CCI - No Evidence Of P&G Using The Informant's Patented Green Technology In Whisper Ultra Clean

Aryan Raj

15 Aug 2024 4:45 PM IST

  • CCI - No Evidence Of P&G Using The Informants Patented Green Technology In Whisper Ultra Clean

    The Competition Commission of India (Commission) bench, comprising Ms. Ravneet Kaur (Chairperson), Mr. Anil Agrawal (Member), Ms. Sweta Kakkad (Member), and Mr. Deepak Anurag (Member), has dismissed the complaint against Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Limited (P&G). The bench found that there is no evidence that P&G used the Informant's patented green technology,...

    The Competition Commission of India (Commission) bench, comprising Ms. Ravneet Kaur (Chairperson), Mr. Anil Agrawal (Member), Ms. Sweta Kakkad (Member), and Mr. Deepak Anurag (Member), has dismissed the complaint against Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Limited (P&G). The bench found that there is no evidence that P&G used the Informant's patented green technology, named Enliven, in their sanitary pad product, named Whisper Ultra Clean.

    Background Facts

    The Informant who is a promoter of the start-up company named Advantage Nature, developed a patented technology called Enliven which involves dyeing and processing natural textile products using herbs like Neem and Tulsi. This technology is patented in India, the US, Europe, and other regions, with additional patents pending worldwide. The Informant's business model focuses on collaborating with global companies to apply this technology to various garments and textile products.

    In 2018, the Informant learned about P & G (OP-2) initiative named PG Connect + Develop initiative, which invites innovators to submit ideas for potential partnerships. On May 18, 2018, the Informant submitted a proposal titled Functional Herbal Hygiene Bio Finishes for Sanitary Pads & Diapers for Adults & Kids, detailing the benefits of Neem and its applicability to OP-2's products, such as sanitary pads and diapers. OP-2 acknowledged the submission but later declined to pursue it, citing strategic reasons.

    In October 2021, the Informant noticed that OP-2 had launched a new sanitary pad product, Whisper ultra clean, which claimed to use Herbal Oil and prominently featured Neem leaves on its packaging. The Informant contended that this product mirrored the features and benefits of his 2018 submission to OP-2.

    The Informant alleged that OP-2 misused the information provided during the PG Connect + Develop program, violating the program's terms. Although the submission was made on a non-confidential basis for evaluation purposes, the Informant argued that this did not grant OP-2 the right to use the idea commercially without consent.

    The Informant also claimed that OP-2's actions amounted to an abuse of its dominant market position, depriving him of the opportunity to introduce his technology to the market. Furthermore, the Informant accused OP-2 of using their program to exploit the ideas of innovators like him for their own commercial gain.

    As a result, the Informant filed a complaint before the Commission, seeking an investigation into OP-2's practices, a restraining order against the manufacture and sale of the allegedly infringing product, and compensation for the damages suffered.

    Observation and Direction by Commission

    The Commission identified that sanitary pads are divided into disposable and reusable types, with the relevant market being the market for disposable sanitary pads in India. This market is defined as having no significant local barriers or constraints, making the entire country the relevant geographical market.

    The Commission held that although the OPs were reported to have a 54.8% market share according to a 2012 study, recent data from 2022 indicated that they did not have a dominant position that would allow them to operate independently of competitive forces or significantly impact the market in their favor.

    The Commission observed that there was no evidence suggesting that the OPs abused any potential dominant position. The Informant did not provide proof that the OPs used their information to develop and launch competing products or that they obstructed the Informant from introducing similar products. Additionally, there was no indication that the Informant had a product near launch that was negatively impacted by the OPs' actions.

    Therefore, the Commission held that there is no prima facie case of violation of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 by the OPs. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the complaint against the opposite parties.

    Case – Rajiv Rai Sachdev Versus Procter & Gamble Hygiene and Health Care Limited & anr

    Citation - Case No. 39 of 2023

    Click HereTo Read/Download Order



    Next Story