Abstract
AbstractThe COVID-19 pandemic has exponentially accelerated the use of 3D printing (3DP) technologies in healthcare. Surprisingly, though, we have seen hardly any public intellectual property right (IPR) disputes concerning the 3D-printed medical equipment produced to cope with this crisis. Yet it can be assumed that a great variety of IPRs could potentially have been enforced against the use of various items of equipment printed out without express consent from IP holders. Many reasons might have motivated IP owners not to enforce their rights during the pandemic, such as the fear of acquiring a bad reputation during a declared situation of national emergency. There is no internationally recognised general exception to IPR enforcement for health emergencies, while several − sometimes ineffective − tools, like compulsory licensing, voluntary licensing arrangements and potential TRIPS waivers, have been considered or used to facilitate access to and the distribution of innovations in critical situations. During the COVID-19 emergency, this has meant that the 3DP community has been operating in a state of relative uncertainty including with regard to the risks of IP infringement. This study contextualises these issues for pandemic-relevant 3DP. Building upon experience gathered during the COVID-19 pandemic, we look to the future to see what novel mechanisms within the IPR system could provide the additional flexibility required for dealing more smoothly, with the help and support of digital technologies, with situations such as global health emergencies.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference73 articles.
1. Ballardini RM, Lee N (2017) Limitations and exceptions in european patent law – challenges from 3D printing technology. In: Ballardini RM, Norrgård M, Partanen J (eds) 3D printing, intellectual property and innovation – insights from law and technology. Kluwer Law Int
2. Beer N et al (2021) Scenarios for 3D printing of personalized medicines – a case study. Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm 4:100073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsop.2021.100073
3. Bently L, Sherman B (2015) Limiting patents. In: Hilty RM, Liu K-C (eds) Compulsory licensing – practical experiences and ways forward. Springer, pp 313–332
4. Bently L, et al (2010) Exclusions from patentability and exceptions and limitations to patentees’ rights. WIPO Standing Committee on the Law of Patents. SCP/15/3 Annex I. World Intellectual Property Organisation
5. Bently L (2011) Exclusions from patentability and exceptions to patentees’ rights: taking exceptions seriously. Curr Legal Prob:315–334
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献