IP Licensing as a Revenue Model for Indian Businesses

IP Licensing as a Revenue Model for Indian Businesses. Intellectual property (IP) is not merely a legal asset used to prevent unauthorised copying or imitation. It can also be a source of revenue, commercial expansion and strategic collaboration. Indian businesses that own or control valuable trademarks, patents, copyrighted works, software or proprietary technology may monetise these assets by permitting other businesses to use them under carefully structured licensing arrangements.
An IP licence generally authorises specified use while ownership remains with the licensor. In return, the owner may receive an upfront fee, recurring royalties, milestone payments or other agreed consideration. This differs from an assignment, which transfers ownership of the relevant rights. WIPO recognises licensing as a way to create additional revenue streams, enter markets and establish collaborations, while emphasising that agreements must reflect the relevant national law and the rights actually protected in the territory.
For Indian businesses, licensing may be relevant in pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, information technology, entertainment, consumer goods, education and manufacturing. Its success depends not only on the existence of an IP right, but also on commercial demand, sound contractual terms, enforceability and compliance with applicable law.
Understanding IP Licensing as a Revenue Model
A licensing arrangement identifies the intellectual property being licensed, the uses permitted, the parties’ obligations and the consideration payable. The owner is commonly called the licensor and the party receiving permission the licensee. A royalty is a payment calculated according to an agreed basis, such as sales, units, production or usage.
For example, a pharmaceutical research company may license a technology to a manufacturer with suitable production capabilities. The research company may earn licence income without establishing its own manufacturing and distribution network, while the licensee gains access to technology it might otherwise need to develop. A software company may similarly license its platform to business customers, and a consumer-products business may license a brand for use in an additional product category.
Licensing does not guarantee profit. Commercial demand, the licensee’s performance, legal restrictions, third-party rights and the ability to monitor use and collect payments remain material considerations.
Principal Types of IP Licensing
Trademark licensing 
Trademark licensing permits another business to use a mark for specified goods or services under agreed conditions. For example, an established clothing brand might license its mark to a manufacturer producing accessories. The owner may earn royalties and expand the brand’s reach without directly manufacturing every licensed product.
The agreement should identify the mark and relevant goods or services, establish quality-control and inspection procedures, define permitted marketing and use, and provide remedies for non-compliance. Poor-quality licensed products can damage the reputation associated with a mark. In India, Sections 48–50 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 address registered users and related matters. The contractual concept of a trademark registration should be distinguished from the specific statutory regime governing registered-user status.
Patent licensing 
Patent licensing permits a licensee to exercise specified rights relating to a patented invention within the licence’s scope and applicable law. It is relevant to pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices, chemicals, engineering and manufacturing. A company holding a patent for an industrial process, for example, may license it to manufacturers in different territories in return for royalties or other consideration.
Key terms include the patents covered, territory, exclusivity, permitted fields of use, royalty calculation, technical support, sublicensing, improvements and responsibility for maintaining the patent. Section 68 of the Patents Act, 1970 requires assignments, licences and certain other interests in patents to be in writing, duly executed and embodied in a document containing the relevant terms and conditions. Section 69 addresses registration of title and interests. Applicable formalities should be checked for the particular transaction. A patent registration is not a guarantee of regulatory approval or freedom to operate. Commercialisation may still be affected by third-party rights, regulatory requirements and other legal restrictions.
Copyright licensing 
Copyright licensing authorises specified uses of protected works, including music, photographs, written materials, films, audiovisual content and software. A software developer, for example, may permit businesses to use proprietary software for a recurring fee while retaining copyright ownership, subject to the agreement.
The licence should identify the work and rights granted, purpose, duration, territory, exclusivity, permitted adaptations, sublicensing and payment terms. Under Section 30 of the Copyright Act, 1957, a copyright registration owner or a duly authorised agent may grant a licence in writing, subject to the Act. Section 30A applies specified assignment-related provisions to licences under Section 30 with necessary adaptations. Ownership and authority to license should be checked, particularly for commissioned works, employee-created material and collaborative projects.
Software, know-how and technology licensing 
Technology agreements may cover software, technical documentation, confidential know-how, trade secrets, manufacturing methods or other proprietary information. The agreement should distinguish the rights to use the IP from separate obligations to provide implementation, maintenance, updates, training or technical assistance. Confidentiality, cybersecurity, permitted access, data handling, improvements and post-termination access may require specific provisions.
Franchising and brand-based licensing 
Franchising may combine trademark use with a business system, copyrighted materials, know-how, training and continuing support.
A food-service brand, for example, may expand through franchisees operating outlets under its brand and operating model. Revenue may include initial fees, royalties and service charges. Franchising is not merely a trademark licence; the parties should also address operational standards, training, supply arrangements, compliance and responsibility for customer complaints.
How Licensing Generates Revenue

Upfront licence fees: An upfront fee is paid at the beginning of the arrangement for the grant of specified rights or access. The agreement should clarify whether the fee is refundable, credited against future royalties or affected by early termination.

Recurring royalties: Royalties may be based on gross or net sales, units produced or sold, usage, subscriptions or another measurable metric. Suppose a trademark licence sets a royalty at 4% of defined net sales. If eligible net sales for a period are Rs.50 lakh, the royalty is Rs.2 lakh before other contractual adjustments. This is an illustrative calculation, not a recommended market rate. The parties should define the royalty base, permitted deductions, returns, discounts, related-party sales, reporting and audit rights.

Milestone payments: Milestone payments become payable when objectively defined events occur, such as completion of a development stage, regulatory approval or commercial launch. The agreement should specify evidence of completion, payment deadlines and the consequences of delay or non-achievement.

Minimum guaranteed royalties: A minimum guarantee establishes a minimum payment for a defined period, sometimes alongside a sales-based royalty. It may protect a licensor where a licensee receives exclusivity but makes little commercial effort. The agreement should explain whether the guarantee is an advance against earned royalties, whether shortfalls carry forward and how performance interacts with termination rights.

Sublicensing income: Where permitted, a licensee may sublicense rights to third parties. The agreement should state whether prior consent is required, how sublicensing income is shared, what obligations must flow down to sublicensees and who remains responsible for their conduct.

Hybrid models: A hybrid model may combine an upfront fee, royalties, milestone payments and service charges. This can distribute risk between the parties but increases accounting and contractual complexity.

Choosing a Suitable Model

Model

Potential advantage

Main concern

Upfront fee

Immediate payment

May limit recurring income

Sales-based royalty

Income linked to sales

Requires reliable reporting

Usage-based royalty

Useful for measurable software or platform use

Requires accurate usage records

Milestone payments

Links payments to defined progress

Milestone disputes or delays

Minimum guarantee

Sets a payment floor

Unrealistic targets can deter licensees

Hybrid model

Combines different payment mechanisms

Greater accounting complexity

No structure is universally superior. The choice should reflect the asset, the parties’ bargaining positions, the commercial forecast and each party’s ability to monitor performance.
Indian Legal Framework
Trade Marks Act, 1999 
The Act governs trademark registration, protection and permitted use. Sections 48–50 address registered users and related matters. A licence should identify the mark, relevant goods or services, territory, duration and quality-control obligations. The parties should assess whether registered-user status is appropriate and comply with any applicable statutory requirements.
Patents Act, 1970 
Section 68 addresses formal requirements for patent licences and certain other interests; Section 69 concerns registration of title and interests. Sections 84 and 90 concern compulsory licences and their terms in the circumstances specified by the Act. A voluntary licence is negotiated by the parties, whereas a compulsory licence may be granted under the statutory framework when the legal requirements are met. The two should not be conflated.
Copyright Act, 1957 
Section 30 permits copyright owners or duly authorised agents to grant licences in writing, subject to the Act. Section 30A applies specified assignment-related provisions to such licences with necessary adaptations. The licence should identify the particular rights granted; permission for one form of exploitation does not automatically authorise every other use.
Competition and contract law 
The Competition Act, 2002 includes provisions concerning anti-competitive agreements and an IP-related qualification in Section 3(5), subject to its conditions. This is not blanket immunity for every restriction in an IP licence. Exclusivity, tying, pricing restrictions, market allocation and other restraints should be assessed in context. General contract principles, confidentiality, warranties, indemnities, liability allocation, termination and dispute resolution also matter. Cross-border transactions may raise additional tax, foreign-exchange and transfer-pricing issues depending on the parties and arrangement.
Relevant Case Law: Compulsory Licensing and Patent Rights 
Bayer Corporation v. Union of India is a significant Indian patent compulsory-licensing decision. The Bombay High Court considered a challenge to the compulsory licence granted to Natco Pharmaceuticals under Section 84 of the Patents Act, 1970 in relation to Bayer’s patented cancer medicine sorafenib tosylate, marketed as Nexavar. The Court declined to interfere with the orders granting the compulsory licence in the circumstances of the case.
The decision illustrates that patent exclusivity operates within the statutory framework governing compulsory licensing, including the grounds specified in Section 84. It does not establish a general rule for royalty rates or contractual terms in ordinary voluntary licences. The case is therefore relevant as a boundary on patent exclusivity, rather than as a template for negotiating commercial royalties.
Citation: Bayer Corporation v. Union of India, AIR 2014 Bom 178; Bombay High Court, Writ Petition No. 1323 of 2013, decided on 15 July 2014. The judgment should be read in full and in its statutory context. A compulsory licence is a distinct legal mechanism and depends on the applicable statutory requirements and the facts of the case.
Drafting an Effective Licensing Agreement

Identify the IP: Specify the marks, patent numbers, copyrighted works, software, know-how or other assets covered.

Define the scope: Set permitted acts, products, services, applications, territory and duration.

Specify exclusivity: State whether the licence is exclusive, sole or non-exclusive and identify any exceptions.

Set financial terms: Define fees, royalty rates, payment dates, calculation bases, deductions, currency and taxes.

Reporting and audit: Establish records, periodic statements and reasonable verification mechanisms.

Quality and confidentiality: Provide suitable quality controls and protections for confidential information.

Improvements: Allocate ownership and use rights for new IP developed during the relationship.

Risk allocation: Address representations, indemnities, liability limits and third-party claims as appropriate.

Termination and transition: Define termination events, cure periods, unpaid amounts, remaining inventory, data and return or destruction of confidential material.

Dispute resolution: Identify governing law and an appropriate dispute-resolution mechanism.

Terms should be adapted to the relevant IP right and transaction. A generic licence template may not adequately address the differences between trademark, patent, copyright and technology licensing.
Practical Challenges

Identifying valuable IP: Not every registered or protected asset has meaningful licensing potential. Businesses should examine ownership, legal status, market demand and prospective licensees before investing heavily in a licensing programme.

Finding and monitoring licensees: A valuable invention may generate little income without a licensee that has the necessary technical capability, finance, regulatory expertise or distribution network. Royalty-based arrangements also require accurate reporting and practical verification rights.

Protecting reputation and confidential information: A licensee’s conduct may damage a brand, while careless disclosure can undermine the value of confidential know-how. Quality controls, confidentiality obligations and access restrictions should be proportionate to the risks.

Balancing exclusivity and performance: Exclusivity may make a deal attractive but restrict the licensor’s ability to license others. Minimum sales commitments, development milestones and carefully drafted termination rights can help address the risk of underperformance.

A Practical Strategy for Indian Businesses

Conduct an IP audit: Identify assets owned or controlled and verify ownership and status.

Assess commercial potential: Identify assets that solve a problem or provide a competitive advantage.

Identify licensees: Seek partners with the capability to exploit the asset.

Select a payment structure: Choose an upfront fee, royalty, milestone or hybrid model.

Define the grant: Specify rights, territory, exclusivity, duration and limitations.

Document the arrangement: Address payments, reporting, quality, confidentiality, improvements and termination.

Monitor performance: Review payments, market development and compliance throughout the term.

Conclusion
IP licensing offers Indian businesses a way to generate revenue from intellectual property without necessarily transferring ownership of the underlying asset. Trademarks can support brand expansion, patents can enable commercial exploitation of inventions, copyrights can generate income from creative works, and technology licences can facilitate access to software and know-how.
Effective licensing combines a realistic commercial strategy with careful drafting. The parties should define the rights granted, select an appropriate payment model, establish reliable reporting and control mechanisms, and address the law applicable to the asset. An IP right does not guarantee market demand, a royalty clause does not guarantee collection, and contractual freedom remains subject to statutory requirements.
For Indian enterprises seeking new markets, collaborations or recurring income from intangible assets, licensing can form an important part of a sustainable growth strategy when the rights are commercially relevant, the licensee can exploit them effectively and risks are allocated clearly.

Intellectual property (IP) is not merely a legal asset used to prevent unauthorised copying or imitation. It can also be a source of revenue, commercial expansion and strategic collaboration. Indian businesses that own or control valuable trademarks, patents, copyrighted works, software or proprietary technology may monetise these assets by permitting other businesses to use them under carefully structured licensing arrangements.

An IP licence generally authorises specified use while ownership remains with the licensor. In return, the owner may receive an upfront fee, recurring royalties, milestone payments or other agreed consideration. This differs from an assignment, which transfers ownership of the relevant rights. WIPO recognises licensing as a way to create additional revenue streams, enter markets and establish collaborations, while emphasising that agreements must reflect the relevant national law and the rights actually protected in the territory.

For Indian businesses, licensing may be relevant in pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, information technology, entertainment, consumer goods, education and manufacturing. Its success depends not only on the existence of an IP right, but also on commercial demand, sound contractual terms, enforceability and compliance with applicable law.

Understanding IP Licensing as a Revenue Model

A licensing arrangement identifies the intellectual property being licensed, the uses permitted, the parties’ obligations and the consideration payable. The owner is commonly called the licensor and the party receiving permission the licensee. A royalty is a payment calculated according to an agreed basis, such as sales, units, production or usage.

For example, a pharmaceutical research company may license a technology to a manufacturer with suitable production capabilities. The research company may earn licence income without establishing its own manufacturing and distribution network, while the licensee gains access to technology it might otherwise need to develop. A software company may similarly license its platform to business customers, and a consumer-products business may license a brand for use in an additional product category.

Licensing does not guarantee profit. Commercial demand, the licensee’s performance, legal restrictions, third-party rights and the ability to monitor use and collect payments remain material considerations.

Principal Types of IP Licensing

Trademark licensing

Trademark licensing permits another business to use a mark for specified goods or services under agreed conditions. For example, an established clothing brand might license its mark to a manufacturer producing accessories. The owner may earn royalties and expand the brand’s reach without directly manufacturing every licensed product.

The agreement should identify the mark and relevant goods or services, establish quality-control and inspection procedures, define permitted marketing and use, and provide remedies for non-compliance. Poor-quality licensed products can damage the reputation associated with a mark. In India, Sections 48–50 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 address registered users and related matters. The contractual concept of a trademark registration should be distinguished from the specific statutory regime governing registered-user status.

Patent licensing

Patent licensing permits a licensee to exercise specified rights relating to a patented invention within the licence’s scope and applicable law. It is relevant to pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices, chemicals, engineering and manufacturing. A company holding a patent for an industrial process, for example, may license it to manufacturers in different territories in return for royalties or other consideration.

Key terms include the patents covered, territory, exclusivity, permitted fields of use, royalty calculation, technical support, sublicensing, improvements and responsibility for maintaining the patent. Section 68 of the Patents Act, 1970 requires assignments, licences and certain other interests in patents to be in writing, duly executed and embodied in a document containing the relevant terms and conditions. Section 69 addresses registration of title and interests. Applicable formalities should be checked for the particular transaction. A patent registration is not a guarantee of regulatory approval or freedom to operate. Commercialisation may still be affected by third-party rights, regulatory requirements and other legal restrictions.

Copyright licensing

Copyright licensing authorises specified uses of protected works, including music, photographs, written materials, films, audiovisual content and software. A software developer, for example, may permit businesses to use proprietary software for a recurring fee while retaining copyright ownership, subject to the agreement.

The licence should identify the work and rights granted, purpose, duration, territory, exclusivity, permitted adaptations, sublicensing and payment terms. Under Section 30 of the Copyright Act, 1957, a copyright registration owner or a duly authorised agent may grant a licence in writing, subject to the Act. Section 30A applies specified assignment-related provisions to licences under Section 30 with necessary adaptations. Ownership and authority to license should be checked, particularly for commissioned works, employee-created material and collaborative projects.

Software, know-how and technology licensing

Technology agreements may cover software, technical documentation, confidential know-how, trade secrets, manufacturing methods or other proprietary information. The agreement should distinguish the rights to use the IP from separate obligations to provide implementation, maintenance, updates, training or technical assistance. Confidentiality, cybersecurity, permitted access, data handling, improvements and post-termination access may require specific provisions.

Franchising and brand-based licensing

Franchising may combine trademark use with a business system, copyrighted materials, know-how, training and continuing support.

A food-service brand, for example, may expand through franchisees operating outlets under its brand and operating model. Revenue may include initial fees, royalties and service charges. Franchising is not merely a trademark licence; the parties should also address operational standards, training, supply arrangements, compliance and responsibility for customer complaints.

How Licensing Generates Revenue

Upfront licence fees: An upfront fee is paid at the beginning of the arrangement for the grant of specified rights or access. The agreement should clarify whether the fee is refundable, credited against future royalties or affected by early termination.
Recurring royalties: Royalties may be based on gross or net sales, units produced or sold, usage, subscriptions or another measurable metric. Suppose a trademark licence sets a royalty at 4% of defined net sales. If eligible net sales for a period are Rs.50 lakh, the royalty is Rs.2 lakh before other contractual adjustments. This is an illustrative calculation, not a recommended market rate. The parties should define the royalty base, permitted deductions, returns, discounts, related-party sales, reporting and audit rights.
Milestone payments: Milestone payments become payable when objectively defined events occur, such as completion of a development stage, regulatory approval or commercial launch. The agreement should specify evidence of completion, payment deadlines and the consequences of delay or non-achievement.
Minimum guaranteed royalties: A minimum guarantee establishes a minimum payment for a defined period, sometimes alongside a sales-based royalty. It may protect a licensor where a licensee receives exclusivity but makes little commercial effort. The agreement should explain whether the guarantee is an advance against earned royalties, whether shortfalls carry forward and how performance interacts with termination rights.
Sublicensing income: Where permitted, a licensee may sublicense rights to third parties. The agreement should state whether prior consent is required, how sublicensing income is shared, what obligations must flow down to sublicensees and who remains responsible for their conduct.
Hybrid models: A hybrid model may combine an upfront fee, royalties, milestone payments and service charges. This can distribute risk between the parties but increases accounting and contractual complexity.

Choosing a Suitable Model

Model	Potential advantage	Main concern
Upfront fee	Immediate payment	May limit recurring income
Sales-based royalty	Income linked to sales	Requires reliable reporting
Usage-based royalty	Useful for measurable software or platform use	Requires accurate usage records
Milestone payments	Links payments to defined progress	Milestone disputes or delays
Minimum guarantee	Sets a payment floor	Unrealistic targets can deter licensees
Hybrid model	Combines different payment mechanisms	Greater accounting complexity

No structure is universally superior. The choice should reflect the asset, the parties’ bargaining positions, the commercial forecast and each party’s ability to monitor performance.

Indian Legal Framework

Trade Marks Act, 1999

The Act governs trademark registration, protection and permitted use. Sections 48–50 address registered users and related matters. A licence should identify the mark, relevant goods or services, territory, duration and quality-control obligations. The parties should assess whether registered-user status is appropriate and comply with any applicable statutory requirements.

Patents Act, 1970

Section 68 addresses formal requirements for patent licences and certain other interests; Section 69 concerns registration of title and interests. Sections 84 and 90 concern compulsory licences and their terms in the circumstances specified by the Act. A voluntary licence is negotiated by the parties, whereas a compulsory licence may be granted under the statutory framework when the legal requirements are met. The two should not be conflated.

Copyright Act, 1957

Section 30 permits copyright owners or duly authorised agents to grant licences in writing, subject to the Act. Section 30A applies specified assignment-related provisions to such licences with necessary adaptations. The licence should identify the particular rights granted; permission for one form of exploitation does not automatically authorise every other use.

Competition and contract law

The Competition Act, 2002 includes provisions concerning anti-competitive agreements and an IP-related qualification in Section 3(5), subject to its conditions. This is not blanket immunity for every restriction in an IP licence. Exclusivity, tying, pricing restrictions, market allocation and other restraints should be assessed in context. General contract principles, confidentiality, warranties, indemnities, liability allocation, termination and dispute resolution also matter. Cross-border transactions may raise additional tax, foreign-exchange and transfer-pricing issues depending on the parties and arrangement.

Relevant Case Law: Compulsory Licensing and Patent Rights

Bayer Corporation v. Union of India is a significant Indian patent compulsory-licensing decision. The Bombay High Court considered a challenge to the compulsory licence granted to Natco Pharmaceuticals under Section 84 of the Patents Act, 1970 in relation to Bayer’s patented cancer medicine sorafenib tosylate, marketed as Nexavar. The Court declined to interfere with the orders granting the compulsory licence in the circumstances of the case.

The decision illustrates that patent exclusivity operates within the statutory framework governing compulsory licensing, including the grounds specified in Section 84. It does not establish a general rule for royalty rates or contractual terms in ordinary voluntary licences. The case is therefore relevant as a boundary on patent exclusivity, rather than as a template for negotiating commercial royalties.

Citation: Bayer Corporation v. Union of India, AIR 2014 Bom 178; Bombay High Court, Writ Petition No. 1323 of 2013, decided on 15 July 2014. The judgment should be read in full and in its statutory context. A compulsory licence is a distinct legal mechanism and depends on the applicable statutory requirements and the facts of the case.

Drafting an Effective Licensing Agreement

Identify the IP: Specify the marks, patent numbers, copyrighted works, software, know-how or other assets covered.
Define the scope: Set permitted acts, products, services, applications, territory and duration.
Specify exclusivity: State whether the licence is exclusive, sole or non-exclusive and identify any exceptions.
Set financial terms: Define fees, royalty rates, payment dates, calculation bases, deductions, currency and taxes.
Reporting and audit: Establish records, periodic statements and reasonable verification mechanisms.
Quality and confidentiality: Provide suitable quality controls and protections for confidential information.
Improvements: Allocate ownership and use rights for new IP developed during the relationship.
Risk allocation: Address representations, indemnities, liability limits and third-party claims as appropriate.
Termination and transition: Define termination events, cure periods, unpaid amounts, remaining inventory, data and return or destruction of confidential material.
Dispute resolution: Identify governing law and an appropriate dispute-resolution mechanism.

Terms should be adapted to the relevant IP right and transaction. A generic licence template may not adequately address the differences between trademark, patent, copyright and technology licensing.

Practical Challenges

Identifying valuable IP: Not every registered or protected asset has meaningful licensing potential. Businesses should examine ownership, legal status, market demand and prospective licensees before investing heavily in a licensing programme.
Finding and monitoring licensees: A valuable invention may generate little income without a licensee that has the necessary technical capability, finance, regulatory expertise or distribution network. Royalty-based arrangements also require accurate reporting and practical verification rights.
Protecting reputation and confidential information: A licensee’s conduct may damage a brand, while careless disclosure can undermine the value of confidential know-how. Quality controls, confidentiality obligations and access restrictions should be proportionate to the risks.
Balancing exclusivity and performance: Exclusivity may make a deal attractive but restrict the licensor’s ability to license others. Minimum sales commitments, development milestones and carefully drafted termination rights can help address the risk of underperformance.

A Practical Strategy for Indian Businesses

Conduct an IP audit: Identify assets owned or controlled and verify ownership and status.
Assess commercial potential: Identify assets that solve a problem or provide a competitive advantage.
Identify licensees: Seek partners with the capability to exploit the asset.
Select a payment structure: Choose an upfront fee, royalty, milestone or hybrid model.
Define the grant: Specify rights, territory, exclusivity, duration and limitations.
Document the arrangement: Address payments, reporting, quality, confidentiality, improvements and termination.
Monitor performance: Review payments, market development and compliance throughout the term.

Conclusion

IP licensing offers Indian businesses a way to generate revenue from intellectual property without necessarily transferring ownership of the underlying asset. Trademarks can support brand expansion, patents can enable commercial exploitation of inventions, copyrights can generate income from creative works, and technology licences can facilitate access to software and know-how.

Effective licensing combines a realistic commercial strategy with careful drafting. The parties should define the rights granted, select an appropriate payment model, establish reliable reporting and control mechanisms, and address the law applicable to the asset. An IP right does not guarantee market demand, a royalty clause does not guarantee collection, and contractual freedom remains subject to statutory requirements.

For Indian enterprises seeking new markets, collaborations or recurring income from intangible assets, licensing can form an important part of a sustainable growth strategy when the rights are commercially relevant, the licensee can exploit them effectively and risks are allocated clearly.

Article last updated on : 27 Oct 2026.