Opinion: Trade policy isn’t giving Minnesota’s intellectual property the protection it deserves

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of guest commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

There’s a good reason Minnesota is known for its “Medical Alley.” The state has produced numerous lifesaving medical breakthroughs, from 3D-printed organs to CPR catheters to brain cancer treatments. And the thousands of life science companies headquartered here are the heartbeat of our state’s economy, employing over 300,000 people and contributing over 10% of our state’s GDP.

Unfortunately, this vibrant ecosystem is now in jeopardy. That’s because the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the agency that carries out U.S. trade policy, has neglected its duty to protect Minnesotans’ intellectual property from attacks abroad.

Like many other industries, Minnesota’s health science sector depends on intellectual property (IP) rights. By protecting innovators from unauthorized copying or theft of their creations, IP rights like patents encourage investment in advanced technologies that might otherwise be too risky to develop.

Take the medical device industry, which employs nearly 35,000 Minnesotans. Developing a new device, like a lifesaving pacemaker, requires time and immense financial resources. The fact that an improved pacemaker can be protected with a patent assures investors that they’ll be able to recoup these costs if the product is successful.

If patent rights weren’t respected in foreign markets, many investors would shift their focus to safer ventures, and pacemakers would remain scientifically stagnant. As such, Congress has tasked the USTR since 1988 with publishing an annual report, typically released in April, that highlights IP violations by U.S. trading partners. Dubbed the Special 301 Report, it’s designed to hold other countries accountable for undermining the IP rights that drive American scientific advancements.

Unfortunately, for the past four years, the report has failed to adequately address these violations, exposing Minnesota’s vital industries to growing IP theft and misuse.

In 2020, the Special 301 Report clearly stated that its priority was “ensuring that U.S. owners of IP have a full and fair opportunity to use and profit from their IP around the globe.” Yet 2024’s report included no such language. This has signaled to foreign governments that America is backing down on IP enforcement, and they’re taking full advantage.

The Special 301 Report used to condemn so-called compulsory licensing, the practice of using patented products or technology without the patent owner’s permission. But soon after language calling out the improper use of compulsory licensing was removed from the report, Colombia issued its first compulsory drug patent license, and the European Commission proposed a plan to expand compulsory licensing across the European Union. These weren’t coincidences.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization is now negotiating provisions to force the sharing of “pandemic related products” across countries without regard for IP. This approach ignores the fact that the rapid global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments occurred thanks to voluntary cooperation between companies and governments. Abandoning the IP protections that scientists depend on would only impair their ability to produce innovative vaccines and diagnostics when the next pandemic hits.

If we continue to sit passively by while other countries seize patented American innovations, U.S. companies will lose access to vital revenue streams, hampering their ability to perform critical R&D. Minnesota risks the disappearance of thousands of jobs and businesses from Medical Alley. And patients nationwide could miss out on new medical treatments, devices and cures.

Minnesota’s representatives in Congress must demand that the next Special 301 Report curb this abuse and re-establish a standard of strong intellectual property enforcement.

First, the report needs to call out countries that fail to uphold trade obligations. In previous reports, the USTR called out trade partners like Canada for imposing price controls on American inventions, depriving innovators of fair value for their products. But this harmful practice was omitted in the most recent report.

Second, the report needs to reaffirm longstanding and bipartisan opposition to the improper use of compulsory licensing, which forces U.S. companies to surrender their IP unjustly.

Last, the report needs to take a strong stance against forced technology transfer. Any sharing of trade secrets or institutional know-how between nations must be voluntary and subject to mutually agreed-upon terms.

Done right, the Special 301 Report will be an important component of the Trump administration’s “America First Trade Policy,” which seeks to ensure fair trade tween the United States and its partners abroad. It will also boost our economy here in Minnesota. With strong enforcement of IP laws abroad, Minnesota’s biotech, medical device and health tech sectors can maintain their competitive edge.

Minnesota’s economy depends on the integrity of global intellectual property rights. By ensuring that the USTR does its job to protect them, lawmakers can safeguard the industries that create good-paying jobs and foster world-changing scientific advancements across our state.

Annette Meeks is CEO of the Freedom Foundation of Minnesota, an independent, nonprofit educational and research organization dedicated to free-market principles and liberty-based public policy initiatives.