News

On Monday (9), Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies approved, by 337 votes to 19, an urgent procedure for a bill that allows the compulsory licensing of patents related to Mounjaro and Zepbound. The approval places the proposal on a fast-track, bypassing committee review and moving directly to a plenary vote.

The medications are used to treat type 2 diabetes and obesity, and the bill seeks to amend Brazil’s intellectual property framework to allow compulsory licenses for public-interest purposes.

Rationale behind the proposal

According to the bill’s justification, the high market prices of these drugs prevent their large-scale adoption, particularly in public health policies. The author argues that the current cost structure is incompatible with mass treatment strategies in a country with more than 200 million inhabitants, many of whom could benefit from such therapies.

The proposal also highlights that Brazil’s public healthcare system (SUS) is unable to absorb these medicines due to their elevated cost.

Parallel initiative in the Senate

A similar initiative is currently under discussion in the Brazilian Senate. The bill proposes a temporary suspension of the tirzepatide patent, the active ingredient in Mounjaro, on public-interest grounds. The proposal includes provisions for local manufacturing and expanded access to obesity treatment within the public healthcare system.

IP implications

These legislative initiatives revive discussions on the balance between patent protection and public health policies, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector. If approved, compulsory licensing measures may significantly impact patent strategies, pricing models, technology transfer agreements, and investment decisions in Brazil.

On January 22, 2026, the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) released an updated version of its Industrial Designs Manual, introducing important changes to the examination of priority claims in industrial design applications.

The key change allows the BPTO to declare a loss of priority without issuing a prior office action in certain situations, marking a shift from prior administrative practice.

Cases where priority may be lost without prior action

Under the updated guidelines, priority may be automatically lost when:

• the priority document contains a design unrelated to the Brazilian application, and the correct document is not submitted within 90 days;
• a valid priority document, including figures, application number, and filing date in the country of origin, is not submitted within the 90-day statutory deadline; or
• the figures in the Brazilian application do not fully correspond to those in the priority document.

Situations where an office action still applies

The BPTO will continue to issue office actions in cases such as:

• illegible or incomplete priority documents;
• discrepancies between the applicants or owners listed in the Brazilian filing and the priority document; or
• poor-quality figures that prevent proper comparison between the claimed design and the priority filing.

Legal basis and practical impact

The update aligns the Manual with the Brazilian Industrial Property Law (Law No. 9,279/1996), particularly Articles 16 and 99. It reflects the conclusions of Legal Opinion No. 00016/2023, which emphasizes strict compliance with administrative deadlines.

While the new approach is more stringent, applicants’ right to appeal remains fully preserved.

Overall, the changes aim to improve exam efficiency, eliminate procedural inconsistencies, and enhance legal certainty and predictability for industrial design applicants in Brazil.

Brazil and the European Union have announced the mutual recognition of the equivalence of their personal data protection frameworks, creating a trusted legal basis for cross-border data transfers between the two jurisdictions.

The decision acknowledges that both systems ensure high and reliable standards of privacy protection, providing legal certainty for international data flows related to economic activities, digital services, scientific cooperation, and global platform operations.

From a regulatory perspective, the agreement is expected to reduce compliance burdens, enhance legal predictability, and foster digital trade and investment between Brazil and the EU. Government officials emphasized that strong data protection standards are not obstacles to innovation, but rather a cornerstone of a sustainable and trustworthy digital economy.

The measure also highlights the growing alignment between Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (LGPD) and the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), a key issue for companies handling personal data across borders.

Bill No. 512/25, currently under review by the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies, proposes amendments to the Brazilian Industrial Property Law to protect the use of trademarks that have been used continuously and in good faith over time, even without formal registration.

Under the proposal, trademark coexistence may be allowed when:

• the mark has been used for a prolonged period without opposition;
• there is a significant geographic distance between the businesses;
• the registered trademark owner failed to act promptly;
• no financial harm or likelihood of consumer confusion is demonstrated.

according to the author of the text, Congressman Jonas Donizette, the measure aims to enhance legal certainty for micro and small businesses, which often develop well-established local brands but later face claims from trademark owners who do not operate in the same region.

The bill also references recent case law from the São Paulo Court of Appeals (TJSP), which allowed the coexistence of identical trademarks used by pizzerias in different cities, based on over 30 years of good-faith use and the trademark owner’s delay in enforcing its rights.

If enacted, the proposal may significantly influence trademark enforcement strategies in Brazil, particularly in disputes involving prior use, good faith, and the territorial scope of trademark rights.

The bill is subject to conclusive review by the Industry, Commerce and Services Committee and the Constitution and Justice Committee.

Brazil’s Geographical Indications (GIs) continue to expand at a steady pace and are expected to grow by approximately 20% per year, according to Sebrae. The trend confirms the increasing relevance of GIs as strategic intellectual property assets, supporting product differentiation, regional development, and market access.

Between 2020 and the end of 2025, the number of GIs recognized by the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) increased from 73 to 150 registrations, more than doubling in five years. In early 2026, the total reached 151 GIs, with the certification of Carambeí pies (Paraná).

The GI registration process in Brazil requires careful technical and legal structuring. Preparation alone may take around 18 months, followed by an average 12-month examination period before the BPTO. This timeline highlights the importance of early planning and governance.

Brazilian GIs may be recognized as Indications of Source or Denominations of Origin and operate as collective IP rights, protecting geographic names and associated production methods. Coffee stands out as the sector with the highest number of GI registrations, illustrating the economic value of origin-based protection.

Beyond a quality label, GIs function as legal tools that strengthen value chains and position Brazilian products more competitively in domestic and international markets.

Brazil’s intellectual property system recorded significant growth in 2025, according to the December 2025 Industrial Property Monthly Bulletin released by the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO).

The figures show a consistent increase in both filings and grants, with record-breaking results across patents, trademarks, industrial designs, and software registrations, reflecting Brazil’s evolving economic and innovation environment.

Patent filings reached 29,557 applications, a 6.7% increase from 2024 and the strongest performance since 2016. The data suggests renewed interest in securing patent protection in Brazil, particularly among companies positioning the country as a strategic market for technology development and industrial operations.

Trademark activity reached an unprecedented level, with 504,461 applications filed in 2025, marking a 7.9% increase and surpassing the 500,000 mark for the first time in Brazil’s history. This growth highlights the increasing importance of brand protection and intangible asset management in the Brazilian market.

Industrial design filings totaled 9,872 applications, a 35.7% increase, while software registrations reached 7,236, a 36.2% increase. Both categories achieved historic records, underscoring the expansion of Brazil’s creative economy, digital industries, and design-driven innovation.

Grant activity also showed strong performance, with 13,624 patents, 176,559 trademarks, 8,456 industrial designs, and 6,892 software registrations granted in 2025. Notably, industrial design grants more than doubled compared to the previous year.

Overall, the data reinforces Brazil’s growing relevance as a jurisdiction for intellectual property protection, offering increased legal certainty and opportunities for companies seeking to safeguard and leverage their IP assets in Latin America.

The Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BPTO) released an updated version of the Industrial Design Manual on January 22, 2026, introducing important changes to the examination of claimed priority in industrial design applications.

One of the key updates is the introduction of new situations in which priority may be lost without the issuance of a prior office action, representing a significant shift in examination practice.

Under the updated Manual, the loss of priority may be published directly in the following circumstances:

• when the priority document contains an industrial design unrelated to the subject matter claimed in the Brazilian application, and the correct document is not submitted within the statutory 90-day period from the filing date;
• when a valid priority document, including figures, application number, and filing date in the country of origin, is not submitted within the 90-day statutory deadline after filing in Brazil, and
• when the figural claims of the industrial design filed in Brazil do not fully correspond to the figural claims contained in the priority document.

According to BPTO, the revised procedure aims to streamline the examination of industrial design applications, making the process faster, more efficient, and less costly for applicants.

The full list of amendments can be accessed in the “Updates” section of the Industrial Design Manual on BPTO’s website as of January 22, 2026.

For rights holders and applicants, the update highlights the importance of accurate and consistent priority documentation, particularly in international filing strategies involving Brazil.

Disney’s USD 1 billion investment in OpenAI marks a turning point in the relationship between major entertainment studios and generative artificial intelligence. The agreement authorizes OpenAI’s video generation platform, Sora, to use approximately 200 characters from the Disney, Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars universes, with operations expected to begin in 2026.

Under the agreement, Sora will be allowed to generate short-form social videos featuring licensed characters, including their iconic settings, costumes, and visual elements. Notably, the use of actors’ physical likenesses or voices is expressly excluded. Disney will also gain access to OpenAI’s APIs to develop proprietary products and experiences, including applications for Disney+, while its employees will be authorized to use ChatGPT internally.

From an intellectual property perspective, the agreement reflects a strategic shift. Traditionally, large studios have taken a defensive stance toward AI, emphasizing copyright risks, unauthorized reproduction of protected works, and the potential for litigation. By formalizing a licensing arrangement, Disney moves from opposition to participation, transforming AI from a potential infringer into a contractually authorized actor within its IP ecosystem.

Contracts as the New Boundary of AI Use

According to IP specialists cited in the analysis, agreements of this nature fundamentally change the legal framing of AI-generated content. The contract defines the scope of use, aesthetic boundaries, duration, territories, governance mechanisms, and control of outputs. Any misuse ceases to be a matter of diffuse copyright and becomes a matter of contractual breach.

Importantly, the agreement reinforces that AI systems do not acquire authorship. The underlying characters and universes remain Disney’s intellectual property, while user rights over generated content are limited and strictly subordinated to the licensing terms.

Market Implications

Although the deal does not establish a formal legal precedent, it signals a potential new market standard: generative AI is not inherently unlawful when it operates under explicit authorization, licensing, and governance structures. This approach may encourage other rights holders to negotiate similar agreements, while increasing pressure for more explicit rules regarding training data, post-termination safeguards, and accountability.

At the same time, unresolved challenges remain, particularly for independent creators and smaller rights holders whose works may still be used in AI training without direct negotiation.

For the audiovisual and creative industries, the Disney–OpenAI agreement underscores a broader shift: intellectual property contracts are becoming the primary instrument for balancing innovation, economic exploitation, and legal certainty in the age of generative AI.