New innovations facilitate yogic exercises
R. Saha, Advisor-DST, Director-PFC, TIFAC &
Ms. Sangeeta Nagar, Scientist'D', TIFAC

A US patent granted in 1992 (5141285) protects a special chair or couch which supports the person using it in a predetermined relaxation position as achieved in sarvasana yoga. The position merges the neutral body position the body takes in zero gravity.

People who are not able to perform savasana properly may be benefited with such a device. Does it in any way transfers the right of savasana to the holder of the patent or does it imply that savasana known for centuries can be patented by some one? The answer to both the question is emphatic NO. The patent is only for a device that facilitates performing savasana.

Let us look at another patent granted in 2003 (US 6,640,359) dealing with a special mat, used for performing yoga, which can be rolled up tightly and held closed by straps. Many of us know that every person who goes for an outdoor yoga classes carries a cloth sheet or a spread to the classes for doing yogic exercises by spreading the sheet on the ground. Carrying a loose sheet is not very convenient and it becomes more inconvenient if other things are also to be carried.

There is yet another patent granted in 1997 (US 5.605,379) which deals with a chair specially designed for providing a straight sitting position of the user with cross legs in a yoga position. The chair has a seat raised on both sides, which is wider towards the front and adapts to the contour of the body resulting from cross- legged sitting. A central elevation is provided in the back area of the seat, which forms an extension of the user’s coccyx. The back surface has a protrusion located in the area of fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae of the users. All efforts are towards adapting the contours of the user’s body.

One of the primary requirements of performing yoga is that the individual performing the yoga should sit in an up right position with cross legs position. Many people find it difficult to achieve this posture especially in the beginning. Therefore, this device could be used as an assistive device. Why should any one have any reservation in using such a device if it does not contradict the basic principles of yoga and why shouldn’t the innovator be rewarded for designing such a device?

The above cases emerge out of a study of patents granted in respect of yoga or yogic exercises. This effort was driven by a general perception (or concern) that yoga was being patented. Such perceptions cannot be taken lightly nor can be left to conjectures. By using keywords such as yoga, meditation and yogic exercises an inventory of patents granted in USA, patent applications published in USA and elsewhere has been prepared.

Patents granted in USA since 1978 were searched on the basis of claims and the summary is given below.

Title	Year of grant	Assignee / applicant
Yoga exercise mat	2006	Dawnne Alane, USA
Portable clock with chime signal	2004	Now & Zen Inc., USA
Yoga support system and method	2004	Martha I. Aarons, USA
Yoga balance trainer	2004	Asia Regent Ltd., TW
Yoga mat	2003	Dawnne Alane, USA
Yoga mat holder	2002	Maria Coler, USA
Wall apparatus for supporting an exercise device	2001	Kedric R Wolfe, USA
Mattress with concavity for the breasts	2000	DGF Outdoors, USA
Chair for providinga straight sitting position	1997	Friederike Weiss, Austria
Relaxation chair	1992	Brian Park, USA
Device for yoga exercising	1984	Abram Gin, USA
Device for yoga exercising	1984	Abram Gin, USA
Device for yoga exercising	1981	Abram Gin, USA

Majority of the patents have granted in the last five and half years. This perhaps shows the interest in yoga and need to have new devices to facilitate yogic exercising. The role of innovations is quite obvious in the above patents as they attempt to make yoga more convenient to perform and suitable for many more people leading different life styles. There is no evidence of any yogic exercise getting patented.

The study of applications published in USA (18 month publication) after submission of applications reveal that there are 27 such applications, which include yoga in claims. However, it must be noted that it is not necessary that all these applications would materialize into patents. It is observed that all the titles and claims deal with devices, apparatus, software systems, yoga mats and trainers and there is no application, which attempts at patenting yogic exercises. Similar patent applications have also been filed in many other countries such as Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, Russia and Taiwan. All these deal with support systems, apparatus, trainers and seats.

Three messages emerge from the above data and analysis namely,

1. There is no evidence of any yogic exercise which has been patented. Truly speaking, the observation is in consonance with the basic principles of patent grant i.e., an invention must be novel, inventive and useful to be eligible for grant of a patent. Yogic exercise are known and well documented and hence cannot be candidates for patenting.
2. All the above inventions would actually help in the spread and popularization of yoga as many people will find yogic exercises much simpler with the use of such devices and apparatus. Systems developed for monitoring body parameters while performing yoga would reinstate the scientific basis of yoga.
3. Simple devices like mats should trigger imagination of at least some to go for innovations, which would facilitate the application of known knowledge and practices because such devices can indeed be patented.