Latest Developments: Traditional Knowledge Digital Library

Latest Developments: Traditional Knowledge Digital Library 

The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) is an Indian digital knowledge repository of the traditional knowledge, especially about medicinal plants and formulations used in Indian systems of medicine. Launched in 2001 by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and the Ministry of AYUSH—responsible for advancing education, research, and the promotion of traditional and alternative medicine in India—TKDL documents centuries-old knowledge from Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha, Yoga, and other indigenous practices. A need for such repository was identified at the end of the nineties to allow India to protect its vast traditional knowledge from biopiracy and wrongful patents. 

Three cases prompted the need to have one single stop access to Indian traditional knowledge:

• Turmeric Patent Case (1995-1997)

In 1995, two researchers from the University of Mississippi Medical Centre were granted U.S. Patent No. 5,401,504 for the use of turmeric in wound healing. Turmeric (Curcuma longa) is a common spice widely used in India for centuries, not only in cooking but also in traditional medicine (Ayurveda) for its healing properties. 

The patent was challenged in 1996 by India’s CSIR led by Dr. R.A. Mashelkar. CSIR argued that turmeric’s medicinal use was prior art, meaning it was already known and publicly used, making the patent invalid. CSIR submitted extensive documentary evidence, including ancient Sanskrit texts and scientific publications, proving that turmeric had long been used for wound healing in India.

In 1997, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) revoked the patent after finding that the claims lacked novelty and were based on traditional knowledge. This case became a major victory against biopiracy and led to greater awareness of the need to protect traditional knowledge from misappropriation.

• Neem Patent Case (1995-2005)

In 1995, the European Patent Office (EPO) granted Patent No. EP0436257B1 to W.R. Grace & Co. and the U.S. Department of Agriculture for an antifungal product derived from neem oil. The patent covered a method of extracting neem oil to produce a fungicide. However, in India and many other parts of the world, neem had been used traditionally for pest control and medicinal purposes for over 2,000 years. The patent sparked outrage, as it was seen as an act of biopiracy, where multinational companies sought to patent traditional knowledge without acknowledging or compensating indigenous communities.

A coalition of activists, including Vandana Shiva (Indian environmentalist and founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Ecology), Magda Aelvoet (former Green Party member of the European Parliament) and International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) challenged the patent at the EPO, arguing that neem’s fungicidal properties were already well known in Indian traditional knowledge and did not meet the criteria of novelty or inventiveness. They provided evidence from ancient Sanskrit texts, Indian farmers' practices, and scientific publications demonstrating neem’s historical use as a fungicide. 

In 1999, the EPO conducted hearings and revoked the patent due to a lack of novelty and inventiveness. In 2000, W.R. Grace & Co. appealed the decision. However, after a final hearing in 2005, the EPO reaffirmed the revocation, permanently cancelling the patent.

• Basmati Rice Patent Case (1997-2001)

In 1997, USPTO granted Patent No. 5,663,484 to the American company RiceTec Inc. for a strain of Basmati-like rice. The patent covered "novel" rice lines and methods of breeding Basmati-type rice adapted for North American conditions. The patent outraged Indian and Pakistani farmers, as Basmati rice had been cultivated for centuries in the Himalayan foothills and was deeply intertwined with cultural and economic traditions. India argued that RiceTec’s claims were an attempt to monopolize a traditional crop and mislead consumers. 

In 1998, the Indian government, along with farmer organisations and non-governmental organisations, formally challenged RiceTec’s patent at the USPTO. By 2000, India had submitted extensive evidence, including historical records and scientific studies, demonstrating that Basmati rice had been cultivated in the region for centuries. The USPTO partially revoked RiceTec’s patent in 2001, cancelling 15 out of 20 claims, including those related to the name "Basmati" and key characteristics of the rice. This significantly weakened RiceTec’s ability to assert exclusive rights. While the company retained some minor claims, it lost the right to market its rice as "Basmati" internationally—a major victory for India and Pakistan.

All these cases had in common that foreign for-profit institutions filed patents or other intellectual property rights outside India based on already existing, therefore non-novel, traditional knowledge used for centuries already in India. Before the existence of the database, identifying relevant pieces of novelty from India Traditional heritage was complicated for Patent Offices because they were not easily discernible and even when such documents were found, understanding them was an arduous task because very often they were written in languages unknown to most patent offices around the world like Sanskrit, Hindi, Tamil, Arabic, and Persian.

As of 2010, 148 books on Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Yoga were transcribed into public domain, 34 million pages of information, translated into five languages — English, German, French, Spanish and Japanese. Data on 80,000 formulations in Ayurveda, 1,000,000 in Unani and 12,000 in Siddha had already been put in the TKDL. The Indian Government has signed agreements with access of sixteen Patent Offices and most recently with the Philippines Patent Office (European Patent Office, United State Patent & Trademark Office, Japan Patent Office, United Kingdom Patent Office, Canadian Intellectual Property Office, German Patent Office, Intellectual Property Australia, Indian Patent Office, Chile Patent Office, Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia, Rospatent—Intellectual Property Office of Russia—Peru Patent Office, Spanish Patent and Trademark Office, Danish Patent and Trademark office, National Industrial Property Institute, France and Eurasian Patent Office). 

Access to examiners is provided under TKDL Access (Non-disclosure) Agreement for patent search and examination in order to stop unauthorised claims before patents are granted, saving time and money of lengthy legal procedures by opposing to the patent during the registration process. So far more than 324 patent applications have either been set aside, withdrawn, amended, based on the prior art evidences present in the TKDL database without any cost in few weeks or months of time. Examiners of patent office can utilise TKDL for search and examination purposes only and cannot reveal the contents of TKDL to any third party unless it is necessary for the purpose of citation. TKDL Access Agreement is unique in nature and has in-built safeguards on Non-disclosure to protect India’s interest against any possible misuse.

From 2024, the Indian government has expanded TKDL’s public access to researchers, industries, and policymakers. From last year, therefore beside the passive function of novelty breaking source of document for patent offices the Indian government is trying to promote innovation and ensuring ethical use of traditional knowledge through an active use of the documentation gathered in the database for more than 20 years. Access will be granted to all interested users through a paid subscription model. Furthermore, this improvement allows also patent applicant the preventively search potential novelty breaking documents before entering the examination phase, potentially saving examination fees. 

In the coming years, it will be interesting to observe whether and how the Indian government integrates artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into the TKDL for advanced search and analysis. Such advancements could enhance both the passive and active applications of TKDL, strengthening efforts to prevent biopiracy while also bridging the gap between traditional wisdom and modern scientific research. Additionally, AI-driven innovations could help ensure that traditional knowledge holders receive proper recognition and benefit from their heritage.