IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jiplap/v20y2025i6p392-397..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

OpenAI’s patent pledge: a post-Moderna analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriela Lenarczyk
  • Mateo Aboy

Abstract

Patent pledges have increasingly been used as private ordering mechanisms to facilitate innovation and collaboration while balancing the proprietary interests of patent holders. The Moderna v Pfizer/BioNTech decision by the UK High Court marked the first judicial analysis of the enforceability and interpretation of such pledges.OpenAI’s patent pledge, committing to defensive patent use subject to specific behavioural conditions, raises novel interpretative issues. Their pledge diverges from traditional pledges by focusing on defensive use, conditioned upon specific behavioural triggers such as avoiding harm or legal actions against OpenAI.This article examines the pledge through the lens of the Moderna framework, analysing its scope, revocability and operational limits. The pledge’s reliance on broad behavioural conditions and lack of explicit temporal markers introduce noteworthy legal and practical complexities. These elements affect its enforceability and create challenges for third-party reliance.Our analysis highlights the balance between strategic flexibility for patent holders and the need for clarity to foster trust among implementers. The findings underscore the balance between fostering innovation and protecting proprietary interests.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriela Lenarczyk & Mateo Aboy, 2025. "OpenAI’s patent pledge: a post-Moderna analysis," Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(6), pages 392-397.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jiplap:v:20:y:2025:i:6:p:392-397.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiplp/jpaf006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jiplap:v:20:y:2025:i:6:p:392-397.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiplp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.