SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Call For Transparency In The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiation

In this post, three US law professors explain a recent call by over 30 legal scholars for the US Trade Representative to increase transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement intellectual property chapter, and their response to Ambassador Kirk’s response that he is “strongly offended” by the suggestion that the negotiation is not adequately transparent already.





Latest Comments
  • David, thank you for the note. It appears there is... »
  • The link to the US proposal seems to be broken, an... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    IP System Soul-Searching In Face Of Success, System Overload

    Published on 19 January 2010 @ 11:51 am

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    The intellectual property system seems to be tight at the seams with a global overload of work for national IP offices and a backlog in patent requests. Further international cooperation and some adjustments are necessary to keep an efficient high quality IP system, according to speakers at a private-sector meeting in Geneva on 14-15 January.

    The Association Romande de Propriété Intellectuelle (AROPI), a group of Swiss French-speaking IP lawyers and experts, organised its first international meeting in the premises of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The meeting called Aropiade 2010 in a loose reference to the ancient Greek games, was meant to provide an open gathering of the intellectual property community to discuss the prospects for the IP system but also to examine more practical aspects of IP practice, such as recent and upcoming modifications in the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), managed by WIPO.

    The transition towards a knowledge economy with a greater value of intangible assets is a particular challenge, said Francis Gurry, director general of WIPO. The increasing number of patent requests also represents a source of difficulty for the system.

    The migration of content to the internet has brought changes and the classical model of copyright is not working, said Gurry. There is a tendency to try and suppress illegal downloading, such as the recent French legislation, and initiatives in the United Kingdom and Spain. But in order to help the general public understand the real issue, it might be interesting to reformulate the description of what is at stake, he said. The issue is the financing of culture in the 21st century, Gurry said, and “putting teenagers behind bars” does not seem a tactic that is likely to win over the general public, he said.

    A lot of changes are occurring in the IP field, and those changes are taking place in an instable political framework, Gurry said. The global wealth inequality brings instability to IP as technology is a focal point for the differences between countries.

    This instability carries risks for IP, he said, in particular a political paralysis, which is not only true for WIPO. That could leave a vacuum that could be filled by the private sector. IP policies will be more and more market- and technology-driven, according to Gurry. Google Books is a good example of this. Public goods will be managed by private interests, he said.

    WIPO is trying to find a way to separate what is necessary for a functional normalisation from harmonisation that touches the national political sphere. Gurry gave the example of cell phones and the different zones where users would like to use their phone. In order to achieve that, he said, international agreements are necessary.

    For Roland Grossenbacher, director of the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property, one of the main issues is the work overload in patent offices around the world. This overload jeopardises the whole patent system, he said. This challenge could be addressed with a new dimension of international cooperation, he added.

    Part of the problem lies in the fact that requests are more numerous but also more complex, Grossenbacher said. The specialisation of patent examiners is reaching its limits faced with the multidisciplinary natures of requests and the demand for higher quality in the patent examination process.

    The global backlog in the main global patent offices will continue to grow if global collaboration is not improved, he predicted.

    One of the main consequences of the backlog is that it puts patent applicants at a disadvantage vis à vis their competitors. Other innovators might catch up with the requested patented invention before the patent is granted, he said.

    Grossenbacher described two measures to help the problem. A “classical” measure would be to hire more examiners, but he said young scientists should put their talent towards innovation and not become patent examiners. Also, the multiplication of “hyper-specialised patent examiners” would be hard for patent offices to manage, he said.

    A second, bolder measure, according to Grossenbacher, would be a global patent. But at this stage when there is no sign of a European Community patent, it seems utopian, he said, although the PCT has the potential to grow in that direction.

    Another idea would be mutual recognition between patent offices, but this is dangerous if prior conditions are not met. For the moment, that would probably reduce patent quality, he said.

    Alternative solutions have been developed like sharing work among offices, but this can be very controversial, he said. An example of worksharing is the Patent Prosecution Highway, a pilot programme which involves close cooperation between some IP offices, such as the Canadian Intellectual Property Office, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and the Japan Patent Office. It is meant to accelerate the examination of patents in collaborating national offices.

    There is also the idea of asking wider participation of other actors, such as requesting the applicant to give thorough information on the state of the technology, or third parties to present possible anteriority, prior use.

    PCT Takes a Digital Step

    The PCT, which allows patent applicants to file international patent applications will see several changes in 2010, said Christine Bonvallet, lawyer for the PCT Legal Division at WIPO. From 1 January, in the request form, applicants will be able to ask the receiving office or to the WIPO International Bureau to prepare and transmit or to obtain, respectively, a certified copy of the previous application(s) from a digital library.

    As of 1 July, some modalities concerning the supplementary international searches will enter into force, in particular regarding the scope and some limitations under specific circumstances as a result of further modifications of Rule 45bis.5(g) and (h) and 45bis.9(c), said Bonvallet.

    As of 18 January, applicants are able to download documents electronically to the PatentScope gateway, said Ann Bardini, head of the WIPO PCT Functional Support Section in the PCT Operations Division. PatentScope is a WIPO-managed patent search database.

    All documents should be transmitted in PDF format, said Bardini. This procedure is expected to be cost-saving, more efficient, and shorten response time since WIPO will be saved the document digitalisation process.

    Several types of documents will be accepted electronically, such as modifications, supplementary searches, withdrawing requests, unofficial comments by applicants on the written International Searching Authority’s opinion. However, it will not be possible to send initial requests, said Bardini.

    Thu-Lang Tran Wasescha of the World Trade Organization IP Division also spoke at the event.

    Catherine Saez may be reached at csaez@ip-watch.ch.

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.