Salaam …
Recently, I met Prashant Reddy who shared his experience of the 2018 WIPO-WTO colloquium for Teachers of IP from Developing Countries and Countries in Transition. While I was planning to save my experience in writing, meeting Prashant motivated me to share my experience of the 42nd ATRIP Congress with all our readers. My hope is twofold: Firstly, to encourage scholars, particularly from the Global South, to participate in next year’s Congress and leave their mark. This is a way to join the discourse and eventually contribute to it. Secondly, to provide a personal account of the event that could be valuable for researchers working on related issues, particularly in knowledge generation. Needless to say, for the first hope, I understand the internal censorship one may feel after hearing the cost involved in such participation. But, for young scholars, I’d say send in your solid essay entries in ATRIP’s annual essay writing competition. The winner gets the FICPI’s Young Scholar Prize which helps you sponsor your ATRIP trip. I could join only because of that. If you don’t know, ATRIP stands for the International Association for the Advancement of Teaching and Research in Intellectual Property. Its role in IP teaching and research is notable, see here for more.
(Btw, this reminds me of our very own, Prof Shamnad Basheer Essay Competition, 2024 whose deadline has been extended to 28th July. Already looking forward to reading your entries 
!)
Before diving in, I want to clarify that I may not recall every presentation or detail from the conference. Instead, I’ll focus on sharing my personal experience and what stood out to me. Here we go: this year’s conference happened in Rome, Italy, and was themed “Intellectual Property, Ethical Innovation, and Sustainability.” In the words of the ATRIP president, Christophe Geiger:
“Our theme for this year centers on the role of intellectual property laws and their enforcement in promoting ethical and sustainable innovation. Given the rising concerns for environmental stewardship, and respect for fundamental human values (including dignity, free expression, privacy, and diversity), there is an urgent need for a holistic re-evaluation of the impact of intellectual property laws on the pursuit of the mentioned values. …” (From the brochure here)
I attended the conference as this year’s Young FCIPI Scholar to present my essay “Whither Global South’s Copyright Scholars: Lost in “Citation Game.” It was a great experience, meeting scholars worldwide and getting their feedback/ideas on my ongoing work. Where else would I find and listen to a range of issues like sustainability in health and life science Innovation, digital ethics, ethics of IP enforcement, and rethinking IP’s international framework for sustainable innovation? The networking opportunities were unparalleled. Engaging with renowned scholars whose work I’ve long admired was inspiring. Beyond formal sessions, the post-event gatherings revealed a more personal and insightful side of these academics. As someone aptly said, this is where genuine connections and profound ideas come to life.
It was a four-day conference. The first day was dedicated to doctoral students where 12 selected students presented their PhD projects. It was great seeing scholars presenting their works, however, it needs to be highlighted that there were no students based in Global South institutions. However, there were two scholars (+ dear friends) from the Global South who foregrounded the Global South issues, namely Michelle Okyere and Niharika Salar. Michelle is a PhD student at Nottingham Trent University, England. She presented her doctoral work on “Unlocking Sustainable Development Through Geographical Indications: A Comparative Study of Non-Agricultural Products in Africa and Europe.” Niharika studies PhD at Queen’s University, Belfast, United Kingdom, and presented “Fast Fashion’s Impact on Traditional Weaving Communities: The Need for A Fresh Intellectual Property Law Perspective.” Her commenter was Prof. Ruth L. Okediji, from Harvard University Law School whose comment on Niharika’s work piqued my interest. As my memory recalls and I understood, she cautioned Niharika to not think of cultural works as something frozen in the past but rather as evolving entities shaped by contemporary cultural norms. I found this insightful, as I often think of traditional cultural expressions as artifacts of the past—an accurate view, yet incomplete without recognizing how they are equally shaped by present cultural norms. The best presentation award went to another good friend Leona King from KU Leuven, Belgium, for her presentation on “Unifying the Concept of Data: Data Scraping for Generative AI Development in the EU and US.”
The following three days featured a mix of plenary and parallel sessions. In the plenary sessions, a select few (mostly professors) presented their ongoing work to all attendees, fostering a broad exchange of ideas. From India, Prof. Padmavati Manchikanti from IIT Kharagpur was there. However, the parallel sessions posed a tad bit of a challenge, as multiple sessions occurred simultaneously, necessitating tough choices for someone interested in all sessions. These sessions were more intimate and time-constrained, which unfortunately limited the time available for questions and audience engagement. The time constraints were more than usual, I felt, making it difficult to fully engage with the material and discuss it in depth.
I presented my essay on the last day, 3rd July when I received an award from FICPI’s director Mr. Roberto Pistolesi, and Prof. Jens Schovsbo (ATRIP President 2020-2022). My presentation slides are available here if they interest you. Shout out to Sanaa Syed, a good friend and master’s student at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, for helping me with them! While I will resist talking about the essay again, I want to underscore two comments I received. One drew intriguing parallels between Global South scholars and marginalized European counterparts. Another highlighted the waning influence and referencing of the French scholars/theorists in mainstream discourse, noting the shifting political and linguistic hegemonies.
While I concede that disparities in scholarly attention and support exist across continents and contexts and am going to think through them more, I intuitively find it hard to see these parallels as equivalent. A “global” congress predominantly attended by scholars from the Global North, especially Europeans, itself highlights the inequalities in global knowledge exchange. Who is imparting knowledge, who is receiving it, and more importantly, who “gets” to be in these positions are critical questions that prevent me from viewing these parallels in the same light. I should reiterate that it’s not merely about attention or funding but about degrees of recognition and equity. Sample the €200 registration cost for PhD students, which translates to around 18,000 INR—a significant portion of an Indian student’s doctoral stipend. For academics, the fee was €350, approximately 32,000 INR, which constitutes a substantial part of an average Indian law professor’s salary. Moreover, this year’s location in Rome, though beautiful, posed accessibility challenges due to visa issues. (see this piece: Citizenship privilege harms science) These disparities run deep, doubling the barriers to true global participation and equity in academia.
Nevertheless, I agree that the issue demands deeper and empirical investigation. For, the diversity among nations, both within themselves and with others, challenges simplistic classifications like “Global South/North.” Indeed, the term itself invites scrutiny and revision. Despite its shortcomings, it holds transformative potential, which can push crucial reflections on inclusivity and equitable knowledge dissemination. They compel us to reconsider/change/challenge/underscore entrenched narratives and embrace a more inclusive vision of global academic discourse.
I by no means undermine the significance of ATRIP’s efforts in fostering inclusivity. In fact, ATRIP demonstrated inclusiveness back in 1979, long before it became a contemporary buzzword. Its founding members included voices from the Global South, such as Prof. Upendra Baxi, illustrating a commitment to diversity from its inception. However, it’s crucial to introspect and shed light on existing issues because critique is rooted in care, and I deeply care about these matters.
Onward to the next adventure! Bless up.