Human rights are fundamental as they are inherent to the human person. Whereas intellectual property rights seek to provide incentives for inventiveness and creativity, encourage the dissemination of creative and innovat

Human Rights and Intellectual Property Rights in Indian Scenario Human Rights and Intellectual Property, though two very different set of laws with no apparent connection, have gradually becoming intimate bedfellows. Since inception, the two subjects developed virtually in isolation from each other. But in the last few years, international standard setting activities have begun to map previously uncharted intersections between intellectual property laws on the one hand and human rights law on the other. Exactly how this new-found relationship will evolve is being actively studied and sometimes even fought over by states and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). In international venues such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and the Sub- Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). A look at the law making which is underway in these for prima facie reveals two distinct conceptual approaches to the interface between human rights and the intellectual property. The first approach finds that there is a conflict between human rights and the intellectual property rights. This view believes that a regime of strong intellectual property protection undermines and therefore is incompatible with the human rights obligations, especially in the area of economic, social, and cultural rights. In order to resolve this conflict it is suggested the normative primacy of human rights law over intellectual property law should be recognised in areas where specific treaty obligations conflict. In the second approach, the Human Rights and the Intellectual Property Rights are seen as concerned with the same fundamental question, i.e., defining the appropriate scope of private monopoly power that gives authors and inventors a sufficient incentive to create and innovate, while ensuring that the consuming public has adequate access to the fruits of their efforts. This school of thought sees Human Rights law and the Intellectual Property Rights law as essentially compatible, although often disagreeing over where to strike the balance between incentives on the one hand and access on the other.