Sridhar Vembu says India should lead by sharing technology, not hoarding it

Zoho co-founder Sridhar Vembu has reignited the debate around technology, intellectual property and globalisation, arguing that the modern global economic order has moved away from post-war collaboration towards a system that prioritises ownership of knowledge over its distribution.

In a post on X, Vembu contrasted what he described as the "internationalism" of the years immediately following the Second World War with the Wall Street-driven globalisation that emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. According to him, the earlier era was characterised by countries willingly sharing technology and expertise to help newly independent nations industrialise, whereas the latter has increasingly focused on monetising intellectual property.

To illustrate his point, Vembu cited India's Integral Coach Factory (ICF) in Chennai, which was established with technical assistance from Switzerland. He argued that such collaborations were intended to build domestic capabilities rather than create long-term dependence on foreign technology. In his view, the emphasis during that period was on "technology transfer", a phrase he says reflected a belief that knowledge should be shared rather than hoarded.

More from Tech

Vembu suggested that this philosophy has since been replaced by an intellectual property-led model, where patents, software licences and proprietary technologies have become the primary tools of economic power. He argued that companies increasingly seek to sell technology to countries that have little to offer in return, creating dependency and pushing them into debt rather than enabling self-sufficiency.

The Zoho chief went a step further by claiming that this shift has contributed to what he called the "death of globalism". Rather than fostering cooperation between nations, he argued, intellectual property is now frequently used to dominate global affairs, allowing countries and corporations with technological advantages to maintain their lead while limiting access for developing economies.

The comments also reflect Vembu's long-held belief in technological self-reliance and decentralised innovation. Over the years, he has repeatedly advocated for building indigenous capabilities instead of relying heavily on imported technology or venture capital-driven growth models.

Linking his argument to India's aspirations, Vembu said the idea of Bharat as Vishwaguru should not simply be about economic influence but about reviving an earlier tradition of internationalism in which advanced technologies are voluntarily shared with poorer nations. He argued that such an approach would strengthen India's global standing while contributing to broader development.

He also pointed to China's decision to openly release state-of-the-art large language models as an example of how technology sharing can enhance a country's international influence. According to Vembu, there is a lesson in that approach for India as it seeks to establish itself as a major player in artificial intelligence and advanced technology.

Vembu's remarks come at a time when debates over AI models, open-source software, semiconductor technologies and access to cutting-edge innovation are reshaping geopolitics, with governments and technology companies increasingly balancing openness against commercial and strategic interests.