In June 2025, Italian luxury brand Prada unveiled its Spring/Summer 2026 menswear collection featuring open-toe leather sandals. These featured the design elements, construction and overall aesthetic of the centuries-old, handcrafted footwear popularly known as ‘Kolhapuri chappals’, without acknowledging the geographical source or giving any credit to the artisans of Kolhapur.
Inevitably, it sparked outrage in India, not only because Prada priced its product at ₹1.2 lakh approximately per pair, but also because it is yet another instance where the might of giant commercial entities operating from foreign soil succeeded in eclipsing the identity and legitimate interests of economically weaker communities of Indian entrepreneurs.
Such artisans are unable to make any effective beneficial use of their registration under the Geographical Indications Act, 1999 (GI Act) against such foreign entities. The outrage is not misplaced, for it because it highlights the act of cultural appropriation of the traditional arts, which have come to be exploited without any acknowledgment, credit or fair compensation.
The key question is whether the intellectual property protection under the GI Act has failed the stakeholders in India, despite being represented by associations formed to safeguard the GI tag, or is it a case of limitations of the legislative regime, which contains no adequate mechanism to effectively restrain foreign entities indulging in infringement of GI rights.
The outcome of the PIL filed by a group of lawyers before Bombay High Court, resulting in dismissal on the ground of locus standi and availability of statutory remedy under the GI Act, amply demonstrates the sole reliance on the GI Act to seek redressal for Indian stakeholders in such instances.
Ordinarily, IP disputes, including those under the GI Act, are resolved in civil courts or the IP divisions of High Courts under codified statutes or common law. However, there is no legal mechanism enforceable by Indian stakeholders at the international level to be able to protect themselves against cultural appropriation by foreign entities. Even if the artisans or their associations succeed in securing a court decree or order, as observed in the PIL order, the same may still not inure to their benefit for want of viable global enforcement mechanism from Indian soil. Seeking enforcement in foreign jurisdictions would remain an illusory proposition.
The World Trade Organisation's (WTO’s) TRIPS Agreement, administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), includes GI provisions. However, while it provides a stronger protection to wines and spirits, the same level of protection is not offered to traditional handicrafts such as Kolhapuri chappals. Nonetheless, at the governmental level, India may take recourse to (a) WIPO/bilateral agreements; (b) mediation/arbitration; and/or (c) leverage trade agreements. At the government-to-government level, it is highly desirable that the Indian government takes up the issue of GI protection in foreign jurisdictions. Products with a GI tag such as Kolhapuri chappals are an integral part of Indian cultural heritage, not only possessing longevity of hundreds of years, but more importantly, representing the civilisation of Indian sub-continent.
In the past also, the Indian government has taken the initiative in protection of many a GI protected products in foreign jurisdictions. The APEDA (Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority) has played a defining role in preventing the unauthorised use of GI-tagged agricultural products such as Basmati rice produced in the Indo-Gangetic plain. Similar initiative needs to be taken by the Indian government for non-agricultural products as well, in order to give a huge boost to our traditional artisans and entrepreneurs.
Ongoing discussions between Prada and the Maharashtra Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture (MACCIA) could set an important benchmark for ethical fashion, promoting collaborations with mutual respect towards cultural legacy, instead of deliberately or inadvertently resorting to cultural appropriation.
One hopes that the Prada-Kolhapuri chappal controversy brings an awakening and that all concerned, including the Indian government, will take immediate steps to secure meaningful protection to GI-tagged products and save artisans from the ill-effects of cultural appropriation.
Sanjay Jain is a Senior Advocate and former Additional Solicitor General of India.