India is a party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

The Copyright Act of 1957 provides a clear regime of copyright exceptions that follows the fair dealing model, which enables the lawful use of copyrighted work by others without obtaining permission. According to Art. 52.1, a fair dealing with any work (not being a computer programme) for the purposes of private or personal use, criticism or review and the reporting of current events and current affairs does not constitute an infringement of copyright.

Copyright is not adequately enforced online in India. It is reported that, despite efforts to combat websites hosting pirated content, enforcement by courts and police officers remains weak. There is a lack of familiarity with investigation techniques, and the absence of a centralised IP enforcement agency, coupled with poor coordination between national and state levels, undermines the progress made. Stakeholders report ongoing issues such as unauthorised file-sharing of video games, signal theft by cable operators, commercial-scale photocopying, unauthorised reprints of academic books, and circumvention of technological protection measures.

India has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.

India has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

India lacks a comprehensive framework in place that provides effective protection of trade secrets, but there are limited measures addressing some issues related to them. As per the decision of the Delhi High Court in 1995, a trade secret is defined as any information with commercial value that is not available in the public domain and the disclosure of which would cause significant harm to the owner. Moreover, Indian courts and tribunals have upheld the protection of trade secrets under other laws such as contract law, copyright law, principles of equity, and common law action of breach of confidence (which is basically a breach of an obligation to keep a piece of information secret). In addition to the above, the Information Technology Law of 2000 also sets legal means of protection for confidential information in the form of electronic records.

It is reported that there is an obligation for passive infrastructure sharing in India to deliver telecom services to end users, and it is practised in both the mobile and fixed sectors based on commercial agreements.

According to Section 6.2.14 of the 2020 Consolidated Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Policy Circular, full foreign direct ownership is permitted in the telecommunications sector (including Category-I Telecommunications Infrastructure Providers). However, government approval is required for FDI above 49%. This regulatory requirement has been in effect since the enactment of the Consolidated FDI Policy Circular 2013 (Section 6.2.15).

India applies a residency requirement for the members of the board of directors. Art. 149.3 of the 2013 Companies Act requires every company to have at least one director who has stayed in India for a total period of not less than 182 days in the previous calendar year.

According to the Consolidated Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Policy Circular 2020, broadcasting services require that a majority of the company’s directors are Indian citizens. Additionally, the CEO, the chief officer responsible for technical network operations, and the chief security officer must all be resident Indian citizens. Furthermore, officers or officials of the licensee companies involved in the interception of services must also be Indian citizens. This requirement has been in effect since the implementation of the Consolidated Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Policy Circular 2013 (Section 6.2.7.6)

India has traditionally implemented FDI screening for investors from Bangladesh and Pakistan. According to Section 3.1.1 of the Consolidated FDI Policy 2020, non-resident entities may invest in India, subject to the conditions specified in the policy, except in prohibited sectors or activities. However, investment by citizens of Bangladesh or Pakistan is permitted solely through government approval. This regulatory requirement has been in effect since the enactment of the Consolidated FDI Policy Circular 2013 (Section 3.1.1).
Notwithstanding this framework, in April 2020, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry introduced the Review of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Policy for Curbing Opportunistic Acquisitions of Indian Companies (Press Note 3). Under this policy revision, the FDI regime was expanded to mandate government approval for investments from any entity based in a country that shares a land border with India. Furthermore, the policy stipulates that any direct or indirect transfer of ownership of existing or future FDI in India, which results in a change in beneficial ownership falling within the scope of the conditions set forth in the Press Note, will similarly require government approval.
This legislative adjustment primarily targeted China in response to escalating border tensions between the two nations. Since the introduction of Press Note No. 3, an estimated 150 private equity and venture capital investment applications from China and Hong Kong have remained pending government clearance.

According to Section. 6.2.14 of the 2020 Consolidated Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Policy Circular, full foreign direct ownership is permitted in the telecommunications sector (including Category-I Telecommunications Infrastructure Providers). However, government approval is required for FDI above 49%. This regulatory requirement has been in effect since the enactment of the Consolidated FDI Policy Circular 2013 (Section 6.2.15).

Under Rule 151 of the General Financial Rules, the Central Government may, through notification, mandate the procurement of specific goods or services from certain categories of bidders or grant preferential treatment to bidders to promote locally manufactured goods or locally provided services.

Under India’s Public Procurement Policy for Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs) Order, Central Government Ministries, Departments, and Public Sector Undertakings are required to procure a minimum of 25% of their annual value of goods or services from Indian micro and small enterprises. Within this 25% allocation, 3% is reserved specifically for women-owned SMEs.

In 2015, India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) issued the Request for Proposal for Provisional Empanelment of Cloud Service Offerings of Cloud Service Providers, establishing a framework under which cloud computing service providers may obtain provisional accreditation for government procurement of cloud services. A key requirement for accreditation is the mandatory storage of all data within India.
Additionally, Section 2.1.d of the Guidelines for Government Departments on Contractual Terms Related to Cloud Services stipulates that all government contracts must include a localisation clause mandating that government data stored in cloud networks remain on servers located in India.
Further reinforcing this requirement, Section 1.17.4 of the Master Service Agreement: Procurement of Cloud Services specifies that cloud service providers must deliver services from a MeitY-registered data centre located within India, ensure that all data remains stored domestically, and prohibit its transfer outside India without explicit approval from the purchaser.