The Enhancement of International Patent Technology
Transfer in Relation to National Law, International Law andRelated Policies - Examples from the Current Practice in the
Fields of Telecommunication, Biology and Environment (*)
Overseas Researcher: Yuzuki NAGAKOSHI (**)
Legislation concerning international licensing is seen both in the international and national level. At theinternational level, the TRIPS Agreement and the heavily discussed Draft “ToT Code” are two major attempts toestablish an international law. National laws in developing countries regulate licensing practices from a competition law
perspective, whereas developing countries often have additional licensing regulations. In practice, it has becomecommon to gain profit from licensing out technology to developing countries, and adequate regulations as well as
promotion of these trends by legislation and relevant policy are becoming increasingly necessary. This research explores
the examples of creative international licensing schemes, analyzes existing legislation and policies based on theseexamples and provides policy suggestions.

I

Introduction

Objectives
Developing countries need technology in order toaddress the issues they face. Therefore, there exists
demand for technology transfer, especially throughlicensing. There are successful examples of technology
transfer in various fields of technology, however
differences exist in licensing practices, reflecting factors
such as how the technology is used in the respected field.
Previous research and practice has explored thepossibilities of application of licensing methods such as
pool licensing and free licensing in the field of
information and communications technology (ICT),
however applications in other areas have not yet been
fully examined both in practice and research.
Nevertheless, in recent years, interesting explorations ofcreative licensing schemes have been made in fields ofimportance, for example biological and environmental
technology. Academic research on these inventive
licensing models has not been sufficiently conducted,
despite its being key to understanding the current state oflicensing practice and future development possibilities
and to promoting technology transfer to developing
countries through licensing.
In the past, technology transfer to developing
countries was discussed within the context of regulations
based on international agreement, international technicalcooperation or national actions such as the grant ofcompulsory licenses. However, the cooperation or
initiative of private parties is necessary for a successful
technology transfer, especially given that in manytechnologically advanced countries, technology is mainly
owned by private actors.
From the perspective of international cooperation, it
has long been pointed out that empowering developing
nations to be self-reliant is crucial for their development.
Since the ability to provide technical cooperation is held
mainly by private entities, the major role thatgovernments and the international community play is tosupport the private entities’ attempt to transfer technology.
However, international technology transfer is stillinsufficient due to various factors such as the lack ofadequate national and international legislation or
regulations and its incoordination, the inexistence of
platforms and lack of information. In light of the global
issues we face today, we need to address these issues inlaw and policy in order to encourage technology transfer
between two willing parties. This research attempts toprovide a perspective in this regard from the viewpoint ofintellectual property law.
Research TopicThis research explores the technology licensing
practice between developed and developing countries,
relevant national and international law as well as public
policy initiatives. Factors which promote and hinder
technology transfer are analyzed and a proposal on theformation of national and international law, international(*) This is a summary of the report published under the 2014FY Industrial Property Research Promotion Project (2014FY-2016FY) Entrusted
by the Japan Patent Office.
(**) Ph.D. student, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, over a period of approximately 11 months from April 14, 2015 throughMarch 18, 2016, as Overseas Researcher under the Program for the Fiscal Year 2015.
●

IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

1 ●harmonization of national legislation and a possible
technology transfer platform is made.
Scope of the ResearchThis research focuses on patent rights (including
utility model rights) as well as surrounding know-how,trade secrets necessary for effective technology transfer. It
takes China, Ghana and the EU as examples of countries
in different stages of their economic development andlooks into their national (and regional) laws. Public policy
initiatives of international organizations in patent pools
and licensing support are also discussed.

II Provisions of Licensing Agreements
and Their Effects
Developing countries need technology in order toaddress the issues they face. Therefore, there exists
demand for technology transfer, especially throughlicensing. There are successful examples of technology
transfer in various fields of technology, however
differences exist in licensing practices, reflecting factors
such as how the technology is used in the respected field.
Previous research and practice has explored thepossibilities of application of licensing methods such as
pool licensing and free licensing in the field of
information and communications technology (ICT),
however, applications in other areas have not yet been
fully examined both in practice and research.
Nevertheless, in recent years, interesting explorations ofcreative licensing schemes have been made in fields ofimportance, for example biological and environmental
technology. Academic research on these inventive
licensing models has not been sufficiently conducted,
despite its being key to understanding the current state oflicensing practice and future development possibilities
and to promoting technology transfer to developing
countries through licensing.
Licensing contracts refer to “contracts concerning
the implementation or the allowance of use of an
intellectual property.” 1 Upon the conclusion of alicensing agreement, it sometimes takes over a year tonegotiate the terms between the parties, involving IP
lawyers and patent attorneys. This chapter introduces
major components of licensing agreements.
Recitals
Definition
Subject matter
Scope of license
Licensing fees and payment method
Warranties
Indemnities
Others●

III Classification of Licensing Practices
In this chapter, licensing schemes are classified inorder to better understand the individual examples
discussed below in a comparative manner.
Exclusivity
Subject matter
Number of parties
Licensing fees
Voluntariness

IV Examples
Telecommunications Technology
In the field of telecommunications technology, the
MPEG-2 Patent Pool was established by Japanesecompanies in the 1990s as the first patent pool recognizedby the competition authorities as a pro-competitive patentpool. 2 Since then, many patent pools have been formed.
There are other examples of free licensing in orderto promote one’s own technology. An example of freelicensing is the free licensing of Mitsubishi Electric’s
encryption technology, MISTY. Ever since the decision tolicense the technology out for free, it was adopted as oneof the ISO standards and the company has seen increased
adoption of its own technology in a previously
US-dominated market.
Environmental Technology
In the field of environmental technology, there also
exists an example similar to MISTY. In 2014, Tesla
Motors declared that they would not assert their electricvehicles related patent rights. 3 As a firm developing
competing fuel cell vehicles related technologies, Toyota
Motor Corporation has also declared to license thetechnology out for free in the following year.4 These
were examples of strategic licensing aiming at gaining
market share and also at encouraging infrastructurebuilding necessary for the use of technology. In the
Toyota example, the company retained some control over
the terms and conditions of the license and therefore thelicensee.
On the other hand, reflecting the gravity ofenvironmental destruction, some companies such as IBM
and Sony, together with the World Business Council havelaunched an interesting initiative, EcoPatent Commons in2008. The Commons consists of patents owned by theparticipating companies which can be unconditionallyused cost-free, without signing a contract.5
Considering the reasons for the unavailability ofexisting green technology being the technical skills of theimplementer in developing countries rather than IP rights
blocking their way, there emerged a new licensing
platform by the World Intellectual Property Organization,
WIPO GREEN. The platform emphasizes the importance2 ●IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

of package licensing of patents and know-how andconnects potential licensors and licensees through their
online platform.6 When negotiating for and concluding alicensing agreement, the parties can gain access to legal
specialists and funding from international developmentbanks through the platform.
Biological Technology/Pharmaceuticals
In this field, the Golden Rice Project is awell-known example. In developing fortified rice, basic
patent owners, who were academics, assigned the patent
to for-profit companies in return for developing thetechnology further for implementation in the field. The
company is entitled to commercialize the technology but
is also obligated to license the technology for free forhumanitarian purposes to low-income farmers indeveloping countries and public research institutions.7
Pool licensing for HIV medication for humanitarian
purposes is done through UNITAID, an internationalorganization in the field. The pool, Medicines Patent Pool,licenses patented technology to generics in order toprovide medicine cheaply in developing countries.
Through this license, medication sufficient to treat 720
million patients for one year was produced and the
medicine was distributed in 117 countries around theworld.8
Another WIPO initiative in this field is WIPO
Re:Search. This is a matchmaking platform between
entities that conduct research on neglected tropicaldiseases, malaria and tuberculosis aiming at enhancing
cooperation in the research and development stage. The
form of cooperation or licensing is up to the parties;
however, the licensing fee shall be free for research anddevelopment purposes and also for sales in least
developed countries.9 Ninety-nine agreements have been
made under WIPO Re:Search.10
In this field of technology, the use of patent pools
was considered difficult as the number of patents required
to produce a therapeutic product is often small, licensed
exclusively and not subject to standards and the value ofpatent is relatively high. However, for individualized
diagnosis, many patents for license to many licensees
may be held by many entities, which are factors fordetermining whether patent pools would offer an efficient
licensing alternative. MPEG LA has formed acommercial patent pool, Librassay, in order to address
this need of patent licensing management. Despite having
its first licensee in 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings
on patent validity in the biotechnology sector haverendered the validity of the patent unstable and therefore
the activity of this project has been limited.11●

IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

V Factors Promoting and Hindering
Technology Licensing
Factors Promoting and Hindering Technology
LicensingThis chapter describes the promoting and hinderingfactors of technology licensing based on previous
chapters.
The first hindering factor is the supply-demand
mismatching. Potential licensors with a higher level ofmotivation for technology licensors such as universities
and research institutes do not often hold ready-to-use
technology applicable in the field. Potential licensors who
own ready-to-use technologies such as for-profit
companies are generally more cautious about licensing
their technology out to third parties.
The second hindering factor is the potential
competitive relationship between technology providers
and recipients when they are both implementing thetechnology themselves. Licensing out may in these cases
result in nurturing a future competitor, even if they are notat the moment.
The third hindering factor is the risk licensors bear
when licensing their technology out to developing
countries. In recent years, companies emphasize theimportance of being socially responsible and licensing
into developing countries is a good opportunity to be a
responsible global citizen. However, there are risks suchas technology leakage, illegally copied products
occupying the market and so on, and companies are often
cautious when considering technology transfer.
The fourth hindering factor is the national laws andpolicies and its administration. Among the
aforementioned risks, some can be mitigated throughnational legislation, policies and administration.
Developing countries often have licensing regulations
protecting licensees, intending to save their local
enterprises, however this sometimes results in reluctancein licensing on the part of the licensors. It is of course of
great importance to protect the licensees, who are in
general in a weaker position, however discouraging
licensing may result from this. Legislation allows somespace of discretion in the administrative branch in order
to allow flexibility. However, flexibility can also be seen
as lack of clarity, so a dilemma exists. On the other hand,developed countries also have legislation and policies
which results in discouragement of technology transfer,for example in exhaustion principles.
The first promoting factor is increased business
opportunities, such as moving the production to low-costareas, exploring previously uncultivated markets,
developing products and technologies suitable to local
needs, and generating revenue from areas the licensor
itself cannot enter.
The second promoting factor is the consciousness of
3 ●corporate social responsibility. In some cases, technology
transfer does not generate income, but companies may do
it to improve their image and to act as a responsible
member of the community.
Differences of Licensing Practices, the Reason
for the Difference and the Possibility ofPromoting Licensing
The characteristics of licensing in telecommunications
technology is formed by the fact that a great number ofpatents are required to produce a single product and that
related products need to be based on the same standard.
Contracts being otherwise too complicated andtime-consuming, there existed the need for one-stop
licensing, which led to the formulation of patent pools.
The demand for a standardized product resulted infree-licensing in some cases where multiple standards
compete in order to become a de facto standard.
In the biology/pharmaceutical field, the attempts increative licensing schemes were more humanitarian-aid-oriented;
however, in recent years, it has seen innovative projectsof patent pooling in the for-profit sector. Although being
unsuccessful due to external factors, the possibility of
establishing a patent pool enabling low-cost licensing
while generating profits was shown to us. It is necessarythat more attempts of creative licensing schemes are
made in this area.
In the environmental field, open licensing for
fulfilling their social responsibility has been done.
However, reflecting the findings that patents are not themain obstacle for technology transfer in this field, forexample in research done by the European Patent Office12,
international organizations have initiated a public private
partnership platform to promote technology transfer.
However, issues remain due to the insufficiency of theplanned “package licensing” because of its difficulty inreality and individual fragmented technology became themain part of the technology on the list. It can be said thatin this regard, the platform has not yet reached its goal. In
order to take this platform to a new level, it may benecessary to adopt, for example, the licensing scheme of
the Golden Rice Project, and utilize its advantage as aplatform on which many entities cross its paths.
For technologies which are relatively new,competition between different technologies is occurringin developing countries. This has led to a similar situation
as in the telecommunications field, where companies
license their technology out for free in order to become
the standard technology. In developing countries where
infrastructure is being built now, the newly imported
technology can determine the infrastructure built, and thisbrings the possibility of bringing the price of technology
down and exporting technology earlier.

VI Licensing-Related Policies andNational, Regional and International
Law
The discussions at UNCTAD on setting an
International Code of Conduct on the Transfer ofTechnology from the 1960s to the 1980s was a failed
attempt to establish universal international regulation
concerning licensing. It was envisioned that theregulations would be applied directly13 to private parties.
The attempt ultimately failed because of theunresolved disagreement between developed anddeveloping countries; however, many national licensing
regulations in developing countries have similar contents
to the draft code and the international discussion resulted
in the TRIPS Agreement. The TRIPS Agreement allows(but does not oblige) member states to regulate
anti-competitive licensing activities 14 and to regulate
licensing activities through national law15. The intentionof having these articles is to explicitly give the national
governments the discretion to regulate activities thathinder technology transfer.
Concerning compulsory licensing, Article 31 of the
TRIPS Agreement states in detail the conditions for the
licenses, the rights of the patent owner and the scope of
license, and national governments have the discretion to
make the law within what is allowed in the Agreement.
Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement mandates
developing countries to grant patents for pharmaceuticalinventions. However, even under the international
exhaustion principle, when a particular pharmaceuticalproduct is produced with the consent of the licensor only
in a high-price market, the impoverished population in
the developing world would be denied access toaffordable medicine. Reflecting the criticism, the TRIPS
General Council added Article 31 bis exempting member
states from the obligations in Article 31(f) under certain
conditions.
National legislation in developing countries anddeveloped countries greatly differ from one another.
Developed countries often only regulate licensing
through competition law, which means licensing activities
are in principle not regulated as long as they do notconstitute an anti-competitive act. Developing countries
often have in addition to competition law-based
regulations additional licensing regulations which
regulate the content of licensing contracts. The
regulations change based on the stage of a country’s
development. In China, licensing regulations are being
loosened as the country develops, and now the regulation
is subject to another revision. In Ghana, the regulation isstill very strict.
Ghana
The Ghanaian government has been improving their●

4 ●IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

standards of IP protection in order to reach theinternational standard in the mid-2000s. In 2009, thegovernment started moving towards the establishment ofa national IP policy in cooperation with the Swissgovernment and WIPO. 16 As a result, the National
Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy (NIPPS), thefirst national IP strategy, was approved in the cabinet but
is not yet enforced.17 It is planned to be enforced in 2016.
Compulsory Licensing
The Ghanaian government has granted acompulsory license for the importation of an antiretroviral
HIV medicine produced under a compulsory license in
India. The patent holder was GlaxoSmithKline. However,this is the only case of compulsory licenses being granted
and in general the government takes a very cautious
approach towards granting them. The reluctance towards
the use of the system is due to their belief that technology
transfer including know-how is important for thedevelopment of their domestic industry.
Concerning the exportation of products produced
under compulsory licenses, TRIPS requires that it is“predominantly for the supply of the domestic market.”18
The Ghanaian interpretation is that it suffices that morethan half of the product is supplied to the domestic
market.19
In the future, it is possible that products produced
under a compulsory license will be exported based on
TRIPS Article 31 bis 1.20 It is also possible that Ghana
will export products to Economic Community of West
African States (ECOWAS) countries based on Article 31
bis 3. 21
License of Right
Non-existent.
Licensing Regulations
Ghana Investment Promotion Center (GIPC), a
government institution, grants permission for andregisters international technology licensing agreements
based on the Technology Transfer Regulation. According
to the Regulation, all domestic and international
technology transfer shall be registered at the GIPC,
otherwise it is not enforceable.22 Upon registration, the
GIPC checks all clauses to confirm that it is compliant
with the Regulation.23
The regulation which can be of relative importancefor Japanese companies is that a clause prohibiting theexport of goods produced under the license to Japan isconsidered incompliant with the Regulation.24 This isinconsistent with Japanese law and results in being unable
to prevent licensed products from entering the Japanesemarket.
An additional point of interest is that for trade secrets,
the use by the licensee is allowed after the expiration of●

IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

the contract 25 , although confidentiality obligations
continue to exist. 26 The maximum term allowed fortechnology licensing contracts is 10 years and it can be
renewed only when both parties agree.27 This means thatonce a license for a trade secret is granted, they can use
the technology for free after a maximum 10 years of
payment. Considering the relatively low royalties allowed
for trade secrets (0-2%)28, This could be an obstacle fortechnology licensing.
Exhaustion
There was no explicit legislation until 2003 stating
which principle Ghana abides by. However, they adopted
the domestic exhaustion principle. In 2003, upon revising
the law in order to make it TRIPS-compliant, theydecided to utilize TRIPS flexibility and introduced
international exhaustion. However, government officials
consider international exhaustion as both potentiallybeneficial and harmful, as they have reached a certain
level of industrialization and have their own industry toprotect. International exhaustion may result incompetition between locally produced goods and cheaper
imports.29
China
China is currently planning a revision of its Patent
Law and Regulations on Technology Import and Export
Administration. It is expected that regulations would beloosened and there would be more freedom of contract.
At the same time, a license of right system is being
introduced and voluntary licensing will also be
encouraged.
Compulsory Licensing
China has never granted a compulsory license since
the establishment of the patent system in 1985. 30
However, revisions of the system have been frequent,reflecting the high concern of the government.31
License of Right
China does not have a license of right system now,
but one is included in the draft revision expected to be
enforced in 2016 or 2017.32 The difference from theGerman system is that the licensor must register their
proposed licensing fee at the patent office.33
Licensing Regulations
Licensing-related legislations and regulations in
China are mainly Contract Law (1999), Patent Law(2008) and Regulations on Technology Import andExport Administration (2008). There are detailed
regulatory clauses in the Contract Law, Chapter 18, whichstate the basic rules.
However, for international
technology transfer, the Regulation applies in case of
conflict between the two laws.
5 ●The Chinese regulations are not as strict as the
Ghanaian regulations. At the moment, technologies as a
subject matter of licensing agreements are divided into
three groups – prohibited, restricted or allowed to import.
For technologies for which import is allowed, they can be
freely imported upon registration. However, whenregistering the contract, the officer of the local authority
who is responsible for the registration checks the contract.
When they are incompliant with the compulsory
provisions of Chinese law, the registration is declined.
An interesting comparison with Ghanaian law is that
the Chinese law also prohibits unreasonable restriction ofexportation of licensed products34, but it allows a wider
interpretation of reasonableness. For example, when thelicensor is a manufacturer in Japan, it is regarded as asufficient reason to restrict exports to Japan. By contrast,
China has a blanket ban on grant back clauses35 but
Ghana is more flexible. Although there are similarities in
the regulations of the two countries, the flexibilities exist
in different areas and therefore individual examination isimportant for understanding the regulations in thedeveloping world.
Exhaustion
China explicitly adopted the principle ofinternational licensing36 in 2000 to exploit the TRIPS
flexibilities. Before that, there were no legislations norcases for or against the principle. China supports
international exhaustion within and outside China due tothe fact that its industry relies heavily on importation ofparts which are assembled in China, and that it is themain exporter of cheap industrial products.37
EU
The EU has a unified competition law-based
licensing regulation and has a unified principle ofregional exhaustion. However, for compulsory licensing
and license of right, member states have individual rules.
How these systems will be unified is the target ofobservations for the upcoming unified patent system.
Compulsory Licensing
EU countries have their own compulsory licensing
systems but they are not frequently used for products
targeted at their own markets. For example, Germany has
its own compulsory licensing system but it has not been
granted. However, they have a positive attitude towards
exporting products based on compulsory licensing forhumanitarian reasons and have legislation that allows
exports based on TRIPS Article 31 bis.
License of Right
The EU does not have a unified license of rightsystem at the moment but many individual member states
including Germany (Lizenzbereitschaft) have them. The●

new unified patent system is likely to have a unified
license of right system.
Licensing Regulations
In the EU, licensing regulations are competition
law-based and other licensing regulations do not exist.
This is also the case in Germany.
For licensing contracts, an exemption of competition
law (Treaty on the Functioning of the EU Article 101) is
granted based on Technology Transfer Block Exemption
Regulation (TTBER、2014).
Exhaustion
The EU has the principle of regional exhaustion.
This means that within the EU the principle ofinternational exhaustion applies.

VII National and International Policy
DesignNational and International Policy Design
The international discussion concerning licensingthat started in UNCTAD ended when the TRIPS
Agreement was concluded. However, the TRIPS
Agreement only set out the breadth of the discretion thenational governments have, and therefore national
licensing regulations has yet to be standardized. A
standardized law would facilitate international business
operations. On the other hand, it may not reflect therealities of relevant policies and regulations of individual
countries, all within different stages of development.
Therefore, to what extent standardization is desirable isarguable and this should always be kept in mind when
discussing the harmonization of licensing regulations.
Concerning compulsory licensing, the value of its
existence is acknowledged in general, however both in
Ghana and China the government has shown strong
reluctance in utilizing the system. TRIPS has flexibilities
in the grant of compulsory licensing by allowing member
states to grant when procedural requirements are met.
However, national governments are not utilizing thissystem despite their lack of technology because they do
not have licensees who could actually implement thetechnology, or because they want technology transfer
including know-how rather than mere allowance. The gap
in technical ability is the reason why licensing platforms
such as WIPO GREEN become necessary.
Concerning exhaustion, it can be said that fordeveloped countries, national or regional exhaustion isbetter not only for their own industry but also to
encourage technology transfer. When the high-end
market is protected through the exhaustion principle,
patent holders could license their technologies out tocountries with low manufacturing costs without fear of
the licensees destroying the price of the home market.
6 ●IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

This is a good way to protect the markets despite somenational laws in developing countries prohibiting
licensing agreements to limit exports of products.
For countries wishing to encourage innovations anddevelop their own industry, national exhaustion is alsofavorable. In Ghana for example, the cost of locallymanufacturing industrial products is still high comparedto other more industrialized countries. To protect the local
market from foreign competitors would be important in
nurturing their industry and technology.
Adopting the principle of international exhaustion
can be considered in countries with very few industries
demanding protection and it is unlikely that they candevelop their industry in the future. It is also suitable forcountries in which people are suffering from extreme
poverty and need affordable goods, as prices of goods canbe expected to go down.
It must also be noted that international exhaustion
also has its own merits. The idea that the right holder can
exercise their right only once, universally, is clear andreasonable. The aforementioned benefits of national
exhaustion can be solved by modified international
exhaustion, that allows national exhaustion for limited
cases when it is necessary for humanitarian reasons. This
then would sacrifice the simplicity of the international
exhaustion system, but is worth considering.
In order to further promote licensing, theintroduction of the license of right system would be ofgreat importance. This system not only encouragereasonable and non-discriminatory licensing, but also
allows the patent office or competent authorities to decideon licensing fees when the parties cannot agree on theprice. This benefit should be emphasized in light of themodern patent wars especially in the field of
telecommunications.
Regulations concerning voluntary licensing would
be difficult to standardize, as the determining factors suchas stage of development, economic power, scale ofmarket, the technological level of the country and thebargaining power of licensees greatly differ from country
to country. It is necessary to allow some flexibility in theregulations and at the same time maintain clarity in theexecution of policies and legislation. As a country
develops, licensing regulations also need to change inorder to reflect the increased bargaining power oflicensees in the country and allow more space for creative
licensing agreements.
In addition to all this, it is vital in the long term thatdeveloping countries are supported to develop their own
technology based on the licensed technology and tobenefit from the innovation. To create an IP system that
benefits every country, including developing countries,
cooperation in human resource development that enables
company of all sizes to obtain IP rights and to generate
profits from their IP is necessary.
●

IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25

Licensing Platforms
It is common that international organizations create
licensing platforms. Major lessons learned from theseplatforms are as follows.
First of all, there are limitations to what pure patent
licensing can do to improve the technical ability ofcompanies and technicians in developing countries.
Package licensing that is a mixture of patents and relevant
know-how is needed; however, in previous examples
emphasis was not sufficiently put on this point.
Second, the financial inability of licensees to afford
technology transfer remains as a huge problem.
International organizations can play a role in connecting
technology providers, seekers and financial institutions
utilizing their network.
Third, patent pools are convenient for realizing“one-stop licensing” and to cut the negotiation cost.
However, it is not necessarily substitutable for the
aforementioned package licensing. Therefore, a poolshould, whenever necessary, be supplemented withtechnical support.
Lastly, for technologies which are still not mature
enough to be applicable in the field, especially
technologies owned by non-practicing entities such asuniversities, national and international institutions can aid
in establishing an IP right and using the exclusivity toenable companies to exploit the technology whilelicensing it out at a reasonable royalty or no royalty forhumanitarian purposes.

1

Daisaku Muranishi, Raisensu Keiyaku no “Iroha” Patent 2011,Vol.64 No.13, 5
2 Department of Justice-Federal Trade Commission, Antitrust
Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property 5.33 https://www.teslamotors.com/jp/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you
4 http://newsroom.toyota.co.jp/en/detail/4663446
5 https://ecopatentcommons.org/about-eco-patent-commons
6 http://www.jipa.or.jp/jyohou_hasin/sympo/pdf/sym11_wipo_gre
en.pdf7 http://www.goldenrice.org/Content2-How/how9_IP.php
8 http://www.medicinespatentpool.org/about/
9 http://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2011/article_0026.html
10 As of Apr. 14, 2016. http://www.wipo.int/research/en/collaborations/11 Interview with Larry Horn, CEO of MPEG LA.
12 European Patent Office. Patents and clean energy in Africa(2013) http://www.epo.org/news-issues/technology/sustainable-technologies/clean-energy/patents-africa.html
13 International Code of Conduct on the Transfer of Technolog
y (1985 draft) 1.5
14 Article 40
15 Article 8
16 https://www.ige.ch/en/legal-info/international-cooperation/countr
y-specific-projects/ghana.html
17 Interview with a Ghanaian government officer.
18 TRIPS Agreement Article 31(f)

7 ●

19

Interview with a Ghanaian government officer and a consul
tant to the Ghanaian government.
20 ANNEX TO THE PROTOCOL AMENDING THE TRIPSAGREEMENT, Article 31 bis 1
21 ANNEX TO THE PROTOCOL AMENDING THE TRIPSAGREEMENT, Article 31 bis 3
22 Technology Transfer Regulation 1(1)、2(2)23 Technology Transfer Regulation 2(2)24 Technology Transfer Regulation 4(c)25 Technology Transfer Regulation 4(i)26 Technology Transfer Regulation 8(1)27 Technology Transfer Regulation 9
28 Technology Transfer Regulation 14,15
29 See supra note 19
30 Xintian Yin, Zhongguo Zhuanlifa Xiangjie (2011) 494
31 Revised in 1992, 2000, and 2008.
32 The current draft patent law Articles 82-85 concerns the license of right system.
33 Patent Law Article 82
34 Regulations on Technology Import and Export Administration, Article 29
35 Regulations on Technology Import and Export Administration, Article 27
36
Patent Law, Article 69
37 See supra note 30 803-804●

8 ●IIP Bulletin 2016 Vol.25