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

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.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 24, 2022
The enactment of Thailand’s Narcotics Code, effective December 10, 2021, marked a key milestone in promoting the commercial applications of cannabis (both marijuana and hemp) and kratom as economic plants—with subsequent regulatory developments continuing this push. For many decades, cannabis and kratom were classified as category 5 narcotics under the Narcotics Act. However, a movement for the legalization of cannabis and kratom developed over time. First, the legalization of marijuana (Cannabis indica) for medical purposes became effective on February 19, 2019, as prescribed in Amendment No. 7 of the Narcotics Act. Kratom has also been effectively decriminalized (covering consumption, production, disposal, and possession for any purpose) since August 24, 2021, as prescribed in Amendment No. 8 of the Narcotics Act. The laws governing narcotic and psychotropic substances in Thailand have now taken a significant step forward with the passage of the Narcotics Code, which is intended to be a comprehensive law covering all narcotics and psychotropic substances in Thailand. Most recently, the Ministry of Public Health announced in the Government Gazette on February 2, 2022, that only cannabis extract (both marijuana and hemp) with THC of more than 0.2% by weight will be classified as a category 5 narcotic. This means that seeds, cannabis plants, and inflorescences, if harvested in Thailand, have been removed from the list of category 5 narcotics. Although the changes to Thailand’s narcotics regulations for cannabis and kratom are intricate, both cannabis and kratom have become a topical issue for farmers and related industries. The plants are new cash crops and have attracted widespread public interest. Currently, we can see fresh kratom leaves and fresh cannabis leaves sold in the market. Unlike products with cannabis derivatives, kratom-based products are not yet available in the Thai market. Although there is an opportunity for developing kratom-based products
December 10, 2021
Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) has issued a regulation to amend the country’s food labeling regulations by instituting various additional restrictions and providing additional clarity on food labeling requirements—not only for final food products but also for food additives and food products for further processing. The additions are contained in Regulation No. 20 of 2021 (an amendment to Regulation No. 31 of 2018), which took effect on August 2, 2021. The deadline to comply with the new labeling requirements for final food products is December 31, 2021, and the deadline for requirements related to food additives and food products for further processing is August 2, 2022. The new requirements introduced by the latest regulation are outlined below. Final Food Products Non-halal foods. The new regulation clarifies that food products containing non-halal ingredients are exempt from halal certification requirements. This provision is important as it explicitly confirms that non-halal food products can still be sold and distributed in Indonesia. Ingredient percentages. Percentages of ingredient content must be included in the list of ingredients on a food label, and on any ingredients that are emphasized on the label in words or pictures, or stated as part of the food name. Polyol warning. Labels for food products containing polyol must now include a warning to this effect. Allergen information. The new regulation provides an alternative for indicating allergen information on the food label. Under the 2018 regulation, allergens had to be indicated in the ingredients list in bold type, and the label had to have the disclaimer “contains allergens, see list of ingredients printed in bold.” The new regulation, however, allows allergen information to be declared on the label with the phrase “contains allergens:” followed by the allergen name(s) printed in bold. With this new alternative, it is
November 29, 2021
On November 25, 2021, the Myanmar Investment Commission (MIC) issued a list of investment sectors that will receive priority attention in order to encourage national development and state building. The investment activities that MIC will prioritize are the following: Fertilizer manufacturing Cement manufacturing Iron and steel manufacturing Agriculture and livestock farming and related industries Value-added manufacturing of foodstuffs Electric vehicle manufacturing Pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturing Public transportation services Both foreign investors and local investors may invest in these sectors, and the MIC, ministries, and relevant state and regional governments will provide necessary assistance to the investors under the Myanmar Investment Law 2016. For more details on the new requirements, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected] or +95 9 772 440 001.
November 24, 2021
On November 8, 2021, the Vietnamese government issued Decree No. 98/2021/ND-CP on the Management of Medical Devices (“Decree 98”). The new decree will take effect from January 1, 2022, replacing Decree No. 36/2016/ND-CP and its amendments on the same subject (“Decree 36”). Below are the main highlights of Decree 98: 1. Classification of Medical Devices Under Decree 98, responsibility for the classification of medical devices is given to the organization registering or declaring the medical device. Under Decree 36, this responsibility was reserved for Vietnamese organizations qualified for medical device classification. 2. Clinical Trials of Medical Devices Decree 98 provides stricter and more detailed requirements on clinical trials. Particularly, medical device trials will include three phases, in which phases 1 and 2 need to be finished before the product registration, while phase 3 will be conducted after the medical devices are approved for circulation, following the specific requirement from the authorities. This requirement aims to continue evaluating the safety and efficacy of medical devices after they are widely used in the community in line with their usage conditions. 3. Medical Device Registration Similar to the current regulations, Decree 98 requires that medical devices must be registered with the Vietnamese authority (i.e., must obtain registration numbers) before being imported/manufactured for circulation in the Vietnam market. However, Decree 98 further stipulates new requirements as below. Validity of registration numbers Under Decree 98, the registration numbers for all classes of medical devices, not only Class A medical devices as in the current regulations, are valid indefinitely, except for registration numbers granted under the emergency registration procedure. Registration procedure for Class A/B medical devices Instead of having to register with the central level authority with a complex registration dossier as currently required, Decree 98 allows Class B medical devices to be subject to