Patentes: flexibilidades del ADPIC como respuesta a la pandemia del COVID-19. Lecciones aprendidas y perspectivas de una política futura

Abstract

La emergencia sanitaria causada por la pandemia del COVID-19 ha dado lugar a un intenso debate sobre el rol de los derechos de propiedad industrial (PI) entre quienes sostienen que estos derechos pueden obstaculizar el desarrollo, la fabricación y la distribución de productos esenciales para contrarrestar los efectos de la pandemia y quienes, en sentido opuesto, argumentan que la protección de los derechos de PI es fundamental para el incentivo de la innovación y la transferencia de tecnología. En este contexto, el presente artículo, evidenciando ejemplos concretos referidos a la actual pandemia y otros ejemplos del pasado, tiene como objetivo analizar la manifestada colisión entre los derechos exclusivos de quienes son titulares de las patentes y el interés general de la sociedad en la disponibilidad y efectivo acceso en forma igualitaria a medicamentos esenciales en relación con las distintas medidas disponibles a nivel legislativo e internacional...

Patentes: flexibilidade do TRIPS em resposta à pandemia do COVID-19. Lições aprendidas e perspectivas para a política futura discusses the flexibilities provided by TRIPS focussing on compulsory licenses. Part III. Building on publicly controversial examples of the pandemic it reviews the TRIPS’ flexibilities, particularly the compulsory licenses as a response against COVID-19. It also examines the main legislative amendments and other measures adopted by some States, as well as other voluntary initiatives. Part IV. Explores the different position adopted by States in relation to two proposals seeking for a generalised suspension of IP rights in times of pandemic. Part V. It Draws conclusions.

The health emergency triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic gave rise to an intense debate about the role of industrial property (IP) rights. Some argue that IP rights may hinder the development, manufacture and distribution of products essential to tackle the pandemic, others instead advocate in favour of a strong IP protection for incentivising innovation and technology transfer. Against this background, this paper highlights current and past controversial examples to shed light on the tension between IP right holders’ and the general interest of society in having guaranteed effective and equal access to essential medicines. It further analyses the different measures available at international level, as well as the different initiatives currently under international debate, such as the proposal for the transitional waiver of IP rights introduced to the WTO by some Member States. The paper concludes that a compromise should be sought in international cooperation, striking a fair balance between both interests at stake, while contributing to delineate a regulatory framework to address potential future health crises. The paper is organised as follows: Part I. Contextualises the debate, Part II. Analyses from a historical viewpoint the tension between IP rights and public health, and discusses the flexibilities provided by TRIPS focussing on compulsory licenses. Part III. Building on publicly controversial examples of the pandemic it reviews the TRIPS’ flexibilities, particularly the compulsory licenses as a response against COVID-19. It also examines the main legislative amendments and other measures adopted by some States, as well as other voluntary initiatives. Part IV. Explores the different position adopted by States in relation to two proposals seeking for a generalised suspension of IP rights in times of pandemic. Part V. It Draws conclusions.