Ethics and Law in New Media/The Proprietary World: The WIPO Intellectual Property model

Study the Anglo-American and Continental European school of IP. Write a short comparative analysis to your blog (if you have clear preference for one over another, explain that, too).

While investigating the question I have found a polish book on intellectual property and here go some details from it (especially emphasizing the organizations found in Poland, Europe and the US).

Intellectual property and the European Union Framework Programmes
The strategic objective of the Framework Programmes of the European Union is striving to maintain the highest level of development in all spheres of social life. The member countries place great emphasis on supporting an intensive exchange of scientific, collaborative research and various research networks. The idea is that the knowledge resulting from the effort of human intellect is the key to our economy. It has long been witnessing the phenomenon of mobility of researchers around the world in search of knowledge, contacts with other scientists and materials for research. All this requires a wider exchange of knowledge and the product of human intellect, benefiting from protection under the intellectual property.

Polish Patent Office
The Patent Office grants patent protection rights to trademarks and other industrial property rights. Its main task is to grant exclusive rights for the subjects of industrial property protection. This is accomplished through:
1) providing legal protection for industrial property,
2) gathering and sharing of patent documentation and literature,
3) contributing to and promoting public awareness of the principles of industrial property protection.
The basic tasks of the office for the provision and maintenance of legal protection, are implemented on the basis of national legislation, for applications lodged directly to the office and based on international agreements: for patent and utility model – under the Patent Cooperation Treaty and trademark applications – under the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks and the Protocol to that Agreement.

Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys
Patent Agents work in the Patent Office, administrative courts and other courts and adjudicating bodies in matters of industrial property.
Patent attorneys and clerks make up the Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys
– Local government professional, whose tasks include in particular the provision of proper conditions for the profession, representing patent attorneys and applicants, cooperation in the development and use of industrial property rights, further training and education of trainees, supervision over the proper practice of the profession. Polish Chamber of Patent Attorneys is involved in the European organization Committee of the National Institutes of Intellectual Property Attorneys (CNIIPA).

European Patent Office
Competent authority for granting European patents. It contains a very extensive section called “Toolbox for Applicants” with information how to deal with activities of industrial property.

Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs – provides protection for the rights of Community trademarks and Community designs. In addition to the rich information on the procedures and practical operation of the notification procedure also admits on-line applications.

U.S. Patent Office
The U.S. office of the exclusive rights for inventions and trademarks. Very extensive site, both in terms of information as well as enabling the monitoring of pending applications. —

World Intellectual Property Organization
It has a very broad tasks related to international trade in intellectual property. In particular, it deals with the administration of the system of international registration of marks ( / madrid / en) and international patent applications ( / PATENTSCOPE / en).

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council – enhancing the patent system in Europe (the whole found here):

The fragmented single market for patents has serious consequences for the competitiveness of Europe in relation to the challenges of the US, Japan and emerging economic powers such as China. The EU lags behind the US and Japan in terms of patent activity. Even in Europe, the US and Japan patent more than the EU: at the EPO 137 patents per million population are from the EU versus 143 patents from the US and 174 from Japan. The lack of critical patent mass at home translates in less patents that are filed in both the US, the EU and Japan, the so called triadic patents. Whereas Europe has 33 triadic patents per million population, the US has 48 and Japan has 102. Therefore, the US and Japan have respectively 45% and 209% more triadic patents than the EU. This is of particular concern since triadic patents are the most valuable ones and are considered the best patent indicator for innovation.

Recent studies have also shown that a European patent designating 13 countries is about 11 times more expensive than a US patent and 13 times more expensive then a Japanese patent if processing and translation costs are considered. For the total costs with up to 20 years of protection, European patents are nearly nine times more expensive then Japanese and US patents. If the analysis focuses on patent claims, the cost differences increase further.


The biggest companies are interested that the patenting of new technologies would be as simple and cheap as possible. Currently, you have to individually apply for patents at the same time in different parts of the world. The ideal would be global patents, but introducing them is not straightforward because of differences in the different countries.

In October, 2010 announced cooperation between the EPO and the USPTO has to lead to assimilation systems used for classifying patents in Europe and the United States to International Patent Classification (IPC), which is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which is one of the specialized UN agencies.

Jointly developed classification is more detailed than the IPC. As a result, both patent offices will be closer to eliminating unnecessary work. They also plan on more efficient testing and improving patent quality.

The cooperation will achieve one of IP5 – an organization created to promote cooperation among patent offices of EU, U.S., Korea, Japan and China. Offices IP5 partner to be kept informed of the progress made in the context of cooperation.

In the article about the cooperation between the EPO and the USPTO is mentioned that in the USA, it is necessary to reform the patent system. In May this year the head of the USPTO officially admitted that his office has a huge backlog of applications for patents. This may mean for the US economy lost millions of revenue. One of the problems the US contributing to this state of affairs is the possibility of patenting business methods and a large number of patents of poor quality.

According to the sources that I have read the patent system in the US is much better than the one in Europe. Also because the US became party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty on January 24, 1978 as one of the first countries and has more experience with the matter. Europe has to cope with plenty of new member countries (Estonia – August 24, 1994, Poland – December 25, 1990, Lithuania – July 5, 1994; the full list may be found here). Of course, as mentioned before to unify all the countries needs a lot of effort and time.

In spite of all the advantages of the IP  I still agree with Martin’s opinion. And I support the Pirate bay 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: