Publication: Intellectual Property Rights Protection of Public Health Innovations
Issued Date
2019
Resource Type
Language
eng
ISSN
2697-584X (Print)
2697-5866 (Online)
2697-5866 (Online)
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
Institute for Technology and Innovation Management Office of the President Mahidol University
Bibliographic Citation
Thai Journal of Public Health. Vol. 49, No. 3 (September-December 2019), 284-299
Suggested Citation
Lerson Tanasugarn Intellectual Property Rights Protection of Public Health Innovations. Thai Journal of Public Health. Vol. 49, No. 3 (September-December 2019), 284-299. Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/63681
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Intellectual Property Rights Protection of Public Health Innovations
Author(s)
Abstract
To figure out the extent that public
health innovations are protectable under
intellectual property (IP) laws, innovations in
public health are categorized into groups,
each of which is analyzed for applicable
legal regimes of intellectual property right (IPR)
protection. With the exceptions of diagnostic,
therapeutic and surgical methods for the
treatment of humans or animals, public health
innovations that involve physical objects,
chemical/biochemical substances, or electronic
and computer technologies are most likely to
be protectable by patents as well as other
IP laws. Certain body movement-oriented
innovative activities and many computerimplemented
public health innovations may be
copyrightable. Other public health innovations
may not be fully compatible with IPR protection
systems due to incongruence in the subject
matters. These include innovations that are
basically economic or legal measures,
innovations that involve social interactions,
and innovations related to research questions,
research ideas, research or survey methodology,
as well as policy and policy advocacy.
Understandably, some of these exclusions
reflect the public policy against any hindrance
to the spread of medical methods. Other
innovations are not recognized or excluded
from IPR protection probably because legal
development has not caught up with advancement
in public health. Policy studies should
be designed and conducted with the initiation
and assistance of public health policy bodies,
to determine which group of public health
innovation should be protected in order to
derive positive aggregate social benefits.
Protection, if any, could be implemented
through expansion or re-interpretation of the
scope of existing IP laws or by establishing
a new form of exclusive rights.