Dr. Pratyush Nath Upreti

Pratyush Nath Upreti One morning, while leaving home, I heard my neighbour complaining about the Indian blockade while she was using firewood to cook food for her children, who were dressed for school and awaiting food. One week after this incident, I visited Delhi for an academic conference where one of my Indian colleagues asked me if India was a good neighbour. I replied that good neighbours do not block borders and make a landlocked country suffer. He paused, and with a smile, asked if India is to blame for the political problems prevailing in Nepal. I replied that the problem is ours and the onus is on us to solve the contentious issues, but as a neighbour, we expect India to be a mediator, not the moderator. During my visit to Delhi, I had quite a few conversations with Indian nationals regarding the current situation in Nepal. And from my discussions, I could see that Indians were still unable to comprehend the tragic breakdown of relationships between India and Nepal and

Pratyush Nath Upreti, Upreti & Associates* Intellectual Property is sexy! Its romantic endeavor with other branches of law makes it appealing for IP scholars. This romance can be seen through the lens of the global Intellectual property regime. In today’s industrialized world, the landscape of the intellectual property is changing. Mostly, all forms of ‘intellectual property’ have raised debate in the trade agreements domain, making it an important aspect of trade negotiation. The open market economy encourages the developed countries to opt for Investment/Trade Agreement such as Free trade agreement (FTA), Bilateral Investment Treaties to attract investors by strengthening IP regimes. It is evident that IP as incentive commodity has turned into assets, trading commodity. Similarly, the expectation of investors is increasing. Recent cases such as Philip Morris v. Uruguay have revealed the complexity and potential overlap between intellectual property, Investment Law, and Trade