¶¶Òõ¾«Æ·

THE swift progression of digital technologies, artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, fintech, smart agriculture and more constitutes a significant threat to the intellectual property framework in a nation like Bangladesh. The country risks losing its place in global value chains and failing to reward its own inventive activities if the legal framework for patents is not brought into line with the changing ecology of innovation. The situation in Bangladesh needs to be addressed immediately.

Bangladesh is still not performing well in terms of patent filings and grants. The World Intellectual Property Organisation says that Bangladesh’s resident patent applications per million people are rated 106th in the world. In one set of statistics, there were just 74 resident applications in 2021. An independent study found that foreign applicants make up the majority of patent holders in Bangladesh, ‘almost 80–90 per cent of the patents granted belong to the foreign applicants.’ In 2020, Bangladesh was ranked as low as 110th out of 134 nations for submitting patents.Ìý As a result, the empirical ground for local patenting is still weak.

Bangladesh recently passed the Bangladesh Patents Act, 2023 (Act no LIII of 2023), which went into effect on February 27, 2025. The act says it would update and replace the Patents and Designs Act of 1911, which was written during the colonial era. Some important parts of the 2023 act are: sections 16–17 mandated that the date of filing (section 16) and the date of publishing of the application (section 17) are all 18 months following the date of filing. Section 18 suggested patent applications that have to do with national security and may be kept secret until they are approved by the government. Section 19, pre-grant opposition, says that anyone can oppose after an application has been published but before it is granted. Sections 21–23 ask for an assessment (within 36 months) and a substantive examination that includes a search (section 23) for new ideas and previous art. Section 25 says that a patent gives the owner the exclusive right to stop anybody else from making, using, selling, or importing a patented product or process (for product v method).Ìý Section 28 referred to the length of a patent, the payment of yearly fees, and the restoration of a patent. Additionally, the statute discusses public-beneficial licence rights, recording licence agreements and restrictions.

Even with these changes, there are still substantial discrepancies when it comes to the digital economic concentration.Ìý In the beginning there is the question of what kinds of things can be patented in the world of digital technology.Ìý The act says that ‘scientific discoveries, mathematical methods, business methods, schemes, rules, or methods for doing mental acts or purely intellectual activities’ are not patentable.Ìý This makes it unclear if an innovation that uses an algorithm and is built into a physical device, such as an IoT sensor network, will be considered patentable or not.Ìý The world is moving toward allowing software-related inventions as long as they have a technological effect. Bangladesh’s law doesn’t currently have clear rules for this.Ìý In addition, the institutional capacity, backlog of exams and efficiency of procedures are still low. For example, the act sets deadlines for publication (18 months) and requests for examination (36 months), but the number of resident filings is still very low, which shows that there are structural barriers to local innovation take-up.Ìý Ultimately, enforcing rights and allowing local small and medium-sized businesses to use patented assets is still in its early stages. This means that the ‘patent to product’ value chain is still not fully developed.

Based on the above, does Bangladesh’s law do enough to preserve digital economy innovations? My evaluation, somewhat, yes, but not entirely. The 2023 act lays the groundwork for patenting in Bangladesh. It defines rights (section 25), sets out the stages to take (sections 16–24) and establishes objection mechanisms (sections 19–20) and public-interest protections.Ìý So, an inventor in Bangladesh can, in principle, file, have their work examined, get a grant and enforce it. But the law doesn’t give clear advice on things like software-embedded inventions, Internet of Things systems that combine hardware and software, AI models, data-driven processes, business-method patents and so on. Without clear rules and instructions for how to do things, inventors in Bangladesh or multinational companies will be less likely to apply for digital innovation patents there. The law’s potential is mostly squandered because so few residents file.

Should international law be ‘used’ or ‘invoked’? Bangladesh law immediately applies to foreign innovations (ie, non-resident applicants) under its national system. The act acknowledges priority claims (section 5) and addresses the priority date; additionally, foreign application documents are required for re-application (see section 14) to facilitate inspection. Bangladesh cannot directly use foreign legislation, like US or European patent law, unless it is adopted by treaty or by Bangladeshi law. Bangladesh has agreed to follow Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights rules; thus, it needs to follow global standards as well. But using international law or relying on foreign patent licences does not take the place of the national statutory process. So, foreign law won’t work; Bangladesh needs to make sure its own law is strong enough and works well with other countries’ laws if it wants to have digital economy filings.

In the context of the digital economy, Bangladesh needs to provide clear rules for what kinds of software-related inventions, algorithm/hardware combos, AI, big-data approaches, the Internet of Things and fintech platforms can be patented. Without help, the innovators in the country would stay scared.Ìý If you want to build up your institution’s capacity, you should hire more examiners who are good at digital inventions, set up fast-track systems for priority filings in IT sectors and make the examination timeframes more clear. Make the connections between business and academia stronger so that new ideas lead to patents and eventually to sales. The fact that few residents file suggests that there aren’t strong connections between institutions, industry and patenting. Think about giving incentives for international collaboration: get multinational R&D to file in Bangladesh so that the country can be part of global supply chains and digital innovation networks.Ìý Bangladesh needs to find a balance between encouraging innovation and protecting the public interest. While patent protection is crucial, the country must also protect against anti-competitive behaviour, the evergreening of patents and the refusal of access to critical digital infrastructure. It must also make sure that small and medium-sized businesses and start-ups have access. If Bangladesh’s digital economy policy includes integrating the patent system, e-governance, smart cities and agritech projects should all be in line with the intellectual property strategy. This will make sure that artificially made inventions like AI and sensor networks may be protected and used.

In conclusion, Bangladesh’s adoption of the Patents Act, 2023, is a significant step towards modernising its laws pertaining to intellectual property.Ìý However, having a law is insufficient in the digital economy. It is crucial to understand whether the national patent ecosystem promotes digital innovation rather than impedes it, whether Bangladesh is drawing both domestic and international innovators to file patents, and whether the law is being interpreted, guided, and implemented in a way that keeps up with rapidly evolving technology fields.Ìý Without it, the nation might remain on the periphery rather than develop into a hub for patents related to the digital economy.Ìý To put it briefly, Bangladesh has established the legal foundation for patent protection. However, the opportunity to benefit from the digital economy won’t materialise if it doesn’t address the critical gaps in capacity, advice and links to digital innovation networks.

Ìý

Samanta Azrin Prapty is a legal researcher with specialisation in international commercial law.