The debate is about millions of lives – and billions of euros in sales. Now, after a year and a half, a solution seems to be in sight: the US, the EU, India and South Africa have agreed on a temporary compromise on patent protection for Covid vaccines. Pharmaceutical manufacturers in developing countries can therefore more easily use the patented technology from companies like Biontech from Mainz to produce their own corona vaccines. The text of the declaration, for which the EU Commission still has to obtain the approval of the member states, is Süddeutsche Zeitung in front. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, head of the World Trade Organization in Geneva, means the agreement as “a big step forward after many hours of long and difficult negotiations”.
South Africa and India were already demanding in autumn 2020to temporarily suspend patent protection in order to quickly expand production worldwide and improve supplies to poor countries. Because while rich countries vaccinate primary school children and distribute boosters, there are not even enough vaccines for all risk groups elsewhere. Last May, the US government made a surprising announcement your support for the initiative and thus put the EU under pressure. The commission presented one shortly thereafter own suggestionwhich means that patent protection remains in place, but other simplifications are possible.
The compromise agreed upon by the four negotiating parties is broader than the European concept, but far removed from the Indian and South African ideas. So these two governments demanded that patent protection not only for vaccines, but also for Covid drugs, tests and protective clothing be abolished. In addition, the agreement does not provide for the complete cancellation of patent protection. This demand from India and South Africa would have meant that every pharmaceutical company worldwide could produce the vaccine that Biontech developed, for example. The Mainz-based company could no longer sue for patent infringements because there was temporarily no patent protection.
The EU proposal, in turn, came down to simplifying compulsory licenses: A government, for example in India, can then force the patent holder, for example Biontech, to allow a local manufacturer to use the patent. The patentee receives a small compensation and thus has an incentive to help the new manufacturer ramp up production. With this aspect, the Commission promotes its idea; after all, the production of the mRNA vaccine is complicated.
A clause prevents China from benefiting
At the World Trade Organization WTO regulates the so-called Trips Agreement dealing with patents. the contract allows it Governments already suggest using compulsory licenses in emergencies, but the EU wanted to make this process simpler. However, the agreed compromise goes beyond compulsory licenses. It also allows governments to authorize the use of patent-protected vaccine technologies in their country by simple decree, without first having to negotiate with the patent holders. Regarding the amount of compensation, it is said that it can be taken into account that it is a humanitarian emergency and profits are not reasonable.
However, no industrialized countries should benefit from this special rule, only the governments of developing countries. Another restriction states that these countries may have only exported a small amount of Covid vaccine so far. This clause excludes that China will be among the beneficiaries. The regulation should be temporary – either three or five years; this is not yet clear. Within six months of its entry into force, the WTO members are also to decide whether to extend patents for corona drugs and tests.
First, however, the US, the EU, India and South Africa must coordinate the compromise internally. the US Trade Representative Spokesman stressed that no agreement had yet been concluded, but that the compromise was promising and was now being discussed. A spokeswoman for the EU Commission also says that discussions are still taking place – between the four negotiating parties and with the EU member states. If the quartet agrees on a final text, it then has to obtain the approval of all 164 WTO members. However, this is considered the minor hurdle.
The EU’s hesitation is “a sign of inadequacy,” they say
MEP Anna Cavazzini welcomes the easing of patent protection. The trade policy spokeswoman for the Green Group calls it “a sign of failure for the EU that it has taken so long to agree to this proposal during the pandemic”. And it is a mistake to leave medicines out of the equation: Poor countries also need “access to Covid therapies to save lives”.
The CDU MEP Sven Simon, on the other hand, urges caution. Much is still unclear, but if the compromise actually “enables the use of someone else’s intellectual property without compensation, that would be a fatal signal,” he says. Vaccine developers and their suppliers would be “effectively expropriated; trust in global patent protection would be permanently damaged”. Oliver Schacht from the biotechnology association BIO Germany makes a similar argument: Lifting the protection could “have devastating effects on Germany’s attractiveness as a biotechnology location”.