US backs COVID-19 IP waiver

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

US backs COVID-19 IP waiver

wto-waiver-min.jpeg

Despite concerns from the pharma industry, the Biden administration sides with waiving IP rights to vaccines

The Biden administration yesterday announced its backing of a waiver for all intellectual property rights to COVID-19 vaccines, in what is a huge blow to the pharma industry.

The waiver was proposed in October at the World Trade Organization by India and South Africa. It covers not just IP for vaccines but for all COVID-19 technologies.

Related stories

“This is a global health crisis, and the extraordinary circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic call for extraordinary measures,” said Ambassador Katherine Tai, the US trade representative, in a statement released on Wednesday, May 5, announcing the US’s support of the waiver. 

“The administration believes strongly in intellectual property protections, but in service of ending this pandemic, supports the waiver of those protections for COVID-19 vaccines. We will actively participate in text-based negotiations at the World Trade Organization needed to make that happen,” she added.  

The waiver has been strongly opposed by the pharmaceutical industry, which argues that waiving IP would send a chilling signal to the industry and make it reluctant to invest in vaccine research the next time there is a pandemic. 

Stephen Ubl, president and CEO of trade group the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said the decision will do nothing to increase access to vaccines – and warned that it will undermine American leadership in biomedical research. 

“In the midst of a deadly pandemic, the Biden administration has taken an unprecedented step that will undermine our global response to the pandemic and compromise safety. This decision will sow confusion between public and private partners, further weaken already strained supply chains and foster the proliferation of counterfeit vaccines.” 

The waiver has received strong support from global health charities and developing countries but is opposed by the EU and some wealthy nations.

The director general of the World Health Organization (WHO), Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, called Biden’s support for the waiver a “monumental moment” in the fight against COVID-19. 

Global health care advocates argue that waiving IP rights to COVID-19 vaccines will not be enough to ensure equitable global access, which would also require know-how and technology transfer. 

Although the WHO created the COVID-19 Technology Access Pool for all IP and know-how related to COVID-19 over a year ago, it remains empty of relevant IP for vaccines and therapies. 

Biden’s support of the waiver does not guarantee it will be approved by the WTO’s TRIPS Council, which will continue to debate the initiative in the coming weeks. 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
Gift this article