The traditional approach to teaching intellectual property (IP) law—focused primarily on legal texts, registration procedures, and a few case laws—is becoming increasingly obsolete. This method that emphasizes the application and granting of patents, trademarks, designs, and rules on copyright and trade -secret protections, fails to equip students with the tools needed to navigate the complexities of a rapidly evolving technological landscape. As technology continues to advance at an unprecedented pace, IP law students face growing challenges in understanding, applying, and critically analyzing legal frameworks in real-world contexts. To address this, it is no longer adequate to teach IP law solely from a legalistic perspective aimed at serving corporate interests. In the age of emerging technologies, IP education need to adjust several competing interests such as corporate (investment/economic), individual (moral/privacy/human rights) and societal interests (access/environmental). It is vital to incorporate socio-technological and human rights dimensions into the IP curriculum. A futureproof IP education need to adopt a problem-based, critical thinking and interdisciplinary approach. Students should not only study legal texts but also explore how these laws might be interpreted and applied in uncertain, risk-laden, and technologically dynamic environments. Since legal reforms cannot keep pace with every technological innovation, it is the interpretive and interdisciplinary understanding of IP law that will enable future practitioners to address emerging challenges—particularly those intersecting with fundamental rights.

In my teaching, I have developed two interdisciplinary models to address this need.

The first, focused on AI and IP law, begins with students mapping the future of AI using the "Five L&W" framework: Love, Live, Learn, Labour, Legal/regulatory, and War. This is followed by an analysis of relevant technologies from an IP perspective and their implications for fundamental rights. Finally, students propose legal and policy solutions.

The second model, centered on green technologies and role of IP, uses an interconnected approach. Students begin by examining a classic environmental or societal problem through the lens of fundamental rights and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They then explore technological solutions and assess how IP law can support, rather than hinder, accessibility, affordability, and long-term sustainability.

My experience suggests that IP education must be reimagined through the lens of "future-proofing." This involves integrating interdisciplinary and critical perspectives into the curriculum to ensure that students are prepared to address both technological change and fundamental rights in their future legal practice. By doing so, we can ensure that IP law remains relevant, responsive, and socially relevant in the technological age and from the perspectives of fundamental rights too.