Legal regulation of compulsory license


All subjective civil rights are capable of restrictions, especially for patent rights, where the desire to ensure a compromise between the interests of patent holders and the interests of society is most relevant. One of the consequences of compliance with this balance in patent law was the constant expansion of various restrictions and encumbrances, especially the property rights of patent holders. The article considers the issues of restrictions of subjective patent rights on the example of the issuance of a compulsory license. The current legislation of Ukraine and the legislation of developed countries are considered. It was found that countries independently determine the regime of compulsory licenses for patent objects at the national level. A legal mechanism for restricting patent rights to achieve a balance between the interests of society and patent holders through the application of a compulsory license has been identified. The issuance of compulsory licenses is possible for the benefit of individuals and public entities, including for health purposes, which is especially relevant for countries at the present stage. The mechanism of compulsory licensing fully corresponds to the peculiarities of patent legal relations and does not deprive the patent owner of the protection of his exclusive right, nor does it prevent him from independently using and effectively commercializing the relevant development. Compulsory license is paid, although granted against the will of the patent owner, but is a means of securing his property interests.


[1] Achal Prabhala and Ellen ‘t Hoen We’ll find a treat ment for coronavirus – but drug companies will de cide who gets it // URL: https://www.theguardian. com/commentisfree/2020/apr/15/coronavirus-treat ment-drug-companies
[2] Paris Convention for the Protection of Industri al Property. URL: https. :// show/995_123#Text
[3] Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. // URL: laws/show/981_018.
[4] Ghanotakis E. Access to Medicines for Developing Countries // Journal of Word IP. 2004. vol. 7. issue 14. [5] Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health // jects/…/0000019100- Kuznecova_print2.pdf. [6] The Legal Status of the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (James Thuo Gathii, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 2002 р, № 2)
[7] Pillai K.U. The role of Patent Law in Public Interest. // URL: in_%20publicinterest.pdf
[8] Tyler N.S. Patent nonuse and technology suppression: the use of compulsory licensing to promote progress // URL: tent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1548&contex t=penn_law_review
[9] Donald M. Cameron, R. Scott MacKendrick and Chris tina Capone Settimi Canadian Drug Patent Laws and Regulations // URL: web09.pdf.
[10] Costa Rica submits proposal for who to facilitate access to technologies to combat COVID-19. // URL: https:// ta-rica-submits-proposal-for-who-to-facilitate-ac cess-to-technologies-to-combat-covid-19/
[11] Bragarnik A. Compulsory licensing of intellectual prop erty in pharmaceuticals. // URL: www.legalallіance.
[12] Finnegan, Marcus (1977). The folly of compulsory li censing. Licensing Executive Society (LES), June, 128– 147. // URL: files/BAYHDOLE/latkinPDF/The_Folly_of_Compulso ry_Licensing_by_Marcus_B._Finnegan,_6-1977_.pdf [13] Bayh-Dole Act of 1980; Public Law 96-517. //
URL: [14] United States Code Title 35 – Patents // URL: https://
[15] MCI v. ATT 512 U.S. 218; 114 S. Ct. 2223; 129 L. Ed. 2d 182 (1994). // URL: munity/casebrief/p/casebrief-mci-telecomms-corp-v at-t-co
[16] Otter Tail Power Co. v. United States, 331 F.Supp 54, 58 (D. Minn. 1971), 410 U.S. 366 (1973) // URL: https://
[17] Examples of Compulsory Licenses of Intellectual Prop erty in the United States» (James Love and Michael Palmedo, 2001). // URL: health/cl/us-cl.html
[18] Patentgesetz (zuletzt geändert durch Gesetz vom 31. Juli 2009) // URL: jsp?file_id=401424
[19] KZR 39/06 – Orange Book Standard // URL: http:// tion-BGH-Orange-Book-Standard-eng.pdf
[20] Federal Court of Justice № X ZR 26/92, 5 December 1995, BGHZ 131, 247. // URL: enste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=BGH&Da tum=05.12.1995&Aktenzeichen=X%20ZR%2026%2F9
[21] X ZR 26/92 от 05.12.1995. // URL:https://www.jurion. de/urteile/bgh/1995-12-05/x-zr-2692/
[22] Vorozhevich A.S. Compulsory licensing of pharmaceu ticals: why FAS Russia initiatives are dangerous for the industry and consumers // Economy and life. 2017. № 1.
[23] Case № KZR 40/02. Judgment of 13 July 2004. BGHZ 160, 67. // URL: vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=BGH&Da tum=13.07.2004&Aktenzeichen=KZR%2040%2F02
[24] Beckmerhagen A. Die essential facilities doctrine im US-amerikanischen und europaischen Kartellrecht. Baden-Baden, 2002. S. 25. 407р.
[25] Federal Act of June 25, 1954, on Patents for Inven tions // URL: jsp?id=16802.
[26] Questionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights: // URL: http://world-intellectual-property-or html#Q9
[27] Patents Act, 1970 // URL: ru/text.jsp?file_id=295102
[28] Chatterjee P. India: Balancing Public And Private Inter ests In The Intellectual Property Regime // URL: lic-and-private-interests-in-the-intellectual-proper ty-regime/
[29] The text of the compulsory license // URL: http://www.
[30] Natco vs. Bayer (controller of patents, 2012) case anal ysis // URL: vs._Bayer_Controller_of_Patents_2012_Case_Analysis.
[31] Novartis loses landmark India patent case on Glivec // URL: cle/2013/04/01/india-drugs-patent-novartis-glivec idINDEE93000920130401
[32] Hermann R.M. Novartis Before India’s Supreme Court: What’s Really At Stake? // URL: http://www.ip-watch. org/2012/03/02/novartis-before-india%E2%80%99s supreme-court-what%E2%80%99s-really-at-stake/
[33] Patent Act of Japan (Act No. 121 of 13 April 1959, as last amended by Act No. 16 of April 18, 2008) // URL:
[34] Wakui M. Intellectual Property Rights and Antimonop oly Act // URL: t2/0907Ant.pdf
[35] On medicines: Law of Ukraine of 04.04.1996 р. № 123/96-ВР. // URL: laws/ show/123/96-%D0%B2%D1%80.
[36] On approval of the Procedure for granting by the Cabi net of Ministers of Ukraine permission to use a patented
invention (utility model) or registered topography of an integrated circuit: Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine from 14.01.2004 № 8 // URL:https://zakon. [37] About the statement of the Procedure for granting by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of the permission for use of the patented invention (utility model) concerning a medicinal product: Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine № 877 від 4.12.2013 // URL: https:// Text
[38] On protection of rights to inventions and utility models: Law of Ukraine. URL: show/3687-12#Text