The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC) has recently released the 2025 International Intellectual Property Index, an annual assessment of IP protection legal frameworks across countries. While the rankings among top-performing countries remained largely stable—with the United States once again leading as the best overall environment for IP protection—the report highlights two major trends: the Middle East’s efforts to strengthen IP regimes, and concerning efforts in Europe and the U.S. to weaken pharmaceutical IP protections.

    Middle East IP Frameworks Show Improvement Amid Limited Global Shifts

    According to the executive summary, the 2025 Index reflects an overall improvement in the global IP environment. Scores improved in 33 economies, while only two countries saw slight declines. Among the top 10 economies for overall IP protection, most rankings remained consistent with the 2024 Index, except for the Netherlands and Japan climbing to sixth and seventh respectively, and South Korea replacing Switzerland in the top 10.

    The most notable score improvements came from three Middle Eastern countries: Saudi Arabia (up 17.55%), the United Arab Emirates (UAE, up 11.22%), and Kuwait (up 8.87%). The Index attributes these gains to a broad regional improvement in IP protection environments. In particular, Kuwait and the UAE implemented new measures allowing rights holders to block access to infringing websites via administrative injunctions. Saudi Arabia’s gains were largely driven by strong performance in the new category “Incentivizing Advanced Innovation,” which credits the country’s support for the development and commercialization of treatments for rare diseases.

    Saudi Arabia’s backing for orphan drug products stood out within this category, which incidentally posted the lowest average score across the Index (27.39%), followed by “Protection of Trade Secrets and Confidential Information” (49.27%). The highest average score was seen in “Designs, Related Rights, and Limitations” (64.18%), narrowly ahead of “System Efficiency” and “International Treaties: Accession & Ratification” (both averaging 63.91%). Among traditional IP types, trademarks scored highest (63.41%), followed by patents (59.82%) and copyrights (51.45%).

    TRIPS Seen as Catalyst for Global IP Growth and Technology Transfer

    Slight declines in scores for the U.S. and EU were attributed to legislative and regulatory uncertainty surrounding pharmaceutical IP protections. While the EU’s revised proposal on generic drug regulation only shortens the regulatory data exclusivity (RDE) period for new drugs from 8 years to 7.5 (instead of the originally proposed 6), the Chamber emphasized that weakened IP incentives could “exacerbate the trend of investment flight from Europe.” In the U.S., the use of Bayh-Dole “march-in rights” and controversial drug pricing negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act similarly signal a weakening of the life sciences innovation ecosystem.

    The 2025 Index also reflects on 30 years of progress under the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement, which entered into force in 1995. Since 1990, the global value of IP-related trade has increased 17-fold to USD 446 billion. In the same period, technology transfers and IP asset flows from high-income to low- and middle-income economies have tripled, reflecting significant gains for developing countries. The Chamber highlights that Africa, in particular, has benefited from international IP treaties like TRIPS, with trademark filings in the continent increasing by 450% from 1993 to 2023.

    Concerns Over Incomplete IP Enforcement Under USMCA

    Finally, the report flags persistent shortcomings in the enforcement of IP provisions under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Given rising trade tensions with Canada and Mexico—especially if Donald Trump returns to office and acts on his stated plans for aggressive trade renegotiation in the first 100 days—this issue is drawing renewed attention. The Chamber notes that Mexico has failed to implement commitments on patent enforcement for biopharmaceuticals and timely marketing approval, while Canada has not fulfilled its promise to establish an effective patent term adjustment mechanism.

Source:http://ipr.mofcom.gov.cn/article/gjxw/gbhj/bmz/mg/202504/1991411.html