In its Spring/ Summer 2026 fashion show, Prada debuted footwear that looked distinctly like Indian-made kolhapuris. At first, only the internet went wild— reddit users decried the move as cultural appropriation. A day later, the Chamar community was also up in arms— Maharashtra and Karnataka have a geographical indication tag on kolhapuris, which the community said Prada violated.
Karnataka Minister of Rural Development, Priyank Kharge, emphasised that the names, work, and legacy of the state's artisans who craft these iconic chappals should be recognised, not sidelined.
In a statement he posted on X on Sunday, he stated that few people were aware that a large number of artisans who made the iconic chappals actually resided in Karnataka’s Athani, Nippani, Chikkodi, Raibag, and other parts of Belgavi, Bagalkot, and Dharwad.
Maharashtra Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Agriculture (MACCIA) wrote to Prada bringing up the issue.
And on Monday, June 30, Prada wrote back.
Patrizio Bertelli, chairperson of Prada’s Board of Directors, the company responded, “We deeply recognise the cultural significance of such Indian craftsmanship. Please note that, for now, the entire collection is currently at an early stage of design development, and none of the pieces are confirmed to be produced or commercialised. We are committed to responsible design practices, fostering cultural engagement, and opening a dialogue for a meaningful exchange with local Indian artisan communities, as we have done in the past in other collections to ensure the rightful recognition of their craft. Prada strives to pay homage and recognise the value of such specialised craftspeople that represent an unrivalled standard of excellence and heritage.
Since then, much has been said about the GI tag on the kolhapuri chappals, but legal experts say that GI tags will not be useful against Prada in this case.
A geographical indication (GI) is a tag on products to indicate that they have a specific geographical origin and possess qualities, reputation or characteristics essentially attributable to that origin.
Under Article 22.1 of the TRIPS Agreement (1995), GIs are defined as: “indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin.”
GI tags give manufacturers and artisans the exclusive right to use the specific name, and prevent unauthorised parties from misusing it by selling fake products. A GI‑tagged product commands premium prices and has access to niche markets.
However, a GI tag does not product a design that has been in the public domain for decades, said Shwetashree Majumdar, the Managing Partner of Fidus Law Chambers.
“A GI does not protect the craft form. Prada has taken something that's in the public domain and made it in their manufacturing hub, perhaps Italy. So the GI doesn't apply,” she says, adding that, “If someone is getting chappals made in Kolhapur, which are Kolhapuri chappals, and is selling them under their own tag without calling them Kolhapuri chappals, that's a problem.”
GI-certification is a collective right held by stakeholders – including artisans – and currently, there are 484 GIs are registered India of which close to 55 per cent pertain to handicrafts. As of 31 December 2024, India has registered over 603 registered GIs, spanning agricultural products, handicrafts, food materials, and manufactured goods. Between 2003 and 2024, India received 1,167 GI applications, of which 547 had been accepted and registered by late 2023, making GI acceptance rate at 46 per cent.
While Prada has given a formal apology to the Maharashtra Commerce Association and acknowledged its chappal was inspired by kolhapuris, it is unlikely that the company will be drawn into any litigation with regard to this controversy.
“GI is given to something that is understood to be a centuries-old art or a craft. And anything that is centuries-old cannot be monopolised. GI is given to a right that belongs to a community that isn't an exclusive monopoly,” Majumdar explains, adding that GI cannot be conflated with other IPRs like a copyright or a patent which is an exclusive monopoly.
It is likely because of this limitation that the MACCIA has decided to collaborate with the artisans and businesses to patent the Kolhapuri chappals.
“The GI tag is given by the Indian government. It is not sufficient in the international market. We need to patent our products. This incident has opened our eyes. We have now formed a separate wing. We will patent not just the Kolhapuri chappals, but also Kolhapur’s jaggery,” said Lalit Gandhi, president of MACCIA.
Renowned for its long grains and fragrance, Basmati rice GI registration was disputed by both India and Pakistan. When, in the early 2000s, a Texas‑based company patented “Texmati” or “American Basmati” in the USA, both India and Pakistan objected.
The Basmati Growers Association (Lahore) intervened and in subsequent legal proceedings before India’s Intellectual Property Appellate Board it was decided that Basmati attracted a GI.
Darjeeling tea was the first Indian product to receive GI registration in 2004–05. However, enforcement of the GI proved to be challenging. Producers continuously police international markets against misuse of the term “Darjeeling” by non‑GI-compliant tea exporters.
In 2006, the Delhi High Court sided with the Scotch Whisky Association against the Golden Bottling Ltd for labelling a locally produced spirit “Red Scot.” The court said the name was misleading. In 2015, “Scotch whisky” was given a GI tag under Section 2(e) of India’s GI Act.
Though famous across the world, the Alphonso mango of Maharashtra could not get a GI tag for nearly a decade mostly because of disagreements about the precise delineation of its geographical boundaries and concerns from neighbouring states over inclusion.
