- in India
- within Government, Public Sector, Energy and Natural Resources and Criminal Law topic(s)
- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
An idea that was once thought of as nothing more than a dream (a physique for a high speed, modern form of travel) is now becoming more and more real every day. The Hyperloop project provides a completely new opportunity to travel at close to the speed of sound in a vacuum environment, and it will change many aspects of how we travel, how we move goods around the globe, and how cities grow as a result. India is looking at many possible Hyperloop routes within its borders and is also trying to encourage home grown innovation in this area, but it must also consider how to protect itself and the companies that will create this innovative technology, with respect to India's intellectual property (IP) framework. Looking at Hyperloop from an Indian IP standpoint reveals a number of challenges that cannot be resolved simply by filing a patent application for a given invention. Hyperloop technology crosses many frontiers of knowledge such as mechanical, civil, software, AI, energy optimization, material science, and control systems. The title of this paper will help readers appreciate how various laws related to IP (such as patent laws, trademark laws, design laws, and copyright laws) apply to Hyperloop innovations, along with the legal and business considerations faced by stakeholders.
The Hyperloop, which is a high-velocity travelling system that uses a vacuum tube, is integrated with various technologies such as Pod Design, Propulsion System, Safety System, Advanced Materials, Real-Time Software Control and Energy Efficient Systems. Each of these technologies may have their own separate Intellectual Property (IP) Rights, but when you prove the combination of all these technologies as an integrated system, it creates issues regarding who owns the IP rights for them, who licenses them, and how do they work together (interoperability). In Indian Law, the Patent Office recognizes that if there is a combination of known technologies which provide new technical effects or functional synergy and are new, they can be granted a patent.
Hyperloop designers often file multiple patents covering core technologies, new and improved versions of the original technology as well as component parts of the Hyperloop technology due to the long-term nature and scale of these types of projects. Therefore, in India, where feasibility studies, pilot projects, and/or public announcements may result in loss of novelty to a patent, early filing is essential. Some Hyperloop-related innovations are not suited for patent protection. For example, manufacturing tolerances, proprietary simulations, calibration data, operational protocols and optimization models may be protected by trade secret laws instead of using a patent. India has no Trade Secrets Law, but courts generally enforce confidentiality agreements under contract law and equitable principles. Therefore, if developers of Hyperloop technology are working with Indian governmental authorities, colleges/universities, and/or foreign partners, they should use non-disclosure agreements, confidentiality provisions, and access control regimes to protect trade secrets.
Software systems controlling Hyperloop traffic management, safety monitoring, predictive maintenance, and passenger interfaces are critical to Hyperloop service operation. All of this software is protected by the Copyright Act, 1957, as “literary works”—including source code, object code, and technical diagrams. Copyright will protect the way in which software code is expressed but will not protect the underlying functionality of that software or the technical processes involved in executing that software. The courts in India (including the decision of the Eastern Book Company v D.B. Modak) have consistently reaffirmed this legal principle. Thus, we can look at copyright protection as being a compliment to patent protection—not a substitute— particularly where the software is fulfilling a core technical function.
The design of the Hyperloop pods, the architecture of the stations, the layout of the interiors of the pods/stations and the interfaces between the users and the pods/stations may be eligible for protection under the Designs Act of 2000, providing that those designs are new, and not purely functional in nature. With regard to the future mobility ecosystem, in which the passenger experience and brand identity are of utmost importance, design registrations should be viewed as valuable commercial assets; therefore, early registration of designs should occur whenever the designs are publicly disclosed, and/or demonstrated to investors. As Hyperloop systems are finally moving from experimental to commercial deployment, trademarks will be important in terms of the market position of the transport system. The names of transport systems, proprietary technologies, logos, and service marks will continue to be protected by the TradeMarks Act, 1999, in India.
Indian courts have repeatedly held that strong trademark protection is essential in technology-driven sectors to prevent consumer confusion and protect goodwill (see Tata Sons Ltd. v. Hakunamatata Tata Founders). Given the likelihood of international operations, Indian entities must align domestic trademark filings with global brand strategies.
Hyperloop technology represents a significant opportunity, at an early point of development, for India as a nation to create an advanced transportation ecosystem through infrastructure policy development. Policymakers and regulators must focus on creating IP frameworks that are evident, predictable and inviting to foreign investors. Above all else, IP frameworks must balance the need for incentives for innovation with the need to protect public interest.
Clear determination of the ownership of foreground IP, how improvements will be treated, and what rights arise from publicly funded innovation are needed in the context of the four areas identified above (public-private partnerships, pilot corridors and government funded research). Ambiguity and confusion concerning IP ownership creates difficulties for the bankability of projects, delays deployment, and makes long-term investment in infrastructure less likely. As a result, it is necessary for the creation of standardized IP contract clauses and policy guidance tailored to emerging transportation technologies (such as Hyperloop) to increase regulatory predictability.
Given the importance of the relationship between IP rights and standardization, it is also necessary for India’s policy treatment of standard-essential patents to ensure both fair access to critical technologies and incentives for local Indian innovation. A well-designed, infrastructure-sensitive IP regime will be critical in ensuring that transformative technologies, like Hyperloop, are implemented responsibly and efficiently and in accordance with the overall objectives of national development.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
