Rice Tech had sought to register three different brands--Texmati, Kasmati and Jasmati--in Greece with the objective of marketing these varieties in the country. While these varieties were registered in the US over a decade ago, there was not much action from India as the US was not one of India's major rice export destinations.
But when it came to Europe, the Ministry of Commerce woke up and appealed to Creek authorities through the Agriculture Products Export Development Authority (Apeda) to prevent such misuse. As a result, Rice Tech withdrew the brands Kasmati and Jasmati while Texmati was continued with. Incidentally, it wants to register the brands in the UK too.
According to Rajendra Kumar, from the law firm Kumaran and Sagar representing India's case, India's plea was that basmati was a variety of rice grown in the sub-Himalayan regions of India and Pakistan where it matured into a specific aroma and texture. In fact, the name Bas-mati (which literally means "the perfumed one" in Hindi) was based on the presence of aroma in the grain, he says.
He says that the distinctive characteristic of the grain came from the agro-climatic conditions available only in this region and could not be found in grains grown elsewhere. Indian exporters led by Apeda felt the use of such names misrepresented an Indian product, and that the marketing of such products would hit Indian exports.
According to Kumar, the case of basmati was similar to that of Champagne and Scotch. If international authorities could ban the use of the names Champagne and Scotch for products made outside specific regions, there was no reason why basmati should not be treated similarly, he says.
Incidentally, some experiments have been carried out to grow basmati in other parts of India. In Pakistan's Dokri region, a group attempted to grow basmati rice from actual basmati seeds. Similarly, in Tamil Nadu, a dedicated farmer attempted to grow bas mati in the state and named it Jayamati after then chief minister J. Jayalalitha. Both experiments failed; the produce was of a far inferior quality than the real crop.
The government, on its part, set up the Basmati Development Fund under the Ministry of Commerce in 1995, to be administered by Apeda, to protect basmati and meet all expenses in this protection. Every rice exporter was required to pay Rs 20 per tonne of rice exported to this fund.
After the Greek episode, the battle is continuing in London where another case is being fought. India is slated to fight similar cases in Brazil where a local producer has undertaken a similar project, in Mexico where a businessman has sought to market vegetables under the Basmati name; and in Thailand, where a company is marketing rice under the name Basmalli.
According to a leading rice exporter, the problem arises due to the absence of Indian laws protecting 'geographic appellation' while in the cases of Champagne, Scotch, Cognac or even Cheddar cheese, the respective countries have laws protecting names. "Indian laws have never even recognised geographic appellation, as a result of which Indian products with traditional and geographic advantage are unprotected," he says. As a matter of fact, Kenya actually produces more 'Darjeeling Tea' than India does, using 'Darjeeling' as a brandname. And an extremely popular variety of long-grain American rice is known as 'Patna rice'.
According to sources, there are certain other products which are being either unlawfully marketed across the world or their names are being misused. These include Andhra Pradesh's Nellore rice, West Bengal's Gobindabhog rice and Alphonso mangoes. There are also cases of companies patenting popular recipes such as Biriyani under the company name, they said.
For India, victory in Greece is just the first step. Apeda plans take the Greek verdict the European Union and spread India's point of view. "Since the start has been successful, the remaining stages will fall in place," feels an Apeda spokesperson. The names Darjeeling Tea and Assam Tea are being registered for India in the UK.
Several other battles, though, remain to be won. In the absence of legislation protecting Indian products and with the government reneging on its commitment to set up a proper brand protection mechanism, it might just be difficult for India to protect its own traditional products from outside influence and misuse.
