You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

November 25, 2016

Intellectual Property Linkage: Connecting IP Offices with Regulators

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

Intellectual property (IP) linkage refers to connecting an IP office, through open communication lines and complementary processes, to other government agencies that work on IP. This generally includes agencies tasked with regulating food, drugs, and agricultural products, in order to ensure not only that there is proper communication between the officials of both agencies, but also that each agency’s regulations are in line with one another, and the agencies do not promulgate conflicting requirements. IP linkage is also useful in suppressing IP infringement, especially when health regulators work closely with IP offices.

Subcommittee to Suppress IP Infringement

The Suppression of Intellectual Property Infringement Subcommittee was set up earlier this year in Thailand to resolve issues related to preventing IP infringement, reduce problems for IP rights holders, increase IP protection in accordance with international standards, and improve Thailand’s image as an IP-friendly country (a particularly important undertaking, as Thailand has been listed on the U.S. Trade Representative’s Priority Watch List for the past several years for providing insufficient IP protection).

The agencies that are part of the Subcommittee include the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and 15 other government agencies. Their inclusion in the Subcommittee is a clear indication that the government has recognized the importance of linkage between intergovernmental agencies that work on IP. The next agency to be added to the Subcommittee should be the Ministry of Agriculture, in order to ensure that agricultural inputs, animal health, and new plant variations are adequately protected.

IP Linkage with Health Regulators

There are many examples of IP linkage around the world. For instance, the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPR Center) in the United States is composed of 23 partner agencies, of which 19 are federal agencies and 4 are foreign agencies (Interpol, Europol, and the Canadian and Mexican governments). The IPR Center is structured as a cohesive task force, in order to allow resources and skills to be pooled and leveraged, and to foster the sharing of information.

There is also a patent linkage system in the United States. When filing a New Drug Application with the U.S. FDA, an applicant must list any patents that cover the drug. The FDA will take these existing patents into consideration when reviewing the application, and if a patent exists, marketing approval will not be granted to a generic applicant unless and until the patent expires or is found invalid.

In the European Union, the EU Agencies Network is comprised of various agencies across EU member states, including the EU Intellectual Property Office. It promotes the sharing of information and expertise among these agencies. While the EU does not have a patent linkage system in place, generic drugs are still not allowed to be placed on the market until an existing patent expires. The EU also provides a period of data exclusivity, during which no other company may use the patent holder’s pre-clinical and clinical trials data in their regulatory filings for a generic version of a patented drug substance for a set amount of time. The EU also provides patent holders with a two-year period of market exclusivity, meaning that a generic drug company cannot market an equivalent generic version of an original product, but can instead submit an application for authorization so that they can begin marketing their generic product once the two years have expired.

Thailand has begun to provide linkage between the Department of Intellectual Property and the Thai FDA, but the system is in a very undeveloped stage. Since 2008, the Thai FDA has imposed a requirement on all applicants that are applying for a new drug to fill out a form listing all of their existing patents. While this is a step in the right direction, this type of mandatory disclosure should be enforced on applications for generic drugs, as infringement is most likely to occur with such drugs.

Thailand – Going Forward

Thailand can look to Singapore, its regional neighbor, for guidance on moving forward. After entering into a free trade agreement with the United States, Singapore introduced patent linkage as one of the requirements in an application for marketing approval. This system allows patent owners to monitor for potential infringement before generic drugs are launched by providing a framework that warns a patent owner any time a competitor’s application is submitted to market the same drug.

This framework is provided under Singapore’s Medicine Act. Under the Act, in order for applicants to obtain a product license, they must declare whether or not a patent is currently in force for the medical product that is the subject of the application. If there is a patent in force, the applicant needs to state that the patent is invalid. However, if the applicant cannot state that the patent is invalid, a notification may be sent to the patent holder to give the holder an opportunity to obtain a court order against the generic company’s launch of the drug. This is an example of successful linkage between an IP regime and health regulators—one which allows for better protection of patent holders’ rights.

This type of linkage should be implemented in Thailand, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry. Thailand should implement a system of patent linkage in which generic drug applications must include patent information. If any patents that cover the drug exist, marketing approval for a generic drug should not be granted until the patent in question has expired or been found invalid. Such a system will better protect IP rights and reduce the risk of infringement.

Thailand Network Information Center

In Thailand, one instance in which linkage has been successfully implemented involves the Thailand Network Information Center (THNIC), which handles country code top-level domain names. In order to obtain a country code top-level domain name from THNIC, an applicant must confirm one of two things: (1) they are a business registered under that name in Thailand; or (2) they have a registered trademark in Thailand that uses that name.

THNIC is an example of well-implemented IP linkage and providing another means of enforcing IP rights. THNIC is a sign that steps have been taken in the right direction, but there is still more work to be done to link up more agencies and protect IP rights.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals
Jessica Grimm
Email

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Intellectual Property

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 9, 2021
The latest updates to Practical Law’s Life Sciences Global Guide feature two revised sections from Tilleke & Gibbins attorneys in the firm’s Jakarta office—“Medicinal Product Regulation and Product Liability in Indonesia,” and “Pharmaceutical IP and Competition Law in Indonesia.” “Medicinal Product Regulation and Product Liability in Indonesia” covers a range of regulatory issues related to the marketing and selling of pharmaceutical products, including the following: Regulatory overview, including relevant laws and authorities, scope, definitions, and general procedures for pharmaceuticals, biologicals, and medical devices and health care IT Pricing, government funding, and reimbursement: Structure of Indonesia’s health care system, price regulation, and reimbursement Clinical trials Manufacturing and distribution Marketing: Authorization for marketing medicinal products, parallel imports and cross-border trade in medicines Restrictions on dealings with health care professionals Selling restrictions Advertising and promotion Data privacy Packaging, labeling, and tracking Product safety, quality, and liability Local establishment, representation, and residency requirements Reform The full “Medicinal Product Regulation and Product Liability in Indonesia” section can be accessed on the Practical Law website. “Pharmaceutical IP and Competition Law in Indonesia” first goes over the country’s legal and regulatory environment for patents and trademarks in relation to pharmaceutical business operations in the jurisdiction. The section then turns to competition law issues, with the Q&A format focusing on how the country’s competition laws and regulations affect the pharmaceutical sector. Readers are also given information on how to properly comply with Indonesian competition law, including in the licensing of medicines and pharmaceutical technology. The full “Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property and Competition Law in Indonesia” section can be found on the Practical Law website. Practical Law, produced by Thomson Reuters, is the world’s leading legal know-how resource for business lawyers, publishing a huge range of guides covering hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas.
Read More
May 27, 2021
The new regulations for using Indonesia’s SIAPIK system have the potential to affect companies’ advertising plans and help maintain the relevance and effectiveness of Indonesia’s drug advertising regulatory environment
Read More
May 27, 2021
On March 1, 2021, the government of Vietnam promulgated Decree No. 14/2021/ND-CP on Penalties for Administrative Violations Involving Animal Husbandry (Decree 14). The new decree took effect on April 20 and, among other contents, repeals the regulations on animal feed found in Decree No. 64/2018/ND-CP dated May 7, 2018. In the field of animal feed, notable penalties of Decree 14 include the following: Penalty forms and levels For each administrative violation, the violator will be imposed a monetary penalty, which is the main penalty form. For the same violation, the monetary penalty level applied to an organization is double the amount applied to an individual. In addition, based on the nature and extent of the violation, additional penalties may be imposed on the violators, including confiscation of violating items, and confiscating Certificates of Eligibility to manufacture animal feeds. Violations of regulations on declaring product information A fine of up to VND 3 million (USD 130) will be imposed for the act of changing information on product labels that has been published on the Portal of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) without conducting the notification procedure to inform the MARD of such change. A fine of up to VND 7 million (USD 300) will be imposed for the act of deliberately falsifying or erasing contents of documents or making false declarations in the applications for animal feed products on the Portal of the MARD. Violation of regulations on quality in importing animal feed A fine of up to VND 25 million (USD 1,080) will be imposed for the act of importing each animal feed having (i) a quantitative content of each quality criterion lower than the minimum level or higher than the maximum level compared with the standards announced or written on the goods label; or (ii)
Read More