Is Compulsory Licensing Destroying the Future of Innovation?

Compulsory licensing (CL) is a vital legal tool that allows governments to authorize the production of patented products without the patent holder's consent, especially in times of public health emergencies. While CL helps to improve access to essential medicines, it can also raise concerns about potentially discouraging investment in research and development due to reduced financial returns for patent holders.

The World Trade Organization's TRIPS Agreement aims to strike a balance between public health needs and intellectual property rights by permitting CL under specific conditions. Yet, challenges persist in implementing CL fairly, as it involves balancing the interests of both patent holders and the public. Other strategies, like partnerships, voluntary licensing, and differential pricing, can complement CL to ensure access to medicines while respecting intellectual property.

In the face of public health crises, CL remains an essential mechanism. However, to implement it effectively, policymakers must carefully consider its impact on innovation and investment. Establishing clear guidelines and regulations is key to promoting both public health and continued innovation.

Curious to dive deeper? Read the full blog to explore how compulsory licensing and alternative mechanisms can coexist to enhance global access to medicines. Compulsory Licensing in Pharma Patents: A Win-Win Solution or a threat to innovation?  - PatSeer 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Year into Europe's Unitary Patent System: Progress and Challenges

Image
Since its launch on June 1, 2023, the Unitary Patent System has aimed to simplify processes, reduce costs, and unify legal protection across participating EU countries. In its first year, over 27,500 Unitary Patents were registered, covering 80% of the EU's GDP. Germany and France led adoption, though the absence of key economies like Spain and Poland shows harmonization is still a work in progress.   The system's Unified Patent Court (UPC) has quickly become a central venue for patent litigation, handling over 500 cases in diverse tech sectors. Businesses appreciate the faster resolution times and streamline legal processes, though some SMEs remain cautious due to perceived cost risks. Meanwhile, traditional litigation has declined, raising questions about local court roles in the evolving ecosystem.   Cost savings are significant maintaining a Unitary Patent for 10 years costs less than €5,000 compared to nearly €29,000 under the old system. However, challenges persist, ...
Read more

Patent or Trade Secret? The IP Dilemma Every Innovator Faces

Image
Should you patent your innovation or keep it under wraps? It’s a question that has shaped the strategies of industry giants like Apple, Coca-Cola, and Google. Patents offer strong legal protection — but require public disclosure and hefty costs. Trade secrets, on the other hand, are free to keep — but risky to lose. Choosing the right path isn’t just a legal decision — it’s a business strategy. From tech to pharmaceuticals, and from manufacturing to software, different industries lean on different IP tactics to gain a competitive edge. In this quick-read guide, I break down: Key differences between patents and trade secrets Industry-specific trends and best practices Global legal impacts (like GDPR and the Defend Trade Secrets Act) Strategic questions to help you decide what’s best for your business Sometimes the smartest move is a hybrid approach. 🧠 Want to dig deeper into how companies like Tesla and Pfizer handle this decision? 👉  Read the full guide here  — How to Decide...
Read more

IP Benchmarking: How Well Do You Know Your IP Portfolio?

Image
IP benchmarking gives you a detailed understanding of the strengths, weaknesses, competitive positioning, and risks related to your patent portfolio. It can help you identify areas vulnerable to competition as well as competitive advantage. IP benchmarking should be conducted periodically  (e.g. annually) to guarantee that the IP strategy is in line with the business strategy. Subject matter experts, senior management, and IP professionals should participate in this exercise. The figure given below demonstrates the process for IP benchmarking: Additionally, IP benchmarking activities can be categorized into 2 types: externally focused benchmarking and internally focused benchmarking.  1.        Internally focused IP benchmarking This kind of benchmarking assesses the level of protection given by your IP portfolio. Map your  patents against your current technologies and products to ascertain if their unique characteristics are adequately protect...
Read more