Canonsphere

CSINv3
Tag

Long Articles

Browsing

This Long Article has been written by GOPIKA.B and co-authored by Dr. ARUN.D RAJ. Gopika and Arun are Law students at Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) University, Chennai campus.

ABSTRACT

Indigenous Traditional Knowledge (TK) encompasses the distinctive traditions, agricultural practices, medicinal practices, and folklore of indigenous people that have been accumulating for centuries. The contemporary laws of intellectual property (IP) consider TK to be lacking protective measures which undermines its immense significance, both scientific and cultural. This research attempts to find a solution at the intersection of TK and IP law by highlighting the comprehensive legal system which seems to provide a framework to address the uniqueness of TK and its moral intricacies in achieving justice for Indigenous peoples. This paper outlines categories of TK, their value in contemporary society, and other issues concerning misappropriation and exploitation. This research attempts to provide an analysis of existing paradigms of IP and explain why they do not provide adequate protection to TK, leading to the conflicts emerging vis a vis varying notion of rights and ownership. This research investigates more actively other global instruments like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Nagoya Protocol and develops a systemic survey of regional modern approaches to the problem of TK protection. This research aims to analyze case studies of attempts to conserve TK and identify the lessons learned from both successes and failures. It promotes solution approaches applicable at the time like the community centered approaches, hybrid legal approaches, and democratic society functions with indigenous participation in decision making within policies. The conclusion highlights the need to try to achieve a better balance of ethical harmony concerning indigenous peoples and contemporary frameworks of intellectual property systems. The results of this study explain the need for urgent collective action to resolve the problematic issue of straining the deadlock of safeguarding the TK while promoting innovation and economic growth. In this paper, there is a strong policy advocacy appeal directed toward governments and inter-parliamentary international bodies stressing the serious need to take steps to protect, preserve, and sustain traditional knowledge as a part of intangible cultural heritage and public health resources.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long Article has been written by Muskan. She is a Law Student at S.S Jain Subodh Law College, Jaipur.

ABSTRACT

In an increasingly innovation-driven economy, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) have evolved from mere expansion tools to pivotal mechanisms shaping industry competition. Traditional merger control, which primarily focuses on market share and price effects, is being reassessed to address the dynamic challenges posed by innovation. This is especially pertinent in sectors like pharmaceuticals, artificial intelligence (AI), and fintech, where the pace of technological advancements has redefined competitive boundaries.
A key concern in the modern merger landscape is the phenomenon of “killer acquisitions,” where dominant firms acquire emerging innovators to neutralize potential competitive threats. Such acquisitions often prevent the disruptive potential of nascent technologies, stifling future innovation. This article explores the theoretical underpinnings of merger control in innovation-driven markets, specifically the innovation harm theory, which suggests that mergers can undermine future market competition by eliminating potential competitors.
The article further contrasts ex-ante and ex-post regulatory mechanisms, evaluating their respective roles in preventing anti-competitive consolidation without stifling market growth. Through case studies such as Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram, Bayer’s merger with Monsanto, and the Zee-Sony merger in India, the article critically assesses how competition regulators have navigated the complex intersection of innovation and market consolidation.
A comparative analysis of merger review practices in the European Union, the United States, and India reveals varying approaches to balancing innovation concerns with economic efficiency. The article concludes by advocating for a more nuanced, innovation-sensitive merger review framework that prioritizes technological progress while ensuring legal certainty and pro-competitive outcomes. By adjusting the focus of merger control, regulators can better navigate the challenges of fostering innovation while preventing monopolistic tendencies in high-tech industries.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long article has been written by Aseem Simlote. He is a Law Student at S.S Jain Subodh Law College, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

ABSTRACT

In the digital age, traditional notions of market power and competition are being upended by the rapid rise of
tech giants such as Google, Amazon, Meta (formerly Facebook), and Apple. These firms operate in multi-sided markets where data is the new currency, and services are often offered for free, raising significant challenges for the application of existing competition law frameworks. The classical focus of antitrust enforcement on price effects and output limitations struggles to capture the full scope of dominance exerted in zero-price markets. This article seeks to reassess the foundations of competition law in the face of digital dominance.
Beginning with an exploration of the shift from price-centric to data-centric models of market dominance, the article analyzes how big tech companies accumulate, control, and monetize vast troves of personal data to entrench their market position. It further examines the unique challenges of enforcing abuse of dominance provisions in environments where consumers are not charged in monetary terms but pay with their attention
and data.
The article also investigates the roles of algorithms, self-preferencing, and gatekeeping behaviors, which allow dominant platforms to control market access, favor their own services, and manipulate market outcomes in their favor. A comparative study of global antitrust responses—including the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), ongoing antitrust reforms in the United States, and the actions of India’s Competition Commission (CCI)—offers insight into how jurisdictions are adapting their legal frameworks to respond to these new market dynamics.
The article concludes by advocating for a modernized, principle-based approach to competition law that incorporates technological realities, ensures fair digital markets, and safeguards innovation and consumer welfare. This includes recommendations for legislative amendments, broader definitions of market power, and enhanced enforcement tools for competition authorities.

Powered By EmbedPress

This Long article has been written by M. Nithya Sri. She is a 4th Year law student, pursuing BALLB from The Central Law College, Salem, Tamil Nadu.

ABSTRACT

The rapid ascent of big tech firms has fundamentally transformed global markets, challenging the efficacy of traditional competition laws. These digital conglomerates leverage vast data troves, sophisticated algorithms and expensive ecosystems to entrench their market position, often blurring the lines between innovation and anti-competition behaviour. The digital economy is increasingly dominated by a handful of technology giants whose control over data, infrastructure and algorithms challenges the underpinning traditional competition law. Special attention is paid to how algorithms and data collection practices are used to entrench monopolistic position, often in ways that are invisible or difficult to detect by regulators.
This paper also considers how privacy violations and opaque consent mechanics intersect with competition concerns, particularly through consumer lock-in and data-driven market advantages.

Powered By EmbedPress