A different strategy for justifying Intellectual Property Rights begins with the claim that individuals are entitled to control the fruits of their intellectual labour. Subject to certain restrictions, rights are generated when individuals mix their labour with an unowned object. Intellectual Property Laws confer rights on relative intellectual labour, maintaining the balance between the interest of society and the individual. The uniqueness of Intellectual Property law is its pluralistic nature and account. There are many different types of intellectual property and a variety of incommensurable values. There have been numerous disputes about the interpretation, scope, and justifications of intellectual property. These disputes raise variety of legal, moral, economic, political issues, most of them also touch on the fundamental issue in IP law and policy. To discuss intellectual property issues, it is important to have a frame work for thinking about justification of IP laws and policies balancing autonomy, privacy, utility and justice. An adequate justification of Intellectual Property Laws and the best ways to resolve disputes therein is to assess and balance these competing values in the light of changing facts and circumstances.

In the last three decades, controversies have arisen regarding the patenting of animals, plants, DNA, computer software and chips, artificial intelligence, copyright protection for websites, computer screen displays, trademark infringement for internet domain names, ownership of traditional knowledge and the application of International IP treaties in pharmaceutical and medical fields. The changing contours of IP law is influenced by and influencing various factors viz. globalization, liberalization, and technological advancements. The legal regime is required to be revisited in the light of changing dynamics, collective social expectations and in tune with the international treaties and conventions.

Brochure: