Patents in the future

17 November 2006

Deputy Director General Keld Nymann Jensen

Patents in the future

DISASTER OR SUCCES

Agenda

1. IP in Denmark and the DKPTO

2. Global Challenge – increasing filings

3. Does output diminish as a function of scale?

4. Vision for Europe

5. What actions have been taken?

•Business Services

•Legal/Political advice

•International negotiations

•Issues Patents

•Registers

-Trademarks

-Utility models

-Designs

The Danish Patent and Trademark Office

Established in 1894

ISO9001 certified

270 employees

The Danish IPR performance: Patent growth

Danish IPR performance: Trademark and design growth

Danish thinking

• IPR active companies more profitable(causality not established)

• Only 50% of companies in innovative industriesare IPR-active(Have IPR and applied for it within the last 3 years)

• Role twofold:– Convert non-active to active IP-users– To get more companies to integrate IP in their

strategic planning

Getting more companies to use IPR strategically

IP Ad Hoc Level

IP Defensive

IP cost optimizing

IP offensive

IP driven

Visionary IP driven

IP Business

Strategic IPaudit- a new innovative product

• Purpose is to strengthening the creation, protection and use of IPR in SME’s

• The idea is to develop a tool that SME’s can use to asses and decide how to systematically use IP for business development

• Conducted in collaboration with the IP profession

• Combine IPaudit with the Business Excellence model

• The project is supported by EU

The Strategic IPaudit project

• Training of auditors (from the IP profession and DKPTO)

• Interview with key personnel in 120 SME’s to establish how the company works with IP within

IP creation IP protection IP competences IP exploitation and IP strategies

• Reporting and follow-up

• Dissemination of tools and continued training of IP professionals

The Strategic IPaudit report (I)

Graphical overview of scores in five IP areas:

0

1

2

3

4

5

IP Strategy

IP Organizing and Responsibility

IP AdministrationIP Knowledge

IP Skills

IP Management, Company 1, 2005

Example of The Strategic IPaudit report (II)

Graphical comparison of a company to industry profiles etc.

0

1

2

3

4

5

IP Creation

IP Obtaining

IP ProtectionIP Enforcement

IP Exploitation

Company 1

Company 2

Company 3

Profile for IP and Innovation in 3 Companies, 2005

f

Total filings

Total filings (1996 = 100)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

US

JP

EPO

CN

KR

Total filings

0

100.000

200.000

300.000

400.000

500.000

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

US

JP

EPO

CN

KR

PCT filings

PCT filings (first inventors country of origen)

0

5.000

10.000

15.000

20.000

25.000

30.000

35.000

40.000

45.000

50.000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

US

JP

EPO

CN

KR

PCT filings (first inventors country of origen) 1995 = 100

0

200

400

600

800

1.000

1.200

1.400

1.600

1.800

2.000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

US

JP

EPO

CN

KR

”The Law of Diminishing return to Scale”

The hypothesis is that at a certain size an organisation will increasingly use it‘s resources to administration purposes rather than production

Hence, adding a new production unit will produce a falling marginal product

‘For the sake of good order’ the “law” has nothing to do with individual or groups of persons (i.e. examiners) productivity but is concerned with overall capacity of an organisation

Diminishing return to scale in the patent processing business

Grants/final actions per patent staff in Trilateral Offices

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Gra

nts

per

sta

ff

Office 1

Office 2

Office 3

The IP-system Drivers

Users FilingsOrganisational

capacityGrants

f (x)

• Competition on knowledge

• New users in “new” countries

f (x)

• Diminishing Return to Scale

• Complexity of files

• System innovation

f (x)

• Public perception

• Regulations

Are we able to manage the future workload?

Filings, grants and staff in Trilateral Offices

(Linear regression)

TotalGrants/final

Patent staff

filings actions  

       

2004 980,644 392,618 15,902       

Est. 20101,227,51

9 530,391 20,968Index (2004 =

100) 125 135 132

       

Est. 20151,414,14

3 621,444 24,812Index (2004 =

100) 144 158 156

   

WIPO

TRIPS

Vision

• EPO as back office concentrating on core business – patent granting;– infrastructure, etc.

• NPO as Front Office: – entry point for users;– first office action (search and preliminary examination);– promoting strategic use of IP;– education;– awareness, etc.

European Patent Network

3 working groups established

• User Support

• Utilisation Pilot Project - UPP

• European Quality System - EQS

International Actions

• Trilateral meetings

• Bilateral ”mutual recognising” agreements

• B+ Group

• SPLT

Thank you for your attention