New version of TPP IP chapter leaked

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In other news, Australia’s IP office has announced expanded search options, and an EPO report shed light on slow progress relating to women inventors in Europe
Managing IP speaks with up-and-coming women lawyers at five law firms about fighting imposter syndrome, maintaining work-life balance and why real representation matters
Kilpatrick’s managing partner for San Francisco discusses taking the longer route to partnership, the importance of female mentors, and strengthening office culture
Home-working and grace periods at IP offices have been announced, while Managing IP understands Iran’s IP office is out of service
With INTA 2026 just two months away, London-based IP practitioners offer tips on making the most out of the city
New platform, which covers SEPs for the Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 7 standards, includes 10 patent owners
The Texas-based IP litigation hires take King & Spalding’s partner appointments from pre-merger Winston & Strawn up to 12 this year
Sunny Su explains how her team overcame challenges with orchard evidence collection to secure a favourable plant variety decision from China’s top court
Flexible working firm continues trajectory from 2025 with appointment of Matthew Grant and Letao Qin
Anousha Davies, associate and trademark attorney at Birketts, unpicks how the university’s reputation enabled it to see off a proposed trademark for ‘Cambridge Rowing’
Gift this article