In the past, discussions about compulsory licensing, the authorisation to use a patented invention without the patentee’s consent, were largely confined to the pharmaceutical sector, often in the context of access to medicines during public health crises.
Today, however, the global landscape has changed dramatically. The accelerating climate crisis has brought to the forefront a new generation of essential technologies: renewable energy, carbon capture, green fuels, recycling, water purification, and agricultural innovation. The deployment of these technologies may become vital to humanity’s collective well-being.
In this new reality, the tension between exclusive patent rights and the public’s urgent need for sustainable technologies is increasingly visible.
Against this backdrop, AIPPI’s 2025 Resolution on Compulsory Licensing offers a timely, principled, and harmonized framework for how such exceptional measures should operate. It addresses the most pressing questions now at the heart of international debate: when compulsory licensing should be justified, how the rights of patent holders should be preserved, what procedural safeguards must apply, and how compensation and confidentiality should be managed.
Collectively, the Resolution lays down a balanced architecture for reconciling innovation incentives with global public needs—whether in health, environment, or beyond.
The International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI) plays a distinctive role in developing and harmonising global IP standards. While its resolutions are not binding, they carry significant influence because they represent the distilled consensus of hundreds of IP experts, practitioners, judges, and academics from around the world. Over the decades, AIPPI’s resolutions have informed both international negotiations (such as those at WIPO and the WTO) and national reforms.
The 2025 Resolution on Patents continues this tradition. It provides a modern, globally consistent framework for compulsory licensing, grounded in the TRIPS Agreement but adapted to today’s realities, where the public interest extends well beyond medicine to encompass climate technologies, renewable energy, and environmental innovation.
AIPPI reaffirms that Articles 31 and 31bis of the TRIPS Agreement form the legal cornerstone for any compulsory licensing regime. These provisions establish the boundaries within which governments may permit the use of patented inventions without authorisation.
AIPPI calls for global harmonization of national practices to prevent uncertainty and ensure that compulsory licensing is applied consistently, predictably, and fairly across jurisdictions.
AIPPI stresses that compulsory licensing is an exceptional measure, never an ordinary tool of industrial or economic policy. It should be used only in situations of Overriding Public Interest, where public interests outweigh private ones, such as national emergencies, public health crises, or environmental imperatives like those linked to the climate crisis.
Importantly, no distinction should be drawn between technological fields; the same principles apply whether the patent concerns pharmaceuticals, clean energy, or sustainable materials.
Before issuing a compulsory license, authorities must carefully evaluate whether the measure is reasonably necessary to serve the overriding interest and whether the applicant has the capacity to meet demand effectively.
The Resolution underscores that compulsory licensing should not undermine the incentives that drive research and investment in innovation, especially in areas such as green technology, where ongoing private R&D remains essential to climate progress.
AIPPI provides detailed guidance on defining the scope of a compulsory license. Licenses must be:
The Resolution explicitly notes that compulsory licenses should also apply to patent term extensions (PTEs or SPCs) and to utility models, ensuring uniform treatment across patent types.
A compulsory license should normally apply only within the granting jurisdiction, preserving national sovereignty over patent enforcement. Cross-border use is allowed only under the specific mechanism of TRIPS Article 31bis, such as for the production and export of medicines or other goods to countries lacking manufacturing capacity. This territorial limitation ensures that compulsory licensing remains targeted and prevents distortion of international trade.
The Resolution outlines several procedural principles designed to safeguard fairness and due process:
These steps ensure transparency, proportionality, and respect for the patentee’s rights, even in urgent cases.
AIPPI strongly reaffirms that patentees must receive reasonable compensation, without statutory ceilings or arbitrary limits.
The determination should consider:
Compensation must be reviewable over time, particularly if circumstances or the scope of use change.
The Resolution also clarifies that remuneration for patent applications under a compulsory license is contingent upon the patent ultimately being granted.
A compulsory license must automatically end when the overriding public interest ceases or when the licensee breaches its terms (such as non-payment or misuse). Patentees must have access to damages, and authorities may impose fines to deter violations. These provisions ensure that compulsory licenses remain temporary, proportionate, and enforceable, rather than open-ended or politically driven.
To safeguard against abuse, the patentee must have the right to audit the use of the invention and receive periodic reports from the licensee. The granting authority may oversee the audit to maintain confidentiality and ensure impartiality.
This dual oversight mechanism of reporting and auditing provides visibility while preserving commercial integrity.
The Resolution makes an important distinction: compulsory licensing applies only to patents, not to trade secrets, confidential know-how, or technical assistance. Patentees cannot be forced to disclose proprietary know-how or manufacturing expertise.
This ensures that compulsory licensing remains a measured intervention, respecting the patentee’s broader intellectual property rights.
AIPPI’s 2025 Resolution on Compulsory Licensing redefines the global balance between innovation and public interest.
By reaffirming TRIPS as the legal foundation, introducing clear procedural safeguards, and extending the concept of “Overriding Interest” beyond public health to encompass climate and environmental needs, the Resolution situates compulsory licensing at the center of contemporary policy debates.
In doing so, it signals a paradigm shift: compulsory licensing is no longer just a tool for access to medicines, but potentially a mechanism for access to sustainability. The Yokohama Resolution thus charts a new course for international patent law, one that protects inventors while recognizing that, in an era of global crises, the public interest sometimes demands that innovation serve the planet itself.
***
Adv. Ran Vogel is a partner in our IP Group and is available to answer questions regarding AIPPI’s latest resolutions and other IP-related matters.
