This article is authored by Virta Godhani, a third year B.A. LL.B. (Hon’s) student at the Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar.

India’s relationship with fashion, creativity, and craftsmanship dates back centuries. We trace this legacy in legal statutes and modern trade chains. The country has long been celebrated worldwide for its superlative artistic sense and workmanship in textiles, whether it’s Banarasi silk, Pashmina shawls, Mashru weaves, Patola, the silk saris of Kanjivaram, or Madhubani paintings. These are more than just fabric or craftsmanship; they represent India’s legacy and profound culture, intricately linked to the people’s lives and livelihoods.

Every handloom cluster forms an independent microcosm of skills and traditional processes, where innovation emerges through cumulative transformations. Techniques and motifs reflect historically novel patterns rooted in the cultural history of their respective regions. From the intricate designs of Jamdani in Bengal to the rich Banaras brocades of Uttar Pradesh, these textiles are deeply intertwined with India’s cultural identity.

The Indian handloom sector stands in a rather special position in the Indian economy and the Indian tradition. The sector remains the second largest employment sector after agriculture, it provides job to more than 4.3 million weavers and allied workers, contributing a major share to the Indian rural income. [i] The weavers and dyers of India had invented techniques to elicit the desire of the world market.  It is important to note that these cultures were never safeguarded for hundreds of years until quite recently, when they were passed down through generations and maintained by informal community rights. It was distinguished in which types of villages and communities’ certain patterns could be made, by whom, and how they were made. It was not the ‘law’ as it is being practiced, govern or protected these.

The biggest crises faced the Indian handloom sector in the late twentieth and the twenty-first century, as it began to face various existential threats. From the overview, we can observe that the major challenge that came with industrialization and mechanization processed the greatest effect. Automated textiles in power loom assembly line could make fabrics with similar appearance as handwoven products but at a third of the cost and at one-tenth of the time that was necessary to develop those fabrics. For instance, famous patan patola saree that demanded approximately 6 months to 1 year to complete with hand weaving that could be easily made using power looms in mere few days, but the quality and genuineness will not be the same and lost the cultural heritage and originality for the same.

The rise of fast fashion in the 1990s and 2000s made things even worse globally. The local and international manufacturers then started to produce the copies of the machine-made versions of the designs without originality at very low costs. Products and textiles replicated mechanically in factories and selling for a lower price. This led to market confusion and eroded the market value of original handloom products. Piracy in designs has made mass production of traditional motifs and patterns and spread through countries and that ultimately reducing demand for weaver’s products and their income. Consumers are unable to differentiate between handloom and power loom products and, in turn, the weavers continue to be trapped in a cycle wherein poor demand results in even fewer incomes for the weaver and fewer demand from the weaver means less products for the consumer as lack of direct access to markets only worsens the problem many traditional weaving communities are unable both to sustain their living and perpetuate their age-old craft.

As part of the process and overcome this challenge The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act was passed in 1999 but came into force from September 2003 has gone a long way to protecting Indian handicrafts and textiles This legislation was passed as part of India’s obligation under the WTO–TRIPS agreement though made unique for the traditional Indian industries which have traditionally been struggling. The act came at a time the world was opening up to values of Intellectual Property Rights on traditional handloom products, GI registration provided three crucial layers of protection rights to seek legal redress against infringement, to trade and to defend the rights in relation to passing off of goods based on traditional knowledge. The process of implementation was scientific and systematic and the first registrations to GI for handloom products were accorded in 2004-2005. It helped Pochampally Ikat to become the first handloom product to get the GI tag and Kancheepuram Silk second. [ii] Further GI tag also granted to Banarasi Brocade in year 2009 [iii]and many more.

The influence of GI protection was a two-sided coin. On the economic front, it also played a big role in setting up the benchmark for others to follow when it comes to using the right prices that befits the true Handloom products. Purchasers saw that after GI status was granted, authentic Chanderi fabrics could be sold at a price range that was 20-30% higher than those fabrics [iv] that did not bear such a status.

The GI registration enhance better market organization and quality control. However, many weavers’ associations and cooperatives received more structural character, where there were given definite indications of the quality standards in product manufacturing as well as procedures for their identification and certification. Furthermore, GI protection enhanced international market opportunities. Indian handloom products with GI tags gained better recognition in export markets, particularly in countries that respected GI protection. [v] The process of authenticating consumers created a level of confidence to consumers to pay for the artwork which the international buyers were willing to pay the high price for handcrafted textiles The Act also played its part in the protection of traditional knowledge and skills.

Nevertheless, GI protection offered formal legal protection, and its efficiency entirely depends on the enforcement and constant monitoring The difficulties in enforcing legislation in a specific area, as well as the lack of awareness of GI issues among producers and consumers, remained the problematic issues that could not be solved once and for all and required unceasing attention of the controlling authorities and producers and consumers associations.

In the recent years the themes emerging from the handloom sector of India comprises of new threats posed by e commerce and digital market systems. Although these platforms provide understanding of the extent and accessibility, they also added the same sort of challenges as were on viewing the power loom dependence. Most internet traders are already dominating the market with their cheaper machine-products labelled as ‘Handloom replica’. A common problem with these sites is the absence of efficient verification systems to enable customers to differentiate between genuine handloom products and fakes. Besides, most of these conventional weavers are not computer literate, and they cannot fully exploit these sites to market their products in the complex contemporary world. to mitigate these difficulties the following significant actions can be taken by taking the steps or making requirement modification in law as well.

India’s handloom industry is a story of sustainability and preservation of history and cultural identity in a rapidly globalizing world. The GI Act of 1999 helps preserve these art forms and provides legal and economic support to the weaver population. However, enforcement and the connection between traditional artisans and new economy sourcing, merchandising, and selling strategies are challenges. To ensure the preservation of India’s unique heritage, it is necessary to cautiously intervene in legal matters while opening up opportunities for the textile industry and ensuring cultural identity survives in a growing global calendar. Balancing these traditions is crucial to ensure the handloom sector continues to create a narrative of skill, identity, and sustainability.

---

Endnotes

[i] Ministry of Textiles Annual Report 2023-24.

[ii] GI Application No. 4, Geographical Indications Registry, 2004.

[iii] GI Application No. 99, Geographical Indications Registry, 2009.

[iv] India Journal of Traditional Knowledge, Vol.8(1),2009.

[v] Textile Committee Report on GI Implementation, Ministry of Textiles, 2010.