I think the hon. Minister would have done well if he had explained to the House the changes made by the Joint Select Committee in the Bill. I think it is the duty of the Minister, when important changes are made, to come and explain what is the real significance and import of those charges. Anyway, coming to the Bill proper, though some important changes are made in many respects, I think that it needs to be improved. if the social objective of this Bill is takne into consideration, the Government has not done well is not incorporating the social objective that had been set forth by Parliament in practice and bringing it into reality in this paritcular Bill. Sir, it is very necessary for us to profit from the experience of highly industrialised and advanced countries. At the same time, we cannot copy the methods that were evolved by those countries. We cannot copy the principle that were evolved in an entirely different context and transplant them here. Trade mark is a type of industrial property. The ownership of trade mark has developed entirely in a different context in England, in America, in Australia and other countries. When the capitalist economy was thought to be sacronsanct, when it was considered that nothing could be done against the ownership of a particular property, these principles were evolved. Here, when we have set before us the social objective of establishing a socialistic pattern of society, when we have decided to have, besides a heavy industries sector, a cottage industries sector and a small industries sector, it is perfectly obvious that we cannot transplant those principles obvious that, though the joint Select Committee has amended it to some extent, as far as this important aspect is concerned, It has ignored the fundamental or the basic objective.
