New version of TPP IP chapter leaked
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

New version of TPP IP chapter leaked

On Tuesday, Knowledge Ecology International released a new leak of the Transpacific Partnership (TPP) chapter on intellectual property, and it shows that the US and Japan have abandoned at least one controversial patent-related demand

Knowledge Ecology International's leaked document is dated May 11 2015, so it would not reflect any changes from last week's negotiations in Hawaii, though it is likely close to the working version entering those discussions.

US negotiators have consistently been arguing for stronger IP protections to be built into the TPP, but the newest leak seems to show that it has backed down on at least one demand. That demand was a provision that signatory countries may not deny a patent "solely on the basis that the product did not result in an enhanced efficacy of the known product" if the invention otherwise met all the other requirements of patentability.

This provision was a response to the India Supreme Court's ruling in 2013 invalidating Novartis's Glivec patent on the grounds that it violated Section 3(d) of the Patent Act, which states that a new form of a known substance is not patentable unless it shows enhanced efficacy.

The provision in the TPP, proposed by the US and Japan but opposed by the other TPP countries, was in Article QQ.E.1 in both the leaks released in November 2013 and October 2014, but not in the most recent version.

Going into last week's negotiations, reports pointed to IP protection as one of the main issues to be hammered out. Debates over data exclusivity provisions, particularly for biologics is one of several issues believed to be a sticking point.

US law provides data exclusivity for biologics for 12 years and it is believed that its negotiators were seeking an identical term in the TPP. However, countries such as Australia would only go up to five years. For countries like Australia, the logic was simple- the government through its national healthcare system would have to bear the additional costs due to lower-cost biosimilars entering the market at a later date.

Interestingly, in the debates that ultimately resulted in the 12-year data exclusivity period in the US, the Obama administration initially argued for a shorter seven-year term, saying that Medicare would have to bear the additional costs.

Knowledge Ecology International director James Love is one of Managing IP's 50 most influential people this year.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

As Australia’s Qantm IP leans towards being acquired by a private equity company, sources discuss what it could mean for IP firms
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
Nghiem Xuan Bac Pham, managing partner of Vision & Associates, discusses opportunities created by the US-China rift as well as profitability issues facing IP practices
Douglas Leite and two of his colleagues were intrigued by Bhering Advogados’s mission to grow its patent litigation practice
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Counsel explain how pricing flexibility, patent agents and being business partners can help them maintain profitable patent prosecution practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Speakers at an INTA event weighed in on why firms should create AI use policies and how they stay on top of the latest developments
The England and Wales Court of Appeal backed Lidl in its trademark dispute with Tesco, but we should pay more attention to how we rule on first-instance decisions
Richard Kempner, partner at Haseltine Lake Kempner, discusses the ‘remarkable’ comments from judges, despite the court finding against his client Tesco on the bulk of issues
Gift this article