benchmarking national and regional support services for smes in the field of intellectual and...

8/14/2019 BENCHMARKING NATIONAL AND REGIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SMEs IN THE FIELD OF INTELLECTUAL AND IND…

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/benchmarking-national-and-regional-support-services-for-smes-in-the-field-of 1/284

BENCHMARKING NATIONALAND REGIONAL SUPPORT SERVICESFOR SMEs IN THE FIELDOF INTELLECTUALAND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY

Authors of the report: Afre Raauer (Austran Insttute for SME Researc)Jürgen Strecer (Austran Insttute for SME Researc)Frtz Oer (Tecnopos Group)

PRO INNO Europe paper N° 4

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 1 17-01-2008 11:10:03



Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers

to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certan mobe teepone operators o not ao access to 00 800 numbers or tese cas may be be.

More nformaton on te European Unon s avaabe on te Internet (ttp://europa.eu).

Cataogung ata can be foun at te en of ts pubcaton.

Luxembourg: Ofice for Ofica Pubcatons of te European Communtes, 2007

ISBN 978-92-79-06926-0

© European Communtes, 2007Reproucton s autorse prove te source s acknoege.

Printed in Italy

PRINTEd ON whITE ChLORINE-FREE PAPER

PRO INNO Europe

Te nnovaton pocy ntatve PRO INNO Europe combnes anayss and benchmarkng of natona an regona nnovaton pocy performance t support for cooperaton of natonaan regona nnovaton programmes an ncentves for nnovaton agences an oter nnovaton stakeoers to mpement jont actons. Te ntatve aspres to become te manEuropean reference for nnovaton pocy anayss an eveopment trougout Europe anbrngs togeter over 200 nnovaton pocy makers and stakehoders from 33 countres.

Atona nformaton on PRO INNO Europe s avaabe on te Internet (.pronno-europe.eu).

Lega notce

Ts report as been prouce as part of te PRO INNO Europe ntatve. Te ves expressen ts report, as e as te nformaton ncue n t, o not necessary relect te opnonor poston of te European Commsson an n no ay commts te nsttuton.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 2 17-01-2008 11:10:03



3Te foong nsttutons contrbute to ts report.Te stng s gven n te orer of te country ere te nsttuton s ocate:

Austra Austran Insttute for SME Researc (KMFA) – ProjectLea

Tecnopos Group

Begum

Researc Centre for Entrepreneursp, EhSAL-K.U.Brusse

Bugara

Founaton for Entrepreneursp deveopment (FEd)

Cyprus

Economarket Bureau of Economc an MarketResearc Lt.

Czech Repubc

PERITUS

Denmark Oxfor Researc A/S

Estona

PRAXIS Center for Pocy Stues

Fnand Sma Busness Insttute, Turku Scoo of Economcsan Busness Amnstraton

France CITIA

Germany Insttut für Mttestansforscung (IfM)

Greece Researc Centre of te Unversty of Praeus

Hungary Sma Busness deveopment Center CorvnusUnversty of Buapest

Iceand

Insttute for Busness Researc, Unversty of Icean

Ireand Tom Martn & Assocates

Itay Scuoa Superore PISA

Latva Batc Internatona Centre for Economc PocyStues BICEPS

Lechtensten Austran Insttute for SME Researc

Lthuana dr. Ruta As, SSEES/UCL/TURKU

Luembourg

Cambre es Méters u Gran-ducé eLuxembourg

Mata Economc & Management Consutancy Servces Lt

Noray Ager Researc Founaton (ARF)

Poand EEdRI, Entrepreneursp an Economc deveopmentResearc Insttute, Acaemy of Management

Portuga Tecnnvest

Sovena Facuty of Economcs an Busness, Unversty of Marbor

Sovak Repubc

PERITUSSpan

Insttuto Vasco e Estuos e Investgacón (IKEI)

Seden Oxfor Researc A/S

The Netherands

EIM Busness & Pocy Researc

Turkey SIBAREN, Inustra Engneerng department MeEast Tecnca Unversty

Unted Kngdom

Tecnopos Group Brgton

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 3 17-01-2008 11:10:03


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/benchmarking-national-and-regional-support-services-for-smes-in-the-field-of 4/28401_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 4 17-01-2008 11:10:03



Contents

Executive Summary 9

1 Introduction 19

2 Methodological framework 21

2.1 Overview on the study design 21

2.2 The three research phases in more detail 21

3 SMEs in the IPR world 25

3.1 SMEs and innovation: The case of IPR 25

3.2 The IPR system in a nutshell 263.2.1 Formal IPR usable by SMEs 26

3.2.2 Informal IP protection mechanisms 29

3.3 Usage Patterns of IP protection methods by SMEs 31

3.4 Perceived and real barriers to IPR usage by SMEs 33

3.5 IPR in large companies – The case for

a strategic approach to IPR 37

3.6 Lessons learned for SMEs: IPR Management and business

models matter 40

4 The policy agenda for SMEs –Issues to be addressed in the study and beyond 43

4.1 Lessons learned for policy makers 43

4.2 Policy options with regard to SMEs 44

5 Towards Good Practices –

The real world of IPR support services 49

5.1 What’s out there for SMEs: Evidence-based policy 49

5.2 Looking for gold: The benchmarking process 54

5.2.1 The selection process

for the benchmarking phase 545.2.2 Benchmarking criteria – dimensions along which the

performance of services can be assessed

on a comparative basis 55

5.2.3 Selected services to display elements

of good practice 57

5.3 Elements of good practice 57

5.3.1 A first glance: The quest for good practices

(and the regress to elements of good practice) 57

5.3.2 Design of the services: History and governance matter 60

C O N T E N T S

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 5 17-01-2008 11:10:04



6

B E N C h M A R K I N G

N A T I O

N A L A N d

R E G I O N A L S U P P O R T

S E R V I C E S F O R S M E S

I N

T h E F I E L d

O F I N T E L L E C T U A L A N d

I N d U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y

5.3.3 Institutional set up:

A case of systems fallacy 63

5.3.4 Employed resources:

Expert staff and budgets as key issues 645.3.5 The performance of the

IPR support services 67

5.4 A closer look at selected generic service types 72

5.4.1 Cheerleading for IPR – Success factors

for IPR awareness raising services 72

5.4.2 Fee reductions and subsidy services – an alternative

to a reformed IPR framework? 78

5.4.3 A single white rose in a bucket of red roses:

The case of embedded IPR services 83

5.4.4 Patent database and information

search services 855.5 The interaction between private

and public support services 93

5.6 IPR support services overseas – Lessons to be learned

from Australia, Japan, Canada and the USA 96

5.6.1 IPR services in Australia, Canada

and the USA 97

5.6.2 The case of Japan: Towards an IP culture 99

6. Conclusions and recommendations 105

7. References 111

ANNEX I

1. INSTI SME Patent Action 117

1.1 The INSTI SME Patent in a nutshell 117

1.2 The user’s view 119


2. Case Study: Patent information centres (PIC) 129

2.1 The patent information centres in a nutshell 129



3. Case Study: IK2 – Innovation and Knowledge 141

3.1 IK2 (Innovation and Knowledge) in a nutshell 141



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 6 17-01-2008 11:10:04



74. Case Study: Innovation by patent Information (IOI) 151

4.1 Innovation by patent Information (IOI)

in a nutshell 151



5. Case Study: IP Prédiagnosis (FRA) 159

5.1 IP Prédiagnosis in a nutshell 159



6 Case Study: “What is the key?” Campaign 169

6.1 The “What is the key? (WITK) Campaign”

in a nutshell 169



7. Case Study: IA Centre Scotland

(Scottish Intellectual Assets Centre) 175

7.1 IA Centre Scotland in a nutshell 175



8. Case Study: serv.ip 185

8.1 Serv.ip in a nutshell 185



9. Case Study:

Intellectual Property Assistance Scheme (IPAS) 195

9.1 The Intellectual Property Assistance Scheme

in a nutshell 195



10. Case Study: The VIVACE Programme 205

10.1 The VIVACE Programme in a nutshell 205



C O N T E N T S

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 7 17-01-2008 11:10:04



8


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



11. Case Study: IPR Services of the Technology

Watch Center CVT 217

11.1 The Technology Watch Centre CVT

in a nutshell 21711.2 The user’s view 220


12. Case Study: Foundation for Finnish Inventions (FIN) 225

12.1 Foundation for Finnish Inventions in a nutshell 225



13. Case Study: Promotion of Industrial Property

(by SEGAPI) 23713.1 Promotion of Industrial Property (SEGAPI)

in a nutshell 237



14. Case Study: Danish Patent and Trademark Office

(DKPTO) 247

14.1 The Danish Patent Office SME services (DKPTO)

in a nutshell 247

14.2 The user’s view 25114.3 Elements of good practice 256

15. Case Study: Technology Network Service –

Intellectual Property (TNS IP) 257

15.1 The Technology Network Service –

Intellectual Property (TNS IP) in a nutshell 257



ANNEX II

List of Support Services Analysed 267

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 8 17-01-2008 11:10:04



9

E x E C U T I V

E S U M M A R YExecutive Summary

Background1. Te move toars a knoege socety, togeter t ongong gobasaton,

s frequenty cte as ben te emergence of a so cae “pro patent” eraover te past to ecaes. Ts era can be caracterse by () a grongmportance of te vaue of ntangbe assets an nteectua property for manycompanes an n many nustres an () a sarp rse n eman for temeans to protect nteectua property troug te system of InteectuaProperty Rgts, most notaby patents.

2. Tere s a e-sprea beef tat a postve reatonsp exsts beteen teeve of IPR usage an nnovaton actvtes. Numerous stues unerne temportance of nnovaton for economc grot an efare, an, furter, asgnicant number of nvestgatons ggt te contrbutons sma anmeum-sze enterprses (SMEs) make to te nnovaton performance of te

European economy. hoever, researc aso ncates tat, on average, SMEsmay be – ue to constrants assocate t ter company sze – at asavantage compare to arge scae enterprses (LSEs) en t comes tousng IPR. As a consequence, SMEs utse te avaabe IPR nstruments(patents, trae marks, regstere esgns an copyrgts) to a muc esser extent tan o LSEs an rey on more nforma protecton metos nstea.Ts outcome appears unesrabe an suggests te exstence of a marketfaure n tat ie. It aso suggests te nee for prompt pocy actons tosupport SMEs n protectng ter nteectua property.

3. Reasons entie n researc for te uner usage of IPR by SMEs comprseprobtve costs for gettng IPR protecton, ficutes n enforcng IPR oncerespectve protecton s grante, a ack of aareness on te se of SMEsconcernng te ay te IPR system orks, te tme to make IP protecton

strateges ork an a (perceve) grantng practce of patent ofices caegey grant patents to renon arge companes more easy tan to rater unknon sma enttes. Nottstanng tese barrers, t as to be aso notetat tere are nustres ere IPR pays an mportant roe even for SMEs (mostnotaby, n g-tec sectors suc as te bo-parmaceutca sectors or n teICT nustres).

4. Of te barrers escrbe n pont 3, te cost ssue stans out. Te cost ssuearses on one an en IPR protecton s sougt: Especay n Europe,patentng s costy an may be, furtermore, as muc as 2. to 3 tmes moreexpensve as n te U.S. or n Japan (c s mosty attrbute to transatoncosts ncurre for te varous European anguages, n orer to get Europe-eprotecton). But even f obtane, SMEs may in t, on te oter an, ficutto efen ter IPR n court: SMEs smpy may not ave te resources (tme anfunng) to go troug engty an uncertan tgaton proceures. Stuessuggest tat e a arge sare of SMEs s face t nfrngements of ter IPR, an a conserabe sare of tese sustans reatvey grave economc ossestroug copyng, ony a fe are abe to successfuy tgate. In ts context, tsou not be forgotten tat patents ave to mportant savantages fromte company’s perspectve: Frst, tey offer bueprnts to potenta unafucopers c ou oterse not be avaabe f te nnovatng irm cousuccessfuy keep te nventon secret. Secon, tey prove protecton onyfor a mte amount of tme. Patents are tus a oube-ege sor for SMEs:Tey can prove beneica for protectng nventons, but n te most extremecase tey can even arm a irm f t faces nfrngement an acks te means to

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 9 17-01-2008 11:10:04



10


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



go troug t tgaton. Furtermore, patents can aso consttute sunk costsf te protecte nventon s of no commerca vaue.

. A strategc ssue arses n te context of anserng te queston y SMEssou use patents at a. As aays, te savantages ave to be contraste

aganst te beneits: Patents are ncreasngy not ony use as an nsurancepremum, but aso for marketng purposes an reputaton bung (e.g., nnegotatons t venture captasts n te absence of reference projects), for rect ncome generaton troug censng agreements an for strategcreasons (e.g., n orer to force compettors to esgn aroun, or to scarepotenta compettors off or to create barganng cps n negotatons for envsage R&d cooperaton projects). In certan nustres, tese ne usagepatterns ave e to entrey ne busness moes ere ncome s generaygenerate troug IPR an ony to a esser extent by proucng pyscagoos. Te most extreme an at te same tme aso gy controversa caseof suc a busness moe s tat of a “patent tro”: a company (usuay anSME) c buys patent rgts from oter irms (tout nvestng tsef nR&d) an sues aege nfrngers, tereby forcng tem to pay royates.

6. Te stuaton s furter compcate by te fact tat tere s a fu spectrum of nstruments avaabe to companes to protect an/or to approprate ter IP– patents are not te ony opton. Ts spectrum covers not ony forma IPRnstruments (n aton to patents, aso trae marks, regstere esgns ancopyrgts), but aso nforma metos (ncung trae secrets, efensvepubsng, ea-tme avantage, an compexty of esgn). Usng traesecrets entas keepng te nventon secret, but, of course, compettors are eftfree to attempt to re-engneer t. Usng efensve pubsng entas pubsngof ts nventon by te nventng company c makes patentng by otersmpossbe, an obstructs compettors ntenng to reengneer te nventon,patent t an rve te orgna nventor out of te market. Reyng on astrategy of ea-tme avantage means aays stayng aea of any ou-becompettor. An, reyng on compexty of te esgn of te nventon meansmakng t more ficut for oters to copy.

7. Eac of tese metos (an tere are many more) as ts rgtfu pace, ante ecson for an/or aganst usng a partcuar IP protecton/appropratonmeto s gy epenant on te context tn c a busness soperatng (e.g., ts market poston, or ts tecnoogca an patent stanng).Company sze mgt be n ts context ony one of te varabes to takeaccount of, toug t may affect te approprateness of te IP strategypursue. A arge company suc as Coca-Coa mgt in t better not to patentte recpe of ts man beverage, but to keep t secret an rey on strong traemark protecton. Oter irms mgt take fferent approaces.

8. From te stuy inngs, e can nfer tat no preference sou be gven apror to any partcuar means of protectng an/or appropratng a company’sIP, be t arge or sma. Especay, tere sou be no genera prespostontoars patents (exceptons for certan nustres not tstanng). Te

ecson for or aganst a certan IP protecton/ appropraton strategy s acompex an nvua one an puts te queston of “y an y not” touse a partcuar IP protecton nstrument or a combnaton of nstruments onte agena irst. Ony after suc a ecson s taken on a soun bass sou atecnca queston, suc as “o to ie for a patent”, or te queston of subssng patentng costs, be pose.

9. Te mpcatons for pocy makers sng to esgn a system of supportservces for SMEs n te ie of IPR are, aganst ts backrop, tree-fo:

a. A rater broa approac sou be taken toars fferent forma annforma metos of protectng/appropratng IPR. Te support systemsou tus not ony cover patents (an pus for more patentng actvtes

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 10 17-01-2008 11:10:04



11

E x E C U T I V

E S U M M A R Y

uner a crcumstances), but rater sou aress te abty of SMEs tomanage te array of IP protecton/ appropraton metos effectvey. Tsmpcaton s consstent t at s currenty appenng n LSEs, eremany are furter eveopng ter “patent epartments” nto “IP

management epartments”.b. Te system of support servces sou am at assstng SMEs to attan an

aareness of () te vaue of ter IP, an as e () effectve knoegeof te fferent features of te fu spectrum of IP protecton/appropratonnstruments. At a mnmum, SMEs sou kno te avantages ansavantages of te aternatve metos, te basc “o’s an “on’ts”en usng tem, an, gven mte resources, o to in te rgtservce provers for partcuars.

c. It s aso cruca tat SMEs unerstan IP management as part of overannovaton an busness strategy. Areay en R&d on an nventon asstarte, ays to approprate te en resuts sou be consere. IPRssues nee to be aresse trougout te nnovaton process, e.g.,eary on t s se to conuct a searc to etermne f te target nventon

s areay patente; once te nventon s market-reay, ssues reatng toesgn an branng may arse c may enta eang t regstereesgns an trae marks. An expcty a out IP strategy tn R&d anbusness management may ep entfy ponts n tme ere acton s tobe taken t respect to IPR.

The IPR services in place10. Te queston of “what’s out there and what can be done to best support SMEs

within the current IPR system” set te key teme for te anayss carre out. Teuneryng stuy “Bencmarkng Natona an Regona Support Servces for SMEs n te Fe of Inteectua an Inustra Property” mappe out teservces n pace for SMEs n te EU-27, Turkey, Lectensten, Icean anNoray, as e as tose n a number of overseas countres (te USA, Canaa,

Austraa an Japan), tat ave been estabse to aress te market faureescrbe uner pont 2 an to support SMEs n te ie of IPR. Morespecicay, t as te am of te stuy to entfy pubcy fune IPR supportservces offere on a natona an/or regona eve from c SMEs coubeneit, an bencmark a seecton of te entie measures (.e., assess ancompare ter performance). Te next step as to snge out eements of goopractces usng a seres of case stues.

11. Te stuy esgn re on a mx of quatatve an quanttatve metos,c ere appe n tree consecutve researc pases. In te irst pase, teenticaton pase, 279 servces (224 n Europe an overseas) ereentie usng a sem-stanarse enticaton guene, esk researc anseecte nterves t servce provers. Te nformaton gatere ascompe nto a atabase c proves servce escrptons as e as keyata suc as contact etas, customer groups targete an type of IPRnstrument/ actvty supporte. Base on ts ata, 72 servces c ereconsere asprng canates to become goo practces ere subject to abencmarkng exercse n te 2n pase of te researc. Te bencmarkngpase empoye a sem-stanarse bencmarkng guene c enqurento a range of bencmarkng ncators measurng te performance anoutcome of te servce, partcuars of te operaton an mpementaton aneements referrng to te esgn an set-up of te measures. Te metooogyncue a compusory nterve t te respectve servce prover an ananayss of avaabe ocuments suc as evauaton reports. Eventuay, 1servces ere seecte to spay eements of goo practce. Te case stuyanayss, te 3r an ast researc pase, nvove te executon of a user survey

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 11 17-01-2008 11:10:05



12


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



usng a stanarse questonnare c ame for 0 responents per servcean atona open expert nterves. In te en, 630 users ere questonet respect to ter experences t te servces. Te oe stuy asconucte n te tme frame of January 2006 t June 2007.

12. we compreensve, te number of entie servces gves ony an orer of magntue of te quantty of avaabe support servces. Te g varaton sue to te fact tat many servces are offere as packages, t often oneservce consstng of severa sub-servces. Te ecson as to eter anntegrate servce as counte as one servce or eter as a portfoo of nvua servces once t as consere reevant for te scope of teuneryng stuy epene on te scope of te nvua sub-servces, teay tese servces ere markete an te overa organsatona context (e.g.,te type of organsaton offerng te servces).

13. By far, most of te entie servces (90 %) focus on patents, t someprovsons for trae marks. Informa protecton mecansms are, by contrast,rarey ncue. Furtermore, te majorty of te servces focus on eary stagesof IPR eveopment suc as appcaton proceures an pror art searces, anony to a esser extent on ater pases suc as acquston of exstng IPR or teactua usage an expotaton of IPR. Ts mpes tat te servce system npace s very patent-centrc an touces te subject of IP an IPR managementony at te perpery.

14. Most of te servces are rater sma offerngs, operate by fe peope anenoe t rater o funng. About 3 % of te servces are expctyoffere to SMEs. Most of te servces are offere naton-e (80 %), an onya fracton s ecate to specic nustres an/or tecnoogy ies.

1. In terms of type of servce, te servces entie can be cassie nto ivecategores: (1) pro-actve aareness rasng measures (c actvey aressSMEs an promote te usage of IPR), (2) passve nformaton provson servces(c prove IPR-reate nformaton on a stan-by bass; a case n pont arepatent atabase searc servces), (3) tranng offerngs (on IPR-reate matters),(4) customze n-ept consutng an avsory ponts/servces (c offer

customse avce) an () servces offerng inanca assstance recty (e.g.,subses for patentng costs) or by makng provsons for IPR n te egaframeork (e.g., tax exemptons). One strkng observaton s tat fe servcesare n te oman of tranng.

The performance of the services16. Te performance of te present IPR support system s gy ambguous.

despte a rater arge number of entie servces, fary fe servces can beescrbe as g performers. Some “sans” of e esgne programmesexst, but te majorty of measures o not seem to ave a strong trackrecor.

17. Tere s tte evence to support a bg reease on “best practces’” or “goo

practces”. At te same tme, tere s ampe evence for compng “eementsof goo practce”, unerstoo as eements n te esgn or executon of toseservces ose caracterstcs an quates are “generc”, mpyng tat ter aopton runs a g probabty of success. Accorngy, tere s a set of eements of goo practce ere eac of te eements can be foun “outtere”, oever not te set as a oe.

18. Te strongest exporatory factors for expanng te varatons n performanceare contextua factors, n c te respectve servce as been esgne,enoe t resources an responsbtes, an utmatey performe. As aconsequence, n searcng for eements of goo practce, t s necessary to ookat te servces, at te overa nsttutons tat ever te servces, an at te

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 12 17-01-2008 11:10:05



13

E x E C U T I V

E S U M M A R Y

overa pocy eve, c prmary etermnes te enoment t resources,te nsttutona ocus an te (erarcca) poston of te servce.

19. One key observaton concernng eements of goo practce s tat servcesc are offere as part of an ntegrate package perform better tan soate

offerngs. Ts s ue to te fact tat ntegrate servces usuay tacke a broaer range of ssues, tus takng te compexty of te subject of IPR better ntoaccount. Tey aso beneit from synerges among te fferent servce eementsan prove a poong of oterse scarce expertse on IPR matters.

20. Anoter mportant eement of goo practce s te competence of te servce-operatng staff. Servces tat perform better can usuay ra on experencepersonne c possess eay tecnca, ega an busness kno-oreate to IPR. Te avaabty of an aequate number of quaie staff s,oever, aso a botteneck for te esgn of IPR support servces – researcncates tat fe eucatona offerngs exst n ts respect, an career opportuntes as e as payro regmes n te pubc sector mgt prove oftenunattractve for peope t te esre backgroun.

21. Ease of access an easy enticaton/recognton are yet anoter key quaty

factor for IPR support servces. In ts context one as to note, oever, tatte man actors n IPR servce provson are patent ofices an ony to a mucesser extent tecnoogy/eveopment agences. If tecnoogy/eveopmentagences are operatng an IPR support servce for SMEs, t s often a servcec s margnase n te overa servce portfoo. As oppose to patentofices, tecnoogy/eveopment agences are, oever, e knon amongSMEs as provers of servces for a range of nnovaton an R&d-reate ssues.

As a resut of beng offere prncpay troug patent ofices, a arge sare of IPR support servces seem to operate n “steat moe” an are ary vsbeto SMEs.

22. Te stuy resuts suggest tat tere are cear cuttng nes separatng patentofices an tecnoogy/eveopment agences an ter respectve servceofferngs. determne by story, fferent mn sets an fferent actors, tereseems to be rater tte excange takng pace beteen tese to types of

organsatons. Ts stuaton consttutes a case of systems faacy: we aevence ponts to te nee tat ssues reate to IPR (or better: IPappropraton/protecton) are to be part of overa nnovaton an R&dmanagement, support on R&d/nnovaton an on IPR s fragmente acrossfferent nsttutons. Furtermore, ts set-up may enta “bn spots”: wtpatent ofices an ter tratona focus on forma IPR an t tecnoogy/eveopment agences treatng IPR at te perpery, tere s te (observe)anger tat aternatve approaces to expotng an protectng IP (.e.,nforma practces) are not covere at a by te IPR support system n pace.

23. Te emergence of natona patent ofices as servces provers n Europe as tobe seen n te context tat te European Patent Organsaton (EPO) s takngover more an more tasks of te natona ofices. Natona ofices are tusseekng ne roes, an an obvous opton s to become servce provng

organsatons. Tere are arguments bot for an aganst suc a eveopment,f pocy makers ave to ece on c organsaton to contract for offerngIPR support servces. Patent ofices ave been tratonay concerne t tessue of protecton of IP, tus tey ten to focus on regstrabe IPR. Patentofices possess conserabe tecnca kno-o (.e., t respect to patentngproceures) an kno-o n ega matters, an tey are perceve bycustomers to be rater nepenent an objectve. On te oter an, teyare reatvey ne n te or of support offerng nsttutons for SMEs.Tecnoogy/eveopment agences, by contrast, ave a sgnicant track recort regar to nnovaton an R&d support offere to SMEs, ave a er knoege of te busness context an are aso better knon by SMEs. Ter IPR kno-o, s, oever, mte.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 13 17-01-2008 11:10:05



14


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



24. Anoter mportant ssue concerns te governance of te servces: Servcesc perform better are usuay carefuy esgne (.e., by assessng user nees or by carryng out ex-ante evauatons) an are subject to reguar evauaton exercses. hoever, many of te bencmarke servces o not ave

evauatons conucte an ave n many ays nsuficent quaty assurancemecansms n pace. Ts as mportant mpcatons bot n terms of customer orentaton (e.g., t respect to knong te target groups anter caracterstcs) an n terms of accountabty. To a arge extent, IPRservces are uncarte terrtory n terms of nvestgate an performance-assesse support servces.

2. Tere s evence to support te noton tat tmey every s a sgnicantssue, especay for patent atabase searc servces. Servces c exce n tsarea spay an eement of goo practce.

26. Spata stance s ary ever seen as a barrer toars usng IPR supportservces. Te user survey conucte as son tat te ssues nvove n IPRmatters are key to be of so muc nterest to SMEs tat tey are ng totrave reasonabe stances to get te support neee.

27. As prvate servce offerngs ave not been scrutnse tn te scope of tsstuy, tte can be sa on te performance of offerngs c are not pubcyfune. It as emerge strongy, toug, tat patent attorneys pay anmportant roe n IPR servce provson for SMEs. Tat s, tey are often teprmary servce provers SMEs go to en tey ook for support. Patentattorneys aso pay an mportant roe n te success of a number of te pubcyfune support servces offere, e.g., as carrers of nformaton on sucsupport programmes or by ang SMEs t amnstratve proceures enusng pubcy fune measures. we for most servce types tere seem to becompementary effects beteen prvate an pubc offerngs, te area of patent searc servces s a potenta ie of conlct.

Conclusions and recommendations

28. Aganst te backrop of te anayss outne above, te foongrecommenatons are outne. As most of te tme, borers are burrng:Terefore, some of te recommenatons are aresse n more tan onepart. As a rue an tus as a esgn ogc, te respectve sectons can be reaas an agena or requrement specicaton for ong a goo job as manager(s)of a servce, as te top executve(s) of nsttuton(s) n carge of provng aservce or parts of t, or inay as pocy maker(s).

29. Recommenatons at te servce eve

a. Integrated IPR service packages / referral to other services. Servces sou beoffere n ntegrate packages, takng nto account te compexty of tesubject of IPR. Ts can be one by genuney ntegrate servces or, norer to account for scarce expert kno-o an n orer to ncreasevsbty an accessbty, by referras to oter servces an/or nsttutons,

tus amng at jont provson of servces.

b. IPR management over IPR protection. Te compexty of te subject of IPRas a strategc ssue eserves ncrease attenton. Partcuary, te busness/nteectua property management aspect s one factor ere many arger enterprses seem to be far aea of te average IPR-afine SME. wt IPRbeng ncreasngy use to create revenue, e at te same tme manypatents c ave no economc vaue are grante, an t manytecnoogca eveopments ookng for appcatons c provencome, t seems tat not te patent aone, but rater te surrounngbusness moe s te sgnicant success factor. Accorngy, ts ponts to

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 14 17-01-2008 11:10:05



1

E x E C U T I V

E S U M M A R Y

te fact tat te busness perspectve sou be gven a more centra pacen IPR servce provson.

c. Fostering availability of qualified staff . A bg botteneck can be seen n tesortage of quaie peope avaabe for provng IPR support. Suc

peope sou ave tecnca, ega an busness expertse, an t sespecay te atter aspect tat nees partcuar attenton. It seemsnecessary to foster eucatona ntatves at unverstes (e.g., busnessfacutes, ega, an tecnca facutes possby cou mount a jont “trante traner” effort), but aso – to ncrease genera pubc aareness – at teg scoo eve.

30. Recommenatons at te nsttutona eve

a. Institutions matter: mind-sets, traditions, institutional architecture. For mpementng ne or mprove IPR servces, t s mportant to conser o s offerng suc servces. dfferent mnsets an tratons an tusfferent nsttutona arctectures make IPR servces ork n fferentays. A specic queston arses partcuary t respect to te vson of abour an te attrbuton of roes beteen te natona patent ofices ante tecnoogy/eveopment agences.

b. Fostering technology/development agencies as entry points. Foong ter traton, t s questonabe f natona patent ofices ave a neutra stancetoars a forms of forma an nforma IP protecton an appropratonmetos. Furtermore, t s questonabe f tey gve mportance to IPmanagement as e as to IP protecton. In ts regar an aso ue tovsbty ssues, t s esrabe to ave tecnoogy/nnovaton eveopmentagences act as entry ponts for cents regaress of eter te patentofices are eveope furter nto fuy-lege IP ofices or reuce toter core competence of regstraton ofices.

c. Bringing the world of patent offices and innovation agencies together. Teres a nee to brng te ors of patent ofices an tecnoogy/eveopment

agences togeter, foong te ratonae tat IPR management sou bepart of overa nnovaton management. Tere are a number of convncngcases ere cooperaton beteen tese types of nsttutons as orkean c cou serve as roe moes.

d. The governance of IPR services providing institutions . As patent ofices are arater ne type of payer n SME servce provson (an because tey avebeen more or ess soate from genera nnovaton support), tegovernance of te servces s a crtca ssue. Soun governance partcuaryempasses te mportance of () carefu nees anayss an servce esgn,() a systematc co-ornaton an co-operaton beteen reevantnsttutons, partcuary beteen te patent ofices an te tecnoogy/nnovaton agences at te eve of servce provson, () an overarcngpocy, an, eventuay, (v) te estabsment of ncentves for coaboraton

at a reevant eves.e. The interaction of private vs. public service provision should be addressed . It

seems cear tat pubc offerngs sou not space prvate ones, butrater enance or gnte a market for tem. In ts context, e esgnerear scemes (ncung a ater prvatsaton of ntay pubcy funeservces) cou attract te rgt peope to o a goo job. Aong te samene, t seems tat cooperaton t patent attorneys s a key success factor for provson of IPR servces.

f. Attracting qualified staff . Te uge mportance of expert staff an teevent ack of eucatona offerngs n ts respect, especay n terms of te busness menson, ave proven to be te most crtca factors n te

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 15 17-01-2008 11:10:05



16


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



acceptance an performance of IPR servces. In ts regar t s cruca tounerstan tat tere s a strong reatonsp beteen te sgnicance of te servce (as sgnae by coverage, buget, staff, access to oter resources, erarcca poston, expectatons, pannng orzons, etc.) an

te abty to attract competent staff.31. Recommenatons at te pocy eve

a. Division of labour between patent offices and innovation agencies . A specicqueston arses partcuary t respect to te vson of abour an teattrbuton of roes to te natona patent ofices an te tecnoogy/eveopment agences. Te arguments escrbe uner pont 23 pont toto pausbe pats: Te irst one s to scae on te scope of te patentofices to ter core competence of patent ings (an possby atabasesearces) an to enrc te tecnoogy/nnovaton agences t IPRservces. Te secon one s to enrc te patent ofices t atonabusness an nteectua asset management kno-o, tus creatng“nsttutes of nteectua property”. In eter case, tree aspects seem tobe gy mportant: () nkages beteen te patent ofices an te

eveopment agences sou be strengtene, an () g permeabtyfor te excange of staff beteen te to organsatons sou be a goa.() Because ter servces are better knon by SMEs, an, moremportanty, because tey may key ave a more neutra stance toarste usage of fferent IP protecton nstruments (gven te patent tratonof te patent ofices), t s probaby avsabe tat tecnoogy agences actas entry ponts for customers, not te patent ofices.

b. Endowment as an indication of priority setting . Many of te servces aresma n voume. To te extent tat aocaton of resources can beconsere an ncaton of prortes, proper enoment t resources(scope, buget, staff, erarcca poston, uraton) s crtca an pre-etermnes to a g egree te performance of te servces, partcuarytroug te attracton of quaie staff.

c. National vs. regional approach. Tere s actuay no sgnicant evence for fosterng a strong regona approac. On te contrary, tere are severaarguments for a genuney natona coverage: () g vsbty of teservce can be more easy aceve f te servce s knon trougout tecountry rater tan ony n a specic regon, () scarce expert kno-ocan be pooe at a centra unt an oes not nee to be prove n everyregon.

d. Out-reach/spatial distance . Out-reac to oca SMEs s mportant, not teeast for marketng reasons. Te case stuy user survey as son tat, ngenera, spata stance s not consere to be a crtca success factor for IPR support servces. Regona outets can be estabse t te task topromote te servce an refer potenta customers to te centra unt. Tsoes not, oever, mean tat regona IPR servces are of no use. If tey

compement te natona offerngs, f tey ave ceary eine anmte goas n te context of te regon an are esgne accorngy,an f tey are netorke enoug t oter servces, tey can proveae vaue.

e. Growing policy culture. we most nustrase countres ave eveopea comparatvey g eve of pocy cuture n te core ies of tecnoogyan nnovaton pocy, te ie of IPR reate servces s st someatsufferng from a rater poor pocy cuture, coverng te oe pocycyce (nee assessment, justicaton, an esgn; goa orentaton n teperformance pase, quaty assurance an earnng troug montorng

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 16 17-01-2008 11:10:05



17

E x E C U T I V

E S U M M A R Y

an evauaton). hence, tere s a nee to foster – n parts areay exstng– attempts to estabs a toroug evauaton cuture.

f. The cost issue: Te stuy set out to nvestgate at exsts an at canbe one n terms of IPR support for SMEs tn te current IPR frameork.

we te resuts ave son tat a ot of tngs can be mprove areaytn te present-ay context, canges to te IPR frameork tsef sounoneteess be tacke. Ts appes especay to te cost menson:Subsy servces cannot n genera compensate for te ack of a communtypatent (or te mpementaton of te European Patent Ltgaton Agreementan te European Patent Jucary). Exstng subsy servces seem to aven many nstances more of a en aareness rasng functon tan broacost-coverng goas.

g. Towards an IP culture : Fnay, te ack of avaabty of quaie staff (togeter t te ack of eucatona ntatves) sou be aso aresseat te pocy eve, as t sets constrants for te magntue of effortspossbe for boostng quaie IPR usage an IP management sks of SMEs. Many recommenatons can to a arge extent bebase on tese

constrants (e.g., te natona approac t a centra unt provng tepooe expertse). Gven te mportance of a irm’s IP n toay’s economy,pocy sou aress te kno-o of SMEs, traners an aso te generapubc on IP management/protecton/usage matters.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 17 17-01-2008 11:10:06



22


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



As mentone above, te researc stuy as ve nto tree researc pases,c sa be escrbe n more eta beo.

Phase 1: The denticaton phase

In te denticaton phase, a sem-stanarse enticaton guene as

eveope by te core stuy team of te Austran Insttute for SME Researc anTecnopos. It as use by te partner netork to entfy reevant IPR supportservces for SMEs. Te guene as esgne to capture te man caracterstcsof te servces, suc as target groups, types of IPR nstruments covere, contactetas, runnng tmes, bugets, servce escrptons an objectves. Te enticatonforms ere, togeter t a ocument contanng furter expanatons on o toconuct te researc, strbute among te researc partners n eac of tecountres to be surveye.

Fe-out enticaton forms ere sent back to te Austran Insttute for SMEResearc, compe nto a MS ACCESS atabase, an cassie. A cassicatonsystem as specicay esgne for te atter task, base on te evence recevean takng nto account te man features of te servces. Te researc n Pase 1as conucte n te tme pero of January 2006 t June 2006. Te inngs of

te irst pase, an especay te st of entie servces, ere vaate by teEuropean Commsson an te GSO (Group of Senor Oficas on Innovaton) nJuy an August 2006.

Phase 2: The benchmarkng phase

In te benchmarkng phase, a secon sem-stanarse guene aseveope (te bencmarkng guene). It as to be compete for a seectenumber of servces c cou at tat tme possby be consere as “goopractce” servces. Ts bencmarkng guene as use to query a range of ncators c ere eeme necessary to gauge te performance of te servce:Incators for te esgn an for preparatory actvtes of te servce offerngs (sucas types of preparatory actvtes, tme spent for preparaton, etc.), for te mpe-mentaton of te sceme (suc as quaty assurance mecansms n pace or organsatona ssues) an, inay, ncators concerne t te output an

outcomes of te servces (take-up by SMEs or, n more genera terms, strengts aneaknesses).

Te bencmarkng guene as to be compete by conuctng furter eskresearc an by conuctng a compusory open, face-to-face nterve t temanager of eac bencmarke servce. Te researc for pase 2 as carre outbeteen August 2006 an december 2006.

Phase 3: Case study anayss of 15 servces ehbtng eements of good

practce

In te thrd phase (the case study anayss), te nformaton retreve n tebencmarkng pase as scrutnze n orer to emprcay back up ypoteses onte eements of goo practce (.e., eements tat ou contrbute to a esrabeperformance of te servce nvestgate an of smar oter servces). Ffteen

servces ere seected for case studes to ustrate “goo practce” eements.

In orer to furter substantate te evence concernng te eements of goopractce, te researc metooogy as furter reine: On one an, a survey ascarre out n orer to catc te ves of te users of te servces an, on te oter an, tree to ive open quatatve nterves t stakeoers of eac servce annatona IPR experts ere conucte n orer to i n mssng nformaton on teservce as e as to assess te vaue an status of te servce n te overa natonannovaton system.

Te user survey as base on a stanarse questonnare t seecte open-ene questons. Te questonnare as (t mnor exceptons) entca for aservces, n orer to ao for cross-servce an cross-country comparsons. It asoncue some questons from te tr communty nnovaton survey (CIS III)(Eurostat, 2004) to furter ao comparsons beteen te nnovaton beavour of

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 22 17-01-2008 11:10:06



23

M E T H O D O L O G I C A L F R A M E w O R K

te user groups an tat of te genera SME popuaton n a country. Te surveyas carre out by means of teepone nterves.

Tabe 1 ncates te response rates for te user survey, broken on by servces.Ffty rease user nterves ere targete for eac servce, gvng a panne tota

of 70 ie out questonnares. For a of te servces, te response rates fe sortof 100%, party because of ata protecton ssues an party because of eicencesn user aresses. hoever, n most cases te number of ie out questonnaress eeme suficent for statstcay sgnicant resuts.

Te number of rease open nterves t experts (stakeoers an natona IPRexperts) n pase 3 amounte to .

Tabe 1 Response rates for the user survey n Phase 3 (case study anayss) *

Nr. tte of te servcearesspoo (1)

contacteusers

executenterves

responserate

1 INSTI SME Patent Acton (GER) 3000 460 2 11 %2 Patent Informaton Centre Stuttgart (GER) 132 132 3 27 %3 IK2 (SwE) 8 81 0 62 %4 IOI (NLd) 200 94 0 3 % IP Préagnoss (FRA) 82 82 30 37%6 wat’s te key? Campagn (UK) 1 14 13 93 %7 IA Centre Scotan (UK) 26 136 46 34%8 serv.p (AUT) 42 9 6 9 %

9 Inteectua Property Assstance Sceme (IRE) 3 3 41 77 %10 VIVACE (hUN) 4000 40 0 11 %11 SME Servces of te Researc Centre henr Tuor

(LUX)47 41 20 49 %

12 Founaton for Fns Inventons (FIN) 138 8 49 8 %13 Promoton of Inustra Property (ESP) 14 90 3 9 %14 SME servces of te dans patent ofice (dK) 79 79 3 44 %1 Tecnoogy Netork Servce PTR (1er brevet) (FRA) 38 23 0 20 %

TOTAL 630(1) Number of available contacts

* The case studies are presented in lose order – the numbering does not represent a ranking of any type and is used only for easier referencing.

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 23 17-01-2008 11:10:07



2

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D3 SMEs in the IPR world

3.1 SMEs and innovation: The case of IPRdata an varous stues conucte over te past years ave unerne temportance of sma and medum-szed enterprses2 for te European economy.

Accorng to te ofice for ofica pubcatons of te European Communtes(European Commsson, 200; see aso: Scmemann, 2006), aroun 23 mo SMEsexste n 200 n te EU-2 (pror to te accesson of Bugara an Romana)representng 99 % of a enterprses. Tese companes empoy aroun 7 mo peopec account for to trs of te tota orkforce avaabe. Mcro enterprses,c empoy ess tan 10 empoyees, consttute te majorty of a irms.

Beses ter obvous sgnicance n terms of numbers an jobs, one of te keystrengts of te SMEs s seen n ter nnovaton actvtes (Innobarometer, 2004).In genera, nnovaton s consere to be an mportant factor nluencng economcgrot, because t as, on average, a postve mpact on prouctvty – consere

to be essenta n competng n a gobase or – an on te creaton of better vng stanars (European Commsson, 2003a).

As regars te nnovatve beavour exbte by SMEs, te foong can be san bref:

• SMEs are, on average, more nnovatve tan one mgt tnk: Accorng to te4t Communty Innovaton Survey (Parvan 2007; see aso: Eurostat, 2004),about 33 % of te enterprses o ave 10-49 empoyees an aroun 40 %of te enterprses t 0-249 empoyees can be consere nnovatve (.e.,tey ntrouce ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts or processes n tetme frame of 2002 to 2004).

• wen t comes to nnovaton, SMEs ave certan avantages n terms of lexbty an aaptabty (.e., beavoura aspects) over arge enterprses,e arge enterprses ave ter avantages on te resource se (avaabe

inanca funs an tecnca resources) (Backburn, 2003). In aton,nnovaton n sma enterprses tens to be ess R&d-rven an s eveopemore nformay tan n arge enterprses (European Commsson, 2006;Backburn, 2003).

• Tere are ncatons tat nnovaton n genera as a postve mpact onempoyment, c s generay more pronounce t SMEs tan t argescae enterprses (LSEs). Ts refers to prouct as e as process nnovatons(Sek & Oberozner, 2001).

Aganst ts backrop, t seems cear tat fosterng nnovaton actvtes souconsttute a foca pont for pocy-makers an tat SMEs sou be gven specaattenton n te formuaton of respectve poces.

One of te possbtes to nuce nnovaton s te ntroucton an use of property-ke rgts – peraps te oest nsttutona arrangement partcuar to nnovaton asa soca penomenon (Granstran, 200). Inteectua Property Rghts (IPR) can be regare as a bune of rgts tat protect appcatons of eas annformaton tat ave commerca vaue (Goers, 2006: 11)

Te IPR system as tree goas (Goers, 2006: 11):

1. To prove ncentves for knoege creaton (an tus aso te bu-up of eat),

2. To accumuate knoege n a cuture an

3. To protect a stnctve entty.

2 For te einton of te term SMEs, te current cassicaton of te European Commsson as ran upon. Uner ts einton, SMEs are irms c ave ess tan 20 empoyees an eter ave an annua turnover of ess tan or equa to € 0 mo or a baance seet tota of ess tan or equa to € 43 mo (European Commsson, 2003b).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 25 17-01-2008 11:10:07



26


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Te ratonae ben mpementng suc rgts s seen n te fact tat knoege,eas an creatons are parta pubc goos c are reatvey easy to consumean use (an especay to copy) but expensve to eveop. wtout a system of excusve rgts, c gve creators some contro over o oters use ter eas

(n partcuar to at extent oters can make money t ter nventons), tereou be, on one an, muc ess ncentves to pursue nnovatve actvtes. On teoter an, nventors st eveopng ne proucts an servces ou try to keepter kno-o as secret as possbe. Te atter ou make especay te eveop-ment of foo-up nnovatons (base on an orgna nventon or ea) veryficut.

Te ea IPR system s abe to overcome te gap beteen te soceta nterest navng a nventons mae avaabe ey an te nvua nterest of gettng amaxmum rear for nventve efforts by grantng a creator or nventor some formof excusvty, at east for a mte amount of tme. we ganng te protecton,te nventor as to make s or ers eas pubc. Pubc scosure ssemnates teknoege. durng te pero of protecton, access to te use of te kno-o of an nventor by foo-up nnovators s mte an n te ans of te nventor; nte ong run, te ea becomes a pubc goo an foo-up nnovators can use teorgna ork freey for te eveopment of ne eas.

3.2 The IPR system in a nutshell

3.2.1 Formal IPR usable by SMEs

Te most mportant IPR nstruments are son n Grap 2. Tey ffer accorngto at tey protect (.e., a usefu ea, an orgna expresson or a stnctveentty), te egree of ega formaty (.e., te regstraton requrements) anoter functona aspects (e.g., tme up to c te nstrument grants protecton).Sort escrptons of tese nstruments foo to prove te basc frameork.

Patents cover nventons of ne an/or mprove proucts an processes(Backburn, 2003: 6). Aganst te scosure of te tecnca etas of an nventon

to te patent ofice, te patent oer (patentee) receves te rgt – for a mte

Graph 2 Major IPR nstruments and common appcatons

Knowledge

e

C

e

Patent

Badge of identity for

goods or services

Physical application

Shape

Configuration Design

L

G

V

A

C

Useful idea

Distinctive identity

Original expression

Application

Simple

e.g. pharmaceutical molecule

Complex

e.g. microprocessor element

Non –physical application

e.g. logo, shape, sound, colour

Trade mark

Ornamentation

Application

Literary

Geographical

Videographic

Audio

Copyright

Source: Gowers, 2006

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 26 17-01-2008 11:10:08



27

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

amount of tme (mosty up to 20 years) – to stop oters from makng, seng or usng an nventon for commerca purposes tout permsson. Te patent s notony te most tratona an e-knon nstrument for protectng IP, t s aso teone t te gest egree of ega formaty, requrng forma regstraton at a

patent or IP ofice an an examnaton t respect to te fferent crtera of patentabty.

In orer to be patentabe, an nventon as to fui te foong four crtera(Goers, 2006: 13):

1. Te nventon as to be nove (.e., te specicatons must ave never beenmae pubc n any ay anyere n te or)

2. It as to exbt an nventve step (.e., f compare to at s areay knont ou not be sometng obvous to someone ese ske n te oman)

3. It as to be capabe of nustra appcaton (.e., beng of use for nustry)

4. It sou not fa uner a st of actvtes c are stncty marke as notpatentabe (ts ou refer to, for exampe, scoveres, scentic teores,matematca metos or artstc ork)

It s mportant to note tat patents are nstruments c are currenty operatonaat natona eves ony. A patent grante n one country s soey va for tatspecic country. If patents are neee eseere, patent ings are necessary neac of te countres n c protecton s sougt. Furtermore, every country asts on as governng patents an, toug egsaton s mosty smar, subtefferences may exst.

Most natona patent systems requre tat te patent be ie n te respectvenatona anguage. Ts means tat n case an nventor seeks to protect s or ersnventon n te oe of Europe, te patent as to be transate nto a natonaanguages. In orer to factate suc an nternatona appcaton process, a specatreaty, te Patent Corporaton Treaty (PCT), as sgne n 1970 by – ntay – 18contractng states. Te PCT as amene severa tmes, te ast tme n 2001. Itas no more tan 100 members.

So-cae PCT appcatons (or nternatona appcatons) can be submtte for annta ing at a specase recevng ofice n one anguage. If te nventon fuiste requrements of patentabty (c s assesse troug a searc by anautorse Internatona Searc Autorty tat ssues an Internatona Searc Report(ISR)), te patent s aso grante by te varous natona patent ofices o takepart n te PCT. Te appcant st as to kno, oever, n c country e/ses ookng for patent protecton an te ocuments st nee to be transate ntote respectve anguages. Noneteess, te avantage of avng to submt onyonce at a centra autorty, togeter t te fact tat fees for natona transatonsave to be pa ony at a ater stage, consttute a major bonus over te route of nvua ings n eac country.

A case unque to Europe s te so-cae Euro-rect patent. European countresc sgne te European Patent Treaty offer te possbty of a patent beng ieeter at te ofice of te European Patent Organsaton (EPO) n Munc, or at te

respectve natona ofices. Once te EPO grants te patent, te patentee onynees to ave te patent transate nto te anguages of oter European countresfor c e/se s seekng protecton. Te vaaton process n te respectvecountres oes not enta anoter separate examnaton. hence, Europeancompanes ave tree routes for patentng: natona ony, Euro-rect an PCT.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 27 17-01-2008 11:10:08



28


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d


I N d U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y The dea of a Communty Patent

Te ea of te so-cae “Communty Patent” or COMPAT ates back to te1970s. Te basc ratonae can be seen n te ega unformty: Enforcement

can be carre out centray; patent sputes can be sette t a supra-natona patent court. Most mportanty, a Communty Patent ou asoao for sgnicanty reuce patentng costs by avong te nee for mut-transatons (Cannon, 2003; Urc, 2006). In ts gt, a Communty Patentou fui key prncpes of te Interna European markets.

hoever, an e scussons about nstang a frameork for a CommuntyPatent system ave contnue snce te 1970s, no tangbe resuts ave beenaceve so far. Progress as been mae to te extent tat ega agreementsave been negotate c tacke te costs an te juca arrangementsssues tn te current European patent system. In 2000, 10 EPO membersrafte te Lonon Agreement (EPO, 200; EPO, 2006) c ams toreuce costs of transatons by ntroucng a cost-attractve post-granttransaton regme for European patents. In aton, te European Patent

Ltgaton Agreement (EPLA) (EPO, 2007), irst rafte n 1999, proposes tecreaton of a European Patent Jucary (EPJ) comprsng aso a supra-natonaEuropean Patent Court. Neter agreement s n force yet, but tere sconserabe support regarng te rap raticaton of te Lonon Agreementan an aopton of te European Patent Ltgaton Agreement (EPLA)(European Commsson, 2007).

Te atest propose verson of o a Communty Patent can be set up asecne n 2004, because te jursctona arrangements ere conserenaequate, an tere as ssatsfacton t te anguage regme.Neverteess, te creaton of a snge Communty Patent contnues to be akey objectve for Europe to ncrease nnovaton performance ancompettveness. Terefore, te European Commsson seeks to present acompreensve IPR Strategy Communcaton by 2008 to tacke te manoutstanng non-egsatve an orzonta ssues n a ies of nteectua

property to support te process of armonsng patentng proceures acrossEurope (European Commsson, 2007).

Trade marks consttute anoter mportant par of te IPR system. Trae marksare bages of orgn for goos or servces, comprsng ors, names, ogos,coours, souns an/or sapes (Goers, 2006: 1). Ts type of IPR nstrumentnees to be regstere t te natona IP ofices, an, once regstere, preventsoters from usng te same or smar bages on te same or smar proucts. Atrae mark, f successfuy appe, aos for easer enticaton an oer searccosts by consumers, because t stans for a specic reputaton concernng te typean/or quaty of proucts an servces evere uner te mark. An mportantan noteorty aspect of a trae mark s tat t oses ts protectve functon, once

t becomes use as a generc term.3

(Regstered) desgns protect te appearance of te oe or part of proucts,ncung sapes, coniguratons an ornamentatons. Protecton may be grantefor up to 2 years. In orer to quafy for regstraton, a esgn must be ne anexbt nvua caracter. Ts requrement means tat te overa mpresson annforme user gets from te esgn must be fferent from te mpresson suc auser ou get from any oter esgn c as been areay mae avaabe tote pubc n eter a regstere or unregstere ay.

3 Ts can appen f a certan bran or or s, after some tme, use by te genera pubc to enote a genera cassof tems. If, for exampe, te genera pubc ou start to use te term Po for a MP3 payers so by fferentmanufacturers, Appe ou key ose te rgts to usng ts or excusvey for ts range of musc payers. A casen pont ere ts as appene s Sony, ose ‘akman’ s not egbe any more for trae mark protecton n

Austra. Most recenty, Googe as avse mea outets not to use ts trae mark nappropratey, as peope start toncreasngy ca a types of nternet searces ‘googng’ (see Goers, 2006: 1).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 28 17-01-2008 11:10:08



29

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

In contrast to arrangements for patents, a communty e regstere esgn (teregstere communty esgn, abbrevate Cd) as mpemente. Snce January2003, irms are abe to regster te esgn at O.h.I.M. (Ofice for harmonzaton nte Interna Market (Trae Marks an desgns)) n Acante, Span. A esgn

regstere at ts ofice s automatcay va n a member states of te EuropeanUnon – no furter vaaton or transaton s neee. OhIM aso amnsters teCommunty Trae mark, c mpements structures smar to te Cd for traemarks.

Copyrghts comprse te fourt arge par of te IPR system. work protecte bya copyrgt may not be egay reprouce, strbute an communcate to tepubc tout te consent of te oner. Furtermore, te oner as to gvepermsson to pubcy en, rent or perform te ork uner s/ers copyrgt. Tecopyrgt s an exampe of an IPR nstrument of esser ega formaty, because toes not nee to be regstere. It arses automatcay, once t s “ixe” n someay (e.g., on paper, on im, on recorngs, by usng ies on servers n te nternet,etc.).

Te copyrgt covers te ay eas are expresse, but not te eas temseves.

For exampe, dan Bron’s book “Te da Vnc Coe” as ceare of carges tatt ou nfrnge te copyrgt of an earer book c areay contane many of te teores rtten n “Te da Vnc Coe”. Usng eas from copyrgte ork for one’s on ork s tus not consere to be a copyrgt nfrngement. Exceptonsto ts rue ave been, oever, put n pace for to cases: (1) f transacton costsfor cearng rgts are too g (e.g., for book reves or for copyng for non-commerca prvate researc uner brary prvege); an (2) n orer to account for equty ssues (e.g., transaton of texts nto Brae or copyng for preservaton).

Beses te four man IPR nstruments above, tere are aso oter IPR nstrumentsc ave been eveope to cope t specic types of nventons. Exampesncue pant varetes, sem-conuctor topograpes, geograpc ncatons or IPRttes for atabases. Tese types of IPR are summarse as “su geners rgts” (asoppose to prmary IP rgts).

A ast noteorty type of IPR s te utty mode. Te utty moe asntrouce as a ceaper but smper aternatve to patents, especay t tenees of SMEs n mn. It s avaabe ony n a mte number of countres – npartcuar, n some European countres (Austra, Germany, France, Fnan, Itay,Span, Portuga, Poan) an, for exampe, n Japan, Taan an Cna. Te uttymoe can be best escrbe as a “patent gt”: It as ess strngent patentabtyrequrements, a sorter maxmum fe tme an t s not substantay examneupon regstraton (n terms of pror art searc), but t enjoys aso a smaer egreeof ega protecton. Legsaton vares from country to country, but te bascconcept s te same.

3.2.2 Informal IP protection mechanisms

Te forma IPR system proves a frameork for protectng te nteectua propertyof a irm. As state n secton 3.1, te system can be consere to factate speciceas beteen socety an nventors: Te nventor receves some form of efensbeexcusvty n excange for makng oterse secret nformaton avaabe to tepubc. Te am of te system s to maxmse efare an nnovaton output, takngnto account bot te nterests of te orgna nnovator an tat of foo-onnnovators.

For te proit-maxmsng irm, t s, oever, mportant to kno tat t can asouse mecansms an/or engage n beavours outse te IPR system n orer toprotect ts nteectua property. Suc nforma IP protecton practces are extremeyvare (Kuussto, 2007; Ktcng & Backburn, 2003: 21). Exampes ncue bungspecast kno-o nto proucts to restrct te possbty of re-engneerng,reguatng access to nformaton or, as an aternatve, ssemnatng knoege

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 29 17-01-2008 11:10:09



30


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



tn te busness to crcumvent epenence on nvua empoyees, or usngsecrecy agreements.

Emprca evence sos tat suc strateges are extremey mportant for a typesof enterprses, not te east for SMEs. Ts may be ue n part to sortcomngs of

te system of forma IPR, but may aso be etermne by oter factors. For exampe, te stuy by Ktcng & Backburn suggests tat irms beeve ter IP (or,to be more precse, ter conienta kno o) to be treatene muc more bynse sources (.e., ter on empoyees) tan by outse compettors. we manyof te nforma practces seem to aress te nse probem aone, nforma IPprotecton practces prove aso usefu for outse protecton.

Some of te most cte nforma IP protecton strateges are:

• The Trade Secret: Trae secrets can be escrbe as secret or propretarynformaton of commerca vaue (LIIP, 2003). Toug tere are fferences nte exact einton n fferent jursctons, nformaton cassie as a traesecret usuay exbts tree trats: It s not generay knon to a reevantporton of te pubc, t as commerca vaue (ereby te vaue must stemspecicay from ts secret nature); an reasonabe acton s taken to mantan

ts secrecy. Te most famous trae secret s probaby te one e by CocaCoa regarng te recpe of ts man beverage. Atoug trae secrets are notprotecte by a n te same ay as patents or trae marks, trae secrets mayst enjoy some eve of ega protecton (toug te extent to c ts sgrante vares from country to country). In ts context, one ou generaystngus beteen afu means to obtan a trae secret (e.g., by reverseengneerng) an mproper means (e.g., by nustra esponage) – te atter ou enta ega abty for te party acqurng te secret.

• The strategy of Lead-Tme advantage: Ts strategy enotes a beavour by c te company rees on beng consstenty more nnovatve tan tscompettors, constanty beng n te ea t regar to ts nnovatveactvtes. By appyng suc a strategy, te nventng company aays as anenance verson of ts proucts reay for reease before a compettor o assuccessfuy cope te currenty avaabe verson.

• The strategy of reyng on the compety of the desgn: Tecomposton an bung structure of some proucts may be sometmes socompex tat compettors ou ncur sproportona cost to copy teprouct. If ts s te case, a irm may rey on te compexty of ts nventonfor protecton. As t te ea-tme strategy, patentng cou prove counter-prouctve, as te patent ou prove te bueprnts of te nventon tounafu copers. hoever, te anger s tat te compettor successfuy (anegay) re-engneers or re-nvents te nnovaton on ts on, an, n te orstcase, even ies for a patent. In suc a case, te orgna nventor may be rvenout of te market, because te patentee may rgtfuy press carges for nfrngement.

• Defensve Pubshng: defensve Pubsng enotes a strategy ereby tecompany makes te bueprnts of ts nventons avaabe to te pubc, for exampe by pubsng n a specast journa. Tat ay everyboy can use tenventon for commerca purposes, but – as an avantage – noboy s abe topatent t any more. A irm engagng n efensve pubsng makes sure tat tmantans ts so-cae freeom to operate, an mtgates te rsk of bengpatente out of te market t ts on nventon. Ts strategy may beappe en te company beeves tat obtanng a patent s too costy (or tgaton too rsky), an tere are ncatons tat better-postone companes key re-engneer te nventon an patent t temseves. Companes sucas IBM, Pps or Semens operate ter on journas for te purpose of efensve pubsng (e.g., te IBM Tecnca dscosure Buetn).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 30 17-01-2008 11:10:09



31

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D3.3 Usage Patterns of IP protection methods

by SMEs

Overall demand for and usage of IP protection methodsTe demand for IPR as been ncreasng over te past ecae. Grap 3 ncateste grot n patents ore beteen 1999 an 2004. wt a yeary averagegrot rate of 26 %, eman n 2004 for patents as about tree tmes ger tan n 1999. It as to be note tat most patents stem from PCT appcatons,c account for approxmatey 83 % of te patent eman eac year.

As regars trae marks an esgns,4 OhIM reports an ncrease from 43,144appcatons for communty trae marks n 1996 to 77,460 appcatons n 2006(OhIM, 2007). Ts ou correspon to an ncrease of aroun 80 % n tattmeframe. As communty esgns ave ony been avaabe snce 2003,corresponng tme seres ata s mte to te years afterars, but te ata fromOhIM suggests tat eman for ts type of IPR s aso ncreasng.

The ssue of data avaabty concernng the usage of IPR by SMEs

we ata erve from te appcaton process s avaabe for fferent forma IPRnstruments, a breakon by irm sze s not possbe. IP ofices usuay o notrequre appcants to prove nformaton on company sze, an mosty tey o noteven offer te opportunty for a respectve statement on te appcaton forms.Even f suc ata ere to be coecte by te (natona) IP ofices from teappcants, te resuts ou most key st ave to be nterprete t great care.Frst, te fact tat companes may ie n any country may cause ata from annvua natona patent ofice to be mseang. Secon, many arge enterprsesave sma subsares c perform patent appcatons on beaf of ter moter irms for strategc reasons. Ts ou ntrouce anoter bas n ata from IPofices.

The Non-Use of IPR by SMEs

A quanttatve anayss of IP protecton actvtes (ncung patents) by SMEs can

tus be – n most nstances – ony conucte usng survey ata. A number of surveys ave been tackng ts ssue (see, for exampe, Tumm, 2006; Backburn,2003; wIPO, 2003a), te most compreensve one for Europe beng teCommunty Innovaton Survey (CIS) (.e., Eurostat, 2004). Te resuts from te

4 As copyrgts are not regstere, no ata concernng te number of came copyrgts can be erve.

Graph 3 Demand for patent rghts ordde

20.599.488

14.644.800

12.294.536

10.011.805

7.659.426

5.265.755

7451674

10068860

14744746

17062058

23497954

12527841

0

5.000.000

10.000.000

15.000.000

20.000.000

25.000.000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

PCT TOTAL

Nr. of patents

Source: Trilateral Statistical Report, 2004 and 2005, cited in Gowers, 2006: 25

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 31 17-01-2008 11:10:09



32


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



tr Communty Innovaton Survey ncate – n ne t inngs form oter stues – tat SMEs make, on average, very tte use of the forma system of

IPR an use more nforma IP protecton mecansms (Arune, 2000).

depenng on te country, beteen 0.9 % (Bugara) an 9.1 % (Germany) of a

te SMEs6 appe for a patent n te tme frame of 1998 to 2000. If te enomnator (number of a SMEs n te country) s repace by te number of nnovatvecompanes, te sares of patentng sma enterprses (10-49 empoyees) ou fanto a range beteen 4 % (Portuga) an 18 % (France), te sare of patentngmeum-sze enterprses (0-249 empoyees) ou range beteen 4 % (Icean)an 3 % (Seen). As regars oter IPR, sgty ger usage rates are onyreporte t respect to trae marks. Informa protecton metos are, by contrast,use muc more frequenty: trae secrets by up to 0 % of te sma nnovatveenterprses n te UK; te strategy of reyng on ea tme avantage by aroun40 % of smaan by aroun 44 % of meum-sze nnovatve enterprses nGermany.

Large companes make muc more use of IP protecton metos, be t forma IPRor nforma IP protecton: Usage frequency s up to tmes ger t respect to

patents, but aso beteen 2.3 (reance on esgn compexty) an 2.6 tmes abovete eve of SMEs as regars nforma protecton metos (toug part of tefference may be ue to statstca artefacts, c cou be ampene by usngoter ncators suc as te number of patent appcatons per 1,000 empoyeestn specic sze casses).

Sze and sectora consderatons th regard to IPR usage by SMEs

As CIS ata refers ony to companes t more tan 10 empoyees, te area of mcro-enterprses t up to 9 empoyees an ter usage eves of IP protectonstrateges remans an area argey open for nvestgaton. One mgt expect tatcorresponng usage eves are cose to nsgnicant, gven te observabe postvecorreaton beteen company sze an IP protecton nstruments empoye. As amatter of fact, a recent stuy by Ptkety foun tat ony 7 % of te mcro-enterprses n te UK appe for a patent; te sare of patentng irms n oter szecasses as at east more tan tce as g (Ptkety, 2007). On te oter an,toug, a arge poo of anecota evence suggests tat start-ups c are baseon ney eveope proucts an/or processes, or oner-manager irms ere teoner as a persona nterest n patentng (tus actng more ke a prvate nventor o ony ooks for persona enjoyment from ixng a tecnca probem) (Laner,2004), mgt beneit greaty from usng forma IPR or even eavy usng IPR. Tus,a fferentate approac as to be taken en anaysng IPR usage by mcro-enter-prses.

Smary, e te average usage of forma IPR by SMEs s reatvey o, t as tobe note tat for some sectors an nustres IPR s essenta even for smaer irms.Te most promnent suc sectors are:

• The botech sector : Te usage of patents s especay g t botec anmost notaby t bo-parmaceutca companes. SMEs pay a vta roe for nnovaton n tese nustres. Long eveopment tmes an te fact tat oftenone patent aone stans ben a prouct make patents te prmary too for te protecton of IP. Te survey by Tomas (Tomas, 2003) ncates gaareness eves by boparmaceutca SMEs t regar to IPR, a perceveg effectveness an sgnicance of IPR for te compettveness of te irmsan a ve tat patentng costs are on average not too g.

• The eectroncs and ICT manufacturng ndustres: Patent usage s asomportant n te context of eectroncs nustres an te manufacturng

Communty Innovaton Survey IV (CIS4) ata for te usage of nforma (‘strategc’) protecton metos as notavaabe n te ata reease by Eurostat. In aton, as te questonnares for te CIS4 an CIS3 surveys are notentca an te resuts can not fuy be compare, ony CIS3 survey resuts ere use n ts stuy. hoever, onesou note tat CIS4 resuts ou bascay be n ne t tose from CIS3.

6 For te CIS3 survey, SMEs are eine as enterprses t beteen 10 an 249 empoyees. Enterprses t ess tan10 empoyees are not covere by te survey.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 32 17-01-2008 11:10:09



33

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

nustres of te ICT sector. Tese nustres can be caracterse by rater sort prouct fe cyces an aso o saes prces, coupe t sma proitmargns per unt so. R&d expenses for tese proucts are noneteess g,an many evces ave to use severa tecnooges, eac of c mgt be

protecte by a range of patents. In ts envronment, open nnovaton moespay an mportant roe, an arge as e as sma companes frequentycombne togeter n cangng consteatons to eveop tese base tecnoogesc are ten to be use by severa manufacturers an brans n ter proucts. As te proit margns per unt so are o, a sgnicant sare of tencome of te ICT an eectroncs companes noaays stem from out-censng to oter manufacturers an to a esser extent from rect saesrevenues (Eeva, 2007).

• The softare and entertanment ndustres: Te softare sector s oneof te most mportant users of copyrgts, an te oter one s teentertanment nustry. As te proucts of tese nustres can be easy copen te gta era, IP protecton as become a key ssue n tese sectors of teeconomy. Te ongong scusson about te patentabty of softare s a casen pont. Currenty, an n contrast to te US, no IP protecton n te form of a patent can be gven n Europe to softare as suc. Apart from annottstanng te scusson on softare patents, easy copyng an s-trbuton possbtes ave been eang to te eveopment of ne busnessmoes, some of c are eavy IPR-reate (e.g., oube censng topen source softare). Reaers are avse to refer to te corresponng anabunant terature on ts topc, as te subject of IPR usage n softarenustres ceary goes beyon te scope of ts overve for te bencmarkngstuy.

Oter users makng eavy use of forma IPR are te automotve sector (t a usagepattern c s to an extent smar to tat of te ICT nustry), te textes sector (ere trae marks an esgns are of mportance, but sometmes aso patents(Tomas, 2003), e.g., for g-tec, speca purpose textes) an even te foonustry.

3.4 Perceived and real barriers to IPR usageby SMEs

As as been son above – an espte reatvey g usage eves n certannustres –, SMEs seem to make, on average, rater tte use of te system of forma IPR. Te reasons for tat ave been expore n a number of stues (wIPO,2003a; Tumm, 2006; Backburn, 2003), a of tem yeng a more or ess smar pcture: Te prmary perceve constrants are te costs of IP protecton, ficutesn enforcng areay obtane rgts, te tme to make IP protecton ork, fooeby tte aareness on te se of te SMEs about IPR ssues, an a (perceve an/or rea) bas of patent examners toars patent appcatons of arge irms.

Hgh costs of usng IPR

Costs are consere to be te prmary barrer by SMEs to usng te forma systemof IPR more ntensvey. Ts appes especay to patents. Costs ncurre arse atfferent tmes n te patentng process an for fferent purposes. One canstngus beteen pre-ings expentures, nta ing costs an costs for conuctng pror art searces or, after obtanng te patent, mantenance/reneafees. In case te patent s to be va n more tan one country, atona costs of vaaton (e.g. for transatons) ave to be covere too, epenng on te number of countres protecton s sougt for. It s aso mportant to conser te costs for apatent attorney/agent (externa costs) an aso probabe costs for enforcng tergts n case tey are nfrnge. Te atter aspect be eat t separateyfurter beo. Te anser to te queston of o expensve patentng actuay s,s far from stragtforar. Te costs of a patent epens on many factors,

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 33 17-01-2008 11:10:10



34


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



ncung, among oters, te route taken for appcatons (PCT, natona, Euro-rect), te number of countres for c protecton s sougt, te number of pages of an appcaton an te tecnoogy ie n queston.

Roan Berger Market Researc (Roan Berger Market Researc, 2004) as gven

te task by te European Patent Ofice to anayse an compare te costs of patentng n fferent countres. Te metooogy ncue a survey of about 20patentng companes (a mxture of SMEs an arge irms) an te anayss of avaabe ata from te EPO, bot from c moe patents (representng“typca” patent appcatons) ave been erve. Average costs for a Euro-rectan a Euro PCT moe patent are son n Tabe 2.

Comparsons t te US an Japan ncate tat a Euro-rect patent may be, onaverage, more tan tce as expensve as an equvaent US patent an more tantree tmes more expensve tan a Japanese patent. hg costs n Europe are sato be mosty ue to transaton costs, c are rreevant for te US an Japanesepatent systems. Ofica fees seem to pay a rater mnor roe – tey are estmateto amount to on average € 3,470 at te EPO, € 2,00 at te USPTO an € 1,70at te JPO. As tese igures are estmates by te patentees, t may be assume tat

tey are areay ajuste for preferenta rates gven to SMEs n te US (by usngte so-cae Sma Entty Act) an by te JPO for nta ings.

It s once agan mportant to unerne tat, e te igures an moe patentsare base on emprca ata, varatons t respect to certan cost categores canamount to up to 100 %. It can be easy seen tat te costs are conserabe for acompany.

Furter, t s necessary to ook at te tmng of the payments, .e., ennvua fee nstaments are ue. For te PCT route, for exampe, a patentee asto ece tn 30 monts7 after avng starte te patentng process (tereference pont n tme s cae te prorty ate), n c countres e/se sactuay ookng for patent protecton. Ts gves te irm a bt of eeay for costan strategc pannng, but t aso sets a eane. Smar peros of tmes aneanes appy for oter cost categores n te patentng process. Overa, te coststructure an te tmng of te nstaments ave reatvey far-reacng consequencesfor te esgn of an IPR support servce (especay for inanca subses – ereaspects suc as at type of costs are to be subsse or for o muc tmesupport sou be gven – ave to be taken nto account) an for te strategc IPmanagement of a irm.

Dficut enforceabty of IP rghts

IP rgts can ony ork to te extent to c tey are enforceabe. In case acompettor nfrnges te IPR of a irm, te irm sou be abe to tgate successfuy,at suficenty o costs an n a tmey manner. In practce, oever, tgatonoften turns out to be ficut.

7 Ts amount of tme may ffer sgty from country to country.

Tabe 2 Tota cost of a representatve EPO patent, n €

Expenture Euro-PCT (1) Euro-rect (2)

Pre-ing expenture (exc. R&d) 9,130 6,240- In-ouse cost 4,190 2,40- Externa cost 4,940 3,700Cost of processng 21,990 14,420- In-house Cost ,680 3,070- Externa cost 16,310 11,30Cost of vaaton 1,80 9,870TOTAL 46,700 30,30(1) average: 8 countries covered by patent

(2) average: 6 countries covered by patent

Source: Roland Berger Market Research, 2004

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 34 17-01-2008 11:10:10



3

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

In a stuy conucte by Kngston (Kngston, 2000), 600 knon SME patentees nte US an Europe ere questone about ter experences t nfrngement. To-trs of tese irms ere face t attempts to copy ter patente nventons. Of tese, 2 % foun t ficut to earn about te nfrngement. About a quarter of te

copyngs ere by arger compettors. Te inanca amage sustane as for aboutaf of te responents “unmportant” or “bearabe”, but for 21 % t as veryserous. Most of te sputes ere sette out of court (80 %). Patent tgatonnsurance as taken out by ony a sma mnorty of te irms (14 %). hoever,successfu cams aganst te nsurance ere ony mae by 2 %. Arbtraton asary use. Case stues an anecota evence suggest tat arge companes useter resources for tgaton to ntmate SMEs rater strongy. In a conserabenumber of cases, SMEs not get compensaton for nfrnge patents.

Overa, te ficutes n estabsng effectve tgaton proceures can beconsere to be a sgnicant threat to SMEs. It as to be recae tat bypatentng, bueprnts are evere to potenta unafu copers. Ts mpes tatpror to patentng proper rsk assessment t respect to enforceabty s necessary,an n many nstances te souton ou be to stck to trae secrets or to rey, for exampe, on a ea tme avantage strategy. Kngston recommens tat egsatonbe passe c ou ao for some form of compusory arbtraton. In teabsence of suc egsaton, t s aso suggeste to create a vountary assocaton of SME patentees (a Patent defence Unon, as Kngston cae t). Members of sucan assocaton ou agree to sette a IPR-reate sputes by tecnca arbtraton.Suc a sceme ou most key, accorng to Kngston, cover about one tr of a nfrngement cases.

Tme requred to make IP strateges ork

Te tme to make an IP strategy ork consttutes anoter mportant barrer. Agan,ts refers especay to patents, an reates on one an to te compexty of tepatentng process (especay, f protecton s sougt on a goba scae) (Ktcng &Backburn, 2003) an, on te oter an, to te tme t takes t patents aregrante. due to te ncrease n te number of patent appcants, conserabebackogs exst at practcay a patent ofices. For te EPO, for exampe, te yeary

amount of patent ings as ncrease by 0 % over te past ecae, eprouctvty ncrease ony by 30 % (Abbott, 2006). In prncpa, te EPO takes teapproac of gvng examnatons more tme n orer to guarantee g-quatystanars for te grante patents. In gt of te “avaance” of appcatons,oever, ts puts conserabe stran on te examners an trggere, for exampe,a strke at te EPO ofices n Munc n eary 2006. In aton, te g quatyapproac can be consere to be at east party responsbe for te cost fferencesbeteen Europe, te USA an Japan escrbe above. On te oter an, gquaty patents mpy feer court an nfrngement cases.

Perceved and rea unfar grantng practces

Anecota evence suggests tat SMEs beeve tat patent examners grant patentsto arge enterprses more easy tan to SMEs, base on te ger reputaton of arger companes an/or out of fear of ter obbyng poer. In response, arge

enterprses empasze ter more professona anng of patents an IPR. Teextent to c suc cams an counter-cams are true s of course subject toebate, as te resuts of Kngston (Kngston, 2000) ave son.

Lmted aareness of IPR ssues and mted kno-ho thn the

enterprse

It as aso been sa tat genera aareness of IPR ssues s, on average, o bymost SMEs (de Marns, 2002; Backburn, 2003) – promptng pubcy funesupport servces n ts area. A Roan Berger stuy of te 1990s, for exampe,came to te concuson tat tere s a major nformaton eict among SMEs onte patent system c s not suficenty aresse by government poces (EPO,1994 cte n wIPO, 2003a). Aong te same ne, a stuy by te Genera

Accountng Ofice (GAO) of te Unte States of Amerca (US-GAO, 2003) suggeststat mte knoege among sma irms about foregn patent as an systems

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 35 17-01-2008 11:10:10



36


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



– togeter t g costs an mte resources – may consttute major barrers for patentng abroa. A recent stuy by Ptkety soe smar resuts (see asosecton .4.1) (Ptkety, 2007).

Grap 4 sos te barrers to usng IPR, as tey are seen by te users questone

n te scope of ts stuy. we tere s a bas present t tese SMEs (gven tattey actuay make use of IPR support servces, n contrast to oter sma anmeum-sze companes c may not be even aare tat suc servces exst),some ponts are nterestng to note. Frst, n ne t oter stuy inngs, costsan tme ssues are tougt to be te major obstace for a ger IPR usage. Teseaspects can be consere factors outse of te company. Inse factors arereporte by te questone SMEs to pay, by comparson, a esser but st notnsgnicant roe n nerng te use of IPR. Ony 16 % see ack of aareness of IPR to be a major barrer. Ony 14 % see a ack of IPR expertse tn te companyto be a major barrer. Informaton on IP protecton seems to be aequateyavaabe, t ony 12 % seeng a ack of nformaton as a major factor.Organsatona ssues are of even ess concern.

Tese resuts may be nterprete n severa ays: Inse factors actuay may not

pay suc an mportant roe after a (f compare to outse ssues), an pocysou, as a consequence, ony concentrate on oerng te costs of te IPR systeman makng t more tme-eficent. Ts nterpretaton mgt be true eter becausenterna ssues are, n genera, not a g prorty probem as concerns IPR (n ccase te oter stuy inngs ou ave to be questone), or because te servceprovers a goo job n transferrng IPR kno-o to ter customers.

Tere are severa nts, toug, suggestng y anoter scenaro seems morepausbe. Frst, SMEs rate te overa cost/beneit rato to be, after te cost antme ssues, te tr argest barrer to usng IPR. Te mpcaton s tat te costsceary outeg te beneits. hoever, t cou aso pont to a eman on te seof te SMEs for a better expanaton of at te beneits of usng IPR are, an f tey are ort te costs. It s nterestng to note n ts regar tat most responentsbeeve tat te provson of nformaton on “y an y not to patent” toconsttute a muc more mportant key factor for te quaty of an IPR support

servce tan te avaabty of matera on “o to patent”. Gven tat manyservce provers compane about te ack of avaabe quaty staff e tecompetence of staff as rate to be te most mportant quaty factor for a servce,an aso gven tat te sks requre for an ea IPR expert nvove tecnca, ega

ANd busness kno-o, t s ary concevabe tat te majorty of SMEs canmarsa suc staff n suficent quaty an quantty.

Graph 4 Perceved barrers for usng IPR, SME users of servces hch ereseected as case studes for ustratng eements of good practce, n %

44

3022

16 14 12 12

31

30

28

2425 29 28

14

60

20

40

60

80

high relevance medium relevance

%

C o s t s o f I P

p r o t e c t i o n

T i m e t o m a k e

I P p r o t e c t i o n w o r k

u n c l e a r

c o s t / b e n e f i t

o f I P p r o t e c t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

L a c k o f i n f o

o n I P p r o t e c t i o n

I P R i r r e l e v a n t

i n b u s i n e s s c o n t e x t

O r g a n i s a t i o n a l

i s s u e s

Source: User survey, n= 350

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 36 17-01-2008 11:10:10



37

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

Care must be taken tat statements an compants by SMEs are nterpreted

th cauton; nee, t may be tat SMEs may – on average – overestmate ter kno-o an resources. It cou aso be tat te compants about te g costsare exaggerate, an tat aareness of IPR n genera s oer tan antcpate by

te SMEs. It sou aso be recae tat te sampe of SMEs provng tenformaton s base toars tose o make use of IPR support servces an,ence, are key to ave a greater aareness tan tose o o not. To put ts nte rgt context, t mgt prove usefu to anayse o IPR s treate n argecompanes.

3.5 IPR in large companies –The case for a strategic approach to IPR

IPR n arge companes s ar to anayse n eta because t s generay vee aspropretary an conienta, nvovng as t oes te core kno-o of a company.

As a matter of fact, anecota evence suggests tat pubc statements on te IPRpocy of a company may aso ncue, at east n part, mseang nformaton, norer not to gve potenta compettors nts about at te company s ong.

hoever, some genera caracterstcs of o arge companes treat IPR, anessons sma irms can earn from ter arge counterparts, can st be erve fromvarous stues an presentatons.

Frst, one as to notce tat arge enterprses seem to be face t very muc tesame caenges as SMEs. Costs are a conserabe factor, an court tras are asomosty seen as a measure of ast resort (Mattes et a., 2003). Nottstanngte fferent extent to c SMEs an arge scae enterprses (LSEs) are actuaysubjecte to te cost ssue, one mgt st oner y companes of a szesengage n IPR protecton at a.

Te anser to ts queston s certany not stragt-forar, an cas for a moreetae anayss regarng te beneits of usng IPR. Tratonay, an as statebefore, IPR s use as means of protecton. hoever, t grong mportance of IP n genera, te usage areas of IPR ave become muc more manfo:

• Protectng aganst copyng: IPR may be use n te tratona ay as annsurance premum to protect aganst mtaton an copyng.

• Scarng potenta compettors off: IPR s aso use n orer to sgnacompettors tat tey ave to expect troube f tey try to enter a market tproucts smar to te ones protecte by patent.

• Creatng reputaton: IPR cou be aso use to unerne te competencean nnovatveness of a irm. Ts s especay mportant for to areas: Frst,for securng inanca funs. Secon, for marketng n genera. Usng IPR for securng inanca funs may be gy reevant for SMEs, too, especay for start-ups. For te atter, patents may ep n negotatons to secure venturecapta funs for a project tat ou oterse be treate as non-exstent.

• Forcng to desgn around: Frms c try to enter a market omnate bya patent-protect prouct may nee to esgn aroun, c s mosty coupet a number of savantages (ger eveopment costs, ess usabty, ossof tme, etc.).

• Generatng ncome: Patents may be use to recty generate ncome. Tss one by usng censng agreements. Uner suc an agreement, te censeeobtans te rgt to use te patent aganst payment of a royaty to te patentoer/censer.

• Creatng freedom to operate: As court proceures are costy an engty,to irms mgt agree to use eac oter’s IPR for free an refran from tgatngfor nvua patent “nfrngements”. Suc mutua censng agreements areenote by te term cross-censng.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 37 17-01-2008 11:10:11



38


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



• Factatng R&D coaboraton: IPR may be use to prove te frameorkof orkng reatons beteen companes engagng n mutua R&d projects;IPR mgt tus ep to overcome concerns on osng company kno-o tote researc partners.

A n a, t becomes cear tat a range of beneits or opportuntes are avaabe byusng IPR, ony one of c s nsurance aganst unafu copyng. On te oter an, tere are aso caenges present c resut from te barrers escrbeabove. Tese caenges ncate te rsks of IPR: provng bueprnts of annventon to compettors; te nabty to protect aganst nfrngement; osng tefreeom to operate by beng patente out of te market; sunk costs because of IPRof no commerca vaue or unsustanabe costs for tgatng an/or mantanng IPR.Last but not east, tere are a number of IP protecton nstruments to cose from– eac t ts on beneits an rsks. An tere s aays te opton of ongnotng, c cou be more usefu tan ong te rong tng uner speciccrcumstances.

To manage a te caenges an rsks, many arge companes ave eveope IPstrateges c bascay serve tree goas (Peam, 2006):

1. To create a patent and IP portfoo, ere te cost/beneit rato smaxmse. Suc a portfoo (sometmes aso cae a patent poo) serves tosecure te irm’s on eveopment an market actvtes, creates freeom tooperate an generates atona ncome (as oppose to te cassca metoof proucng an seng proucts to en users ony).

2. To dentfy potentay harmfu IPR one by compettors an be abe toreact to ts eary on.

3. To use IPR as a source of technoogca nformaton (e.g., by montorngpatent atabases).

Suc a strategy proves te bass for taken acton, for exampe, regarng teusage of certan IP protecton nstruments. Te extent to c IP protectonnstruments are empoye epens on many factors: Te tecnoogca stanng of te company regarng certan proucts an, te strengt of te patent an IPR

portfoo are to exampes. Te matrx son beo n Grap s, for exampe,use by SIEMENS as ecson guance.

Te inngs of Mattes, Pckerng an Krkan suggest tat ntegratng te IPRstrategy nto er management conseratons n a coerent an structuremanner may be vee as a prerequste for successfu mpementaton (Matteset a., 2003). Te coaboraton of researcers, patent managers an attorneys,ayers, an commerca managers s tus by-an-arge consere to be cruca.

Graph 5 Matr for the usage of dfferent IP protecton methods, dependng onmarket poston/standng

R

C

I

C

I

P

A

A

S

O

leading

same

following

following s ame lea ding

P

T

Patent utilisation

Recommended action

Cross-Licensing

In-Licensing

Cross-Licensing with netincome generation

Inhibiting

Product clearing

Appeal/objection

Acquire patent

Strengthen patent portfolio

Optimize patent processes

leading

leading

same

same

following

following

Patent standing

Technologystanding

Source: Peham, 2006

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 38 17-01-2008 11:10:11



39

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

Te irst step to ensure tat IP management s ntegrate nto ay-to-ay busnessoperatons s generay to rte on an cofy te IPR strategy n a respectveocument. Ts ocument expans at proceures are to be fooe enmportant aspects concernng te IP of te irm arse an/or sets out responsbtes

for fferent IPR-reate tasks. For te atter, many companes ave set up ecateIP epartments. Some of tem ere former patent epartments, an te namecange aone ncates te ger sgnicance of focussng on IP protectonnstruments as a oe rater tan ony on patents. Toug te organsatonaembeng an te eve of autonomy assgne to tese epartments vary greaty,t s on average acknoege tat cear nes of responsbty are neee.

Foong te estabsment of an aequate IPR supportng structure, te caenges to rase aareness on IPR matters trougout te company. To ts en,company-nterna tranngs are te prmary nstrument of coce – strbutng teIPR strategy ocuments aone may not be suficent as te ocuments may en upas “…weighty volumes…used…as door stops ” (Mattes et a, 2003: 46). In ay-to-ay busness operatons, t s eventuay mportant to “tnk IP” an act accorngy.Ts entas a process of contnua earnng, revson an reinement, base oncompany-nterna observatons an aso on ntegence concernng te actvtes of compettors.

The ncome-generatng functon revsted – The sgnicance of busness

modes

Te ncome generatng functon of IPR s, n aton to te marketng/reputaton creatng functons of IPR, ort a more etae ook n te IPRmanagement context, as t may ave consequences for te oe organsaton of a busness. Suc canges n corporate organsatona structures can be especayobserve n te manufacturng nustres of te ICT sector.

Te ICT manufacturng ndustres are noaays caracterse by very sortprouct fe cyces, very o proucton costs an o proit margns. At te sametme, oever, tere s aso g pressure regarng te eveopment of nennovatons, c s n turn mosty assocate t g R&d costs. Many prouctsare mae up of a varety of tecnooges, ereby eac of te tecnooges maybe protecte by ter on range of patents.

A key factor n the contet of IPR: open nnovaton

Tratonay operatng companes may not be lexbe enoug to cope t tecaenges presente by suc a busness envronment.8 A possbe, an eycosen, aternatve ay to tacke ts ssue s to open up te R&d epartments anenter n jont-venture agreements t oter companes (mosty oter argecompettors, but aso SMEs) n orer to sare eveopment costs (Eeva, 2007).Ts s often one on a per-nnovaton or per-tecnoogy bass, an te nature of suc agreements entas a range of fferent forms of co-operaton – sometmesoose R&d cooperaton agreements, sometmes membersp n an aance (e.g.,te aance on a partcuar dVd format), but often aso separate ega boes(“jont” spn-offs). As a resut of ts open nnovaton approac, te rg one-company/one R&d epartment moe tens to break on nto a congomerateof arger irms an SMEs, caracterse by mutua trae nterests an compcatemutua onersp structures nvovng aso compettors.

In ts envronment, revenue s ony to a sma extent create by avng en-userspay a margn on top of eveopment an proucton costs. Instea, te prmarysource of ncome s erve from censng to oter proucers o se te en-prouct uner fferent brans to consumers. Te nerent rsk of tgatonresutng from patent nfrngements (conserng, as state before, tat many ICTproucts empoy tecnooges protecte by many fferent patents) s reuce by

8 Tratonay operatng companes ou n ts context enote companes t a snge arge R&d epartmentc orks ony for te irm t s part of, c eveops te nnovatons, as tem patente, an ans tem over to proucton an marketng, from ere tey are so t a proit margn to en-users.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 39 17-01-2008 11:10:12



40


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



enterng nto cross-censng agreements. Uner suc agreements, arge irms ante congomerate of jont-ventures an spn-outs uner ter contro vaue eacoters IP portfoo an agree to use eac oters IP. To te extent tat tey are of equa vaue, use be at no cost; f tey are of unequa vaue, te irm onng te

oer-vaue IP poo compensate te oter irms. In aton, a partes agreeto refran from pressng carges for nvua patents (or oter IP ttes) c arepart of te portfoos.

IPR tus pays a cruca roe for makng open nnovaton constructons ork n abusness context. In fact, te usage of IPR may be consere to prove te bassfor ne forms of busness moes. Agan, te coce of a irm regarng te extentto c t enters R&d coaboratons s a strategc one, an epen on testrengts an eaknesses of ts tecnoogy an IP portfoo. Sometmes t may bebetter to cense tecnoogy from someone ese; sometmes t may be better toeveop ones on an try to keep key knoege secret; sometmes t s better torevert to efensve pubsng (for ts purpose, for exampe, some arge irms sucas SIEMENS pubs ter on journas – see aso secton 3.2.2); oter tmes t maybe te best coce to create a spn-out company togeter t a compettor. Tekey ratonae ben suc ecsons s, oever, aays te same: To maxmserevenue by esgnng a orkabe busness moe usng fferent forms of IPR anIP protecton metos as bung bocks ereby te nvua poston of tecompany n te market s taken nto account.

3.6 Lessons learned for SMEs: IPR Managementand business models matter

Te preceng anayss as son severa tngs: Frst, LSEs pretty muc face tesame probems concernng te costs of te IPR system (toug tese costconsttutes a esser buren); tey, too, fear tgaton. Secony, tose companesave to be e aare of ter on IPR (an tat of ter compettors) an coseter IPR actons carefuy, epenng on te company’s stuaton. Makng te IPRstrategy a knon an a ve practce trougout te company s seen as a

caenge.Te stuaton for SMEs seems to be not tat fferent: SMEs in temseves aso nverse market postons (epenng on ter tecnoogy an IP stanng) an aveto react to t accorngy (toug te reacton an IPR strategy mgt ook fferent,ue to te fferent resources at sposa (e.g., t respect to coaboratve R&dprojects t arge companes SMEs mgt in temseves presse more to ave astrong IPR protecton before tey enter negotatons)). we practcay most of testuy evence ponts to a market faure regarng te IPR system an ts usage bySMEs prmary ue to ts g costs (especay n Europe), t seems aso cear – after a more toroug anayss – tat te stuaton s far more compex. It may e be,for exampe, tat a SME ins tsef – IPR-se an espte te cost barrer – n amuc better poston tan many arge companes, f t cevery makes use of te IPRan nforma IP protecton toos avaabe. In te most extreme case, SMEs canaopt a busness moe ere tey soey rey on acqurng foregn IPR (toutnvestng n R&d temseves) ony to afterars treaten potenta nfrngers tattey press carges. In many suc cases, te spute be sette out of courtan te sung company (te so-cae “patent tro”; see aso text box beo) obtan royates.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 40 17-01-2008 11:10:12



41

S M E s I N T H E

I P R w O R L D

The patent tro as an SME-afine eampe of ne IPR-reated

busness modes

Te term “patent tro” bascay escrbes a patent oner, often a SME, tat

enforces patent rgts aganst accuse nfrngers, but oes not actuayprouce or suppy servces base on te patents n queston. Tougeintons of te terms vary, a key consttutng factor seems to be especaytat te tros are n a poston to negotate censng fees c are grossyout of agnment t ter contrbuton to te aege nfrnger’s prouct or servce.

Beng a patent tro s actuay not unafu as suc. Proponents of patenttros unerne tat suc companes ncrease te quty of IP by provnga reay market for patents c te respectve nventors cannot expot or commercaze. Furtermore, patent tros are sa to factate ega access toIP by poong (censng, aggregatng) patents governng a certan tecnoogyfrom fferent orgns/nventors. Fnay, a postve nluence on nnovaton sascertane as te tro’s actvtes are sa to prove ncentves for te

makng, an pubc scosure, of ne nventons.By contrast, crtcs pont to te ncrease costs for manufacturers tat neeto be taken account of as a precautonary measure, ue to te possbty of avng to pay royates for IP not one. Tey aso pont to ger costs for prouct eveopers, because patent atabases ave to be montore morecosey. A n a, patent tro SMEs can be gy successfu on ter on aneven mportant because of market-functonng conseratons, but tey are nturn aso a potenta treat to oter companes – be t SMEs or argeenterprses.

Te mpcatons for SMEs seem to be treefo:

• SMEs shoud be at the ast aare of the IPR system. Even f tey on’tuse forma IPR, t s st avsabe tat tey montor te IPR envronment of tebusness reguary. Ts s especay true for SMEs operatng n hg-Tecsectors, but even for nustres ere patents o not yet pay a roe t couprove epfu to stay aert – gven te tenency tat te borers beteentratona nustres get ncreasngy burre an te tenency tat over tmemore an more types of nnovatons ten to become subject to some type of IPR regme.

• SMEs shoud adopt a strategy on IPR and ntegrate t nto overa

(nnovaton) management. SMEs sou be, as a pre-requste, abe toassess te vaue of ter IP. Ts ou mpy tat tey aso are abe to conser o to put IP to ts best use. Te key ssue t an IPR strategy s tat t maynot (ony) be a protecton strategy, but t can aso consttute a ne ay of ong busness.

• There shoud be by no means a predsposton toards patentng.Patentng s ony one of te toos avaabe for usng IP (rater tan onyprotectng IP), an nforma toos, suc as trae secrets or efensve pubsngave a rgtfu pace tn te current IPR frameork. Patents may be teprmary coce on many or peraps even most occasons – but to patenttout proper rsk assessment an t no means to tgate cou provesastrous. Smary, patentng tout a proper e-eine goa cou eato money beng aste.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 41 17-01-2008 11:10:12



43

T H E P O L I C Y A G E N D A F O R S M E S – I S S U E S T O B E A D D R E S S E D I N T H E S T U D Y A

N D B E Y O N D4 The policy agenda for SMEs –

Issues to be addressed in the

study and beyond

4.1 Lessons learned for policy makersIn secton tree t as son tat successfuy copng t IP an IPR s consereto be a crtca factor for a number of nustres, an of ncreasng mportance for many of te rest. It as aso son tat a company, be t an SME or a argeenterprse, as to be fuy aare of IP an IPR ssues surrounng ts busness. Itsou eay mpement a rater broa IP an IPR strategy, embee nto overannovaton an busness management. Gven te many functons te IPR systemoffers toay, te ratonae ben formuatng an IPR strategy sou be maxmsngproits, rater tan ony protectng IP. Ts seems to nterock irmy t reatvey

ne IPR-base busness moes an mgt mpy a cange of mnsets an cuturesregarng te use of IPR by SMEs: It s not te IPR tsef tat actuay counts, but testrategy an busness moe ben ts usage. For pocy makers actng n tecurrent IPR frameork, ts as a number of mportant mpcatons:

• Tere s no undsputed postve reatonshp beteen the number of

tmes an IP protecton method (or an IPR too) s used and the

nnovaton performance, or even furter, te busness performance of enterprses. As ing patents mgt prove to be usefu as e as armfu to acompany, pocy makers sou refran from usng patent statstcs as a “true”measure of nnovaton performance an keep te mtatons escrbe nvarous stues n mn.

• Te crtca success factor s the empoyment of an optma and

quaied m of dfferent IP protecton toos. Aareness an kno-o

regarng te usage of a IP protecton metos are tus pre-requstes, ante avaabty of suc knoege to a reevant payers an stakeoers,ncung SMEs, support servce provers, an oters, sou be a goa. Tsnoton of aareness s someat fferent from aareness of te bascfunctons an proceures surrounng patents. It covers not ony tecnca anega kno-o (.e., knoege on “o to patent”) but aso busness kno-o (“y to patent”) (see aso secton .4.1).

• depenng on te busness moe empoye, company sze s not necessarya prmary enabng / nbtng factor for usng IPR. Exampes can be foun of arge enterprses c manage IPR bay, an exampes can aso be foun of SMEs c cope e t IPR. Te exstence of bot exampes supports amore fferentate ve of te barrers anayse as tey concern te usagean non-usage of IPR by SMEs.

• At te same tme, te possbty cannot be gnore tat te barrersdentied n these studes pont to a market faure of the IPR

system regardng SMEs. Ts ou necesstate pocy nterventon. Of ate barrers entie, t s especay te costs an te reate tgaton ssuesc are strkng. Gven te ger costs of patents n Europe (as compareto te US an Japan), measures to reuce te costs (e.g., by usng subses or by cangng te IPR frameork) seem justiabe. hoever, n gt of te oter aspects escrbe above, t s questonabe eter subses aone be abeto mprove sgnicanty SMEs’ usage of IPR. Care s neee n te esgn of aservce offerng inanca support for te ing of patents.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 43 17-01-2008 11:10:12



44


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



4.2 Policy options with regard to SMEsTo better unerstan te overa pocy envronment t s tus mportant to gobeyon te ie of IPR reate pocy an ncue aso te area of nnovatonsupport, ger eucaton an researc pocy. Interestngy, a number of paraesbeteen tese pocy ies can be reveae c creates opportuntes for synerges. Tabe 3 sts te pocy optons avaabe to pocy makers n te ie of IPR to boost IPR usage performance by SMEs. hoever, a coser ook reveas tatmost of tese pocy optons are generc n nature an cover a er range of ssuesto support nnovatons create by sma irms.

It sou be note, toug, tat synergy ies are aso key to be potenta iesof conlct – from an nsttutona pont of ve, for exampe, attempts by tofferent organsatons to ntegrate ter respectve overappng servce portfoosnto one snge portfoo mgt enta competton beteen tose parts of teorgansatons c ave smar servce offerngs. As a matter of fact, tecompetton or conlct moe may be rater te excepton tan te rue. Mosty,te reatons beteen te nsttutons provng te respectve servces (IPR-reatevs. nnovaton-reate) ave emonstrate mutua soaton, but, ncreasngy,

coaboraton s emergng beteen tem, base on vson of abour. In somecases, te respectve nsttutons ave broaene ter portfoos by ntegratngatona servces or servce components. In te best case, ts enargement /ntegraton s use to ncrease te aareness of IPR ssues on te se of tennovaton agency an vce versa, an serve as a bass for nsttutonacoaboraton.

Tabe 3 summarses a range of evence coecte from numerous evauatons of government programmes an measures. It as ts focus on te organsatonaaspect of nsttutons, partcuary en aressng aspects suc as “nee / marketfaure” an “justicaton” as te nput nto te pocy process, “strengts”, an“mtatons” as tose varabes tat etermne te proie an performance of teservces eventuay evere.

Furtermore, from an nsttutona perceptve, te manfo aspects of provng

IPR support servces to SMEs, as ncate n Tabe 3, gve rse to te queston of coaboraton as e as conlcts an bnd spots. we conlcts manyreuce eficency, te exstence of bn spots eas to a more serous consequence,namey of mssed opportuntes. Tus, n te searc for prncpes of goopractce, () te arctecture of nsttutona reatonsps an () reate ssues of goo governance are te most crtca ssues to conser. Accorngy, temensons ste beo are to be anayse:

Contet

Ts set of factors escrbes te overa nsttutona vson of abour ncung temutua reatonsps beteen te nvove nsttutons. Te atter can take severaforms:

• Governmenta nsttutons (many mnstres), takng over te roes of prncpas vs-à-vs RTdI agences, patent ofices etc. Uner very genera

contons, tese prncpas typcay move nto te notorous asymmetrybeteen te prncpa an te agent. we te former rees on ts formapoer, te atter erves ts poer by te accumuate knoege annformaton as e as te but-up netorks an reatonsps. Accorngy, tebaance beteen te prncpa an te agents s an omnpresent ssue n termsof te quaty of governance an te orgn of synerges, conlcts, an bnspots.

• Natona patent ofices. Tey exbt by far te ongest traton. Largeparts of ter sef-percepton are etermne by ter monopostc poston asa soveregn autorty. durng te ast ecae many of te natona patentofices cange ter poston an roe nto a servce-orente organsaton. As

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 44 17-01-2008 11:10:12



46


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



a consequence, tey ncue atona servces an functons nto ter tratona portfoo. To of te most caengng aspects n ts transformatonare () ter openness to IPR protecton an expotaton beyon formametos, an () ter co-ornaton an coaboraton t oter nsttutons,

partcuary t RTdI agences.• (Natona) RDI agences, regona deveopment agences. In terms of

reac an scope (an sze), tey are te nners urng te ast 10 to 20 yearsof RTdI pocy eveopment. In most nustrase countres, tey act as tecentra ‘market paces’ for everng a e range of researc an nnovatonreate servces. Accorngy, tey ave very muc contrbute to anbeneite from te above mentone prncpa-agent-asymmetry. Interestngy,t s rater te rue tan te excepton tat te reatonsp beteen te orof IPR an genera nnovaton support s rater eak – probaby fostere byte monopoy of patent ofices.

• The prvate sector . Te most reevant group n te prvate sector are patentattorneys, patent nformaton irms an busness consutants. Tey typcay actas brokers or oman specasts, provng n-ept consutancy, many on

ega, tecnca, an management matters. due to ter prvate status, ter portfoo of servces s rater seectve, nsofar as tey cannot affor toseservces c are often pubcy supporte, suc as aareness or tranngscemes. A qute recent type of prvate-sector actor s te so-cae patent tro,c combnes a tree quaicatons (ega, tecnca an busness), typcayactng as a sma company tat enforces patent rgts aganst accusenfrngers, but oes not manufacture proucts or suppy servces base on tepatents n queston.

Interna organsaton, portfoo of servces, practces

durng te ast to ecaes, most f not a nnovaton reate pocy nsttutonsave been nspre by te concept of “systems of nnovaton”, base on teassumpton tat te performance of a gven nsttuton s mosty etermne by teovera system arctecture an ts poston tn te nsttutona anscape.Nottstanng ts, tere s a qute pausbe assumpton tat te nternacaracterstcs of nsttutons are omnant over te scope of servces an teperformance of ter every. Accorngy, te nterna (erarcca) structure of te respectve nsttutons, ter strateges, ter practces, te composton of ter servces, an not te east ter key staff outeg te nluence of te roe of ter poston n te nsttutona system.

As regars te nterna vson of abour, t s ecsve, eter te nsttutons(partcuary patent ofices an RTdI agences) are organse eter accorng () tonstruments or reated (casses of) servces, empassng te omogenetyof provson or () base on specic target groups, empassng te omogenetyof utsaton. Obvousy, te orentaton toar target groups proves better pre-contons to aopt ne or exstng IPR reate servces or to co-operate t trpartes rater tan te vson of abour base on nstruments or servces.

Furtermore, te portfoo of te servces prove by an nsttuton etermnes tereaness to aopt ne servces. As regars RTdI agences, tere s a strongncaton of a broaenng of te portfoo. Not unke RTdI agences, patent oficesaso ten to enarge ter portfoo, oever by fferentatng ter exstngservces (aareness campagns, tranng, pro-actve support).

Fnay, te quaty of practces, empoye n te respectve agences, sape teays n c ne servces are aopte, mpemente, an prove: Neeassessment, montorng, quaty assurance, an evauaton are te most reevantmensons as regars te professonasaton of servces. As regars pocy cuture– partcuary pocy pannng, montorng an evauaton, RTdI agences aregeneray more avance as compare to te tratona patent ofices. Tefference as to o t te more ynamc envronment an a ger eve of

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 46 17-01-2008 11:10:13



47

T H E P O L I C Y A G E N D A F O R S M E S – I S S U E S T O B E A D D R E S S E D I N T H E S T U D Y A

N D B E Y O N D

competton of te RTdI agences, an te monopostc status of te patentofices.

Hstory

hstory matters n many regars. Te most reevant factor s tout oubt te

exstence of preecessor servces, because tese, by nature, create earmarkebugets, forma responsbtes an job escrptons, structures, an a centee of stakeoers. Often, ts eas nto ock-n stuatons, ere future rectonsan ecsons are to a arge extent etermne by past rectons an ecsons,an tus story affects te percepton of ne opportuntes an nees.

Paraoxcay, e can assume tat nterna organsaton an tus (past) vson of abour generay etermne te aopton of ne servces an te aaptaton of exstng servces to a ger egree tan “ratona” reasonng.

Peope & staff

we tere s tte evence for te ea of story as te “story of great men”,tere s penty of evence on te ecsve roe of experence staff for te scopean quaty of te servces, rrespectve of te servce uner conseraton.Moreover, as te task of IPR s concerne, tree nterconnecte areas of knoege

an experence are crtca: tecnoogy / oman knoege, management –partcuary of ntangbe assets, an ega affars. Gven a number of restrctons nte pubc sector regarng ncome, career opportuntes, an job avancement,tere are, obvousy, specic restrctons n te recrutment an eveopment of gy quaie staff. As a consequence, te ‘job envronment’ – tus te ocatontn te overa nsttuton – tens to be a crtca factor n te performance of terespectve servces.

As regars to te genera avaabty of staff, te exstence of so-cae patent trolls ncates te genera possbty of teamng up tese stnct competences,prove tere s te expectaton of job satsfacton (te motvatng factor) anfuture ncome (te ygene factor).

Seectng the rght nsttutons, content and busness modes

Puttng a etermnants togeter – te e-knon sogan of “puttng te rgtpeope at te rgt pace” – ses gt on te oe ssue of organsng teprovson of nnovaton support servces.

One major aspect s te denticaton and seecton of the rght nsttutons,takng nto account te omnatng roe of past practce an experence an tuste scope an content of te ne or aapte IPR support servce. Ceary, a broaer an more ntegrate approac s more supportve tan te provson of servcesaressng ony specic aspects of te or of IPR.

Te oter major aspect s access to and recrutng of eperenced staff .Experence staff can compensate for te savantage of servces ocate at teperpery of te provng nsttuton or prove troug coaboratve actvtes.

As a matter of fact, te a pror einton an specicaton of IPR s crtca for tespecicaton of nees, ts transaton nto servce specicaton, seecton of teproper pace n te unverse of nsttutons an, not te east, seecton anrecrutng of proper staff. Tratonay, IPR support servces are amng at teproceura aspects of regsterng patents an tus of “o to patent”9. Moreavance IPR support servces (sou) aress te ssue of “y an f to patent”an “o to expot nteectua assets” rater tan to protect tem. Accorngy,te (mpct) “busness mode” strongy etermnes at s consere asprorty, te competeness of servce caracterstcs, an expecte outcomes anmpacts.

9 Te mpct pocy ben te “o to patent” approac s often “more patentng”. we estate to foo tese argu-ments, as e observe a msuse of countng of patents as an ncator of tecnoogca avancement or compettve-ness of irms, regons, an of natons, c, at te en, s ong a sservce to te ssue of te roe of nteectuapropertes.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 47 17-01-2008 11:10:13



48


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Unerstanng actua practces sou tus be at te begnnng an at te en of unerstanng an nvestgatng te (mpct) “busness modes” of te nvovestakeoers.

Pocy devery and the roe of geography, coaboraton as an opportunty

to brdge spata dstancePocy every an te roe of ocaton factors as become a crtca ssue n te pastecae. Paraoxcay, t te unpreceente ffuson of nternet-basenformaton an reate servces, te ncrease of te regona menson of RTdIpocy s one of te most strkng features of te ast 10 to 1 years.

As regars IPR support to SMEs a number of ssues emerge tat are reevant n teenticaton of goo practce n supportng SMEs n IRP affars. Te mostpromnent one s a certan oss of terran of Natona Patent Ofices to tebeneit of European patents. Ts cange as trggere a re-tnkng of ter roesan, as a consequence, te aunc of specic, more customer-orente servces atte eve of NPOs. At te same tme, regona deveopment agences boometo an extent c mgt be questone, takng unres of ‘epng ans’ for apopuaton of one mon nabtants rater as te rue tan te excepton.

Fnay, te queston of coaboraton amongst specased nsttutons arses.Tere s qute some evence tat NPOs act as a source of specase knoegec can be fe nto te broaer portfoo of servces of RTdI an/or regonaeveopment agences. here e in favourabe opportuntes for feeng n anbenng a broa range of specasts an specase servces n te ie of generabusness management an reate support, an knoege management t afocus on IPR, prove eter by pubc nsttutons or prvate irms, ncungpatent attorneys.

Pubc vs. prvate: The roe of patent attorneys, the crodng out ssue

Atoug tere s some evence tat te provson of pubc nnovaton supportservces as treatene to cro out prvate servces, partcuary tose of prvateconsutants, te overa pcture s to te contrary. It s rater caracterse bymssed opportuntes and bnd spots. Tey presumaby resut from a too-

narro einton an percepton of IPR t a too-strong focus on rghts rater tan on propertes. Even more, ony a mnorty of servces aress te questonof “y patentng”. Rater, tey ep gue te strugge troug te aegeamnstratve junge.

Anoter aspect, c agan resuts from te narro einton of IPR, s temssed opportuntes from non-coaboraton. It can be seen ater n testuy tat, n searc for goo practce, te overemng majorty of entiegoo practces are prove n coaboraton, benng te specates of stnctnsttutons.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 48 17-01-2008 11:10:13



0


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



By appyng te ncuson crtera state above, te researc team as abe toentfy 279 support servces n te ie of IPR for SMEs, 224 of c ereoperate n Europe.10 A furter servces ere entie overseas. despte tetoroug anayss an rgorous quaty assurance mecansms n pace (.e., te

compe st as cross-cecke t IPR experts an vaate by te Group of Senor Oficas for Innovaton from te European Commsson), competeness of te st can not be guarantee11. Tabe 4 proves a breakon of te number of entie servces by country.

One mportant observaton concernng te entie servces s tat te number

of servces vares greaty th countres. Te g varaton s ue to te fact

10 Te number of servces may evate sgty from te number of servces n te pubse eectronc atabase, as teatabase as at te en of te stuy upate to e.g. ncue some ne IPR servces c ere not operatona atte tme of te anayss.

11 An mportant preconton for a servce to be consere n te stuy arose from te ngness of te servceprover to cooperate t te stuy team. Furter on, t became event urng te progress of te researc, tatmany countres ere n te process of esgnng ne servces (especay servces tat tacke te ssue of protectngnteectua property an eang t counterfetng n Cna), c a at te tme of nvestgaton not beenoperatona. Tese servces are tus mosty not part of te uneryng nvestgaton, ue to te ack of a track recorfor te consecutve anayss.

Tabe 4 Number of dentied support servces for SMEs n the ied of IPR,by country

country number of services

Austraa 31 Austra 14

Begum 3Bugara 4Canaa 11Cyprus 1Czec Repubc 10denmark Estona Fnan 10France 6Germany 17Greece hungary 20Irean 4Itay 8

Japan 8Latva 1Lectensten 2Ltuana 10Luxembourg 4Mata 1Noray 3Poan 23Portuga 2Romana 13Sovaka 11Sovena 3Span 12Seen 7Te Neterans 4Turkey 3Unte Kngom 12USA 6TOTAL 279Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 50 17-01-2008 11:10:14



1

T O w A R D S G O O D

P R A C T I C E S – T H E R E A L w O R L D O F I P R S U P P O

R T S E R V I C E S

tat many servces are offere as packages, t often one servce consstng of severa sub-servces. Te ecson, eter suc an ntegrate servce as counteas one servce or eter a portfoo of nvua servces as entere nto teatabase epene on te scope of te nvua sub-servces, te ay tese

servces ere markete an te overa organsatona context (e.g., te type of organsaton offerng te servces).

Taken togeter, t sou be note tat te number of servces entie sounot be taken as an absoute count, gven tat eac researc team nvove as keyfferenty mae te vson beteen “package servces” an “unpackage-stanaone” offerngs n nvua cases. Moreover, t sou be kept n mn tat ts sa ynamc ie t servces beng create, merge, spt an sut on constantyover tme. Noneteess, te resutng measure gves a fary reabe orer of magntue estmate of te number of servces avaabe.

Te majorty of te servces entie are targete at regstrabe IPR. As Grap 6ncates, 90 % of te servces offer support regarng patents, 69 % concernregstere esgns, 67 % concern regstere trae marks an 41 % offer supportreate to oter regstrabe IP rgts (e.g., utty moes). Te ast to categores

– non-regstrabe rgts (37 %) an nforma protecton practces (18 %) – aremuc ess prevaent.

Tese igures are not surprsng gven te patent focus of te researc esgn.hoever, statements by researc partners an experts n severa countres suggesttat tese resuts ou more or ess o even f te scope of te enticatonprocess ou be ene an a avaabe servces offere n te ie of unregstrabe IPR an nforma protecton practces ere ncue n te enticatonprocess.

Te anayss of te support servces aso sos tat 3% of te servces ereecate expcty to SMEs. Most of te servces (80 %) ere offere natonean about 20 % ere offere at a regona eve.

Furter more, as Grap 7 sos, te majorty of te servces entie (about74 %) aress te pase of eveopment an regstraton of an IP protecton

nstrument. Te preceng pase (researc on nnovatve projects an reate IPR(e.g., pror art searces)) s supporte by aroun af of te servces; 37 % of teservces ea t te acquston of exstng IPR; an 60 % t te actua usagean expotaton of IPR. Te g focus of te servces on regstraton ssues s evenmore apparent f one ooks at te actua servce escrptons: In many cases, servce

Graph 6 Degree of ega formaty of IP protecton methods covered by theservces dentied, percentage of servces *)

90

69

67

18

3741

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

patents designs trademarks other registrable IPRs

non-registrableIPRs

informal protectionpractices

%

*) Multiple counts allowed

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, n = 279

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 51 17-01-2008 11:10:14



2


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



eements coverng especay te ater stages of IPR usage seem to be of ess scopean sgnicance n te overa servce context tan te parts eang tregstraton an eveopment. Many servces target mutpe pases of IPR usage atte same tme.

Te fact tat a rater arge quantty of servces come n te form of ntegratepackages causes severe mutpe-countng probems en tryng to cassfy teseservces. In prncpe, one cou stngus beteen embedded servces (tat s,IPR servces tat are part of a servce portfoo ere te portfoo tsef s nottargete at te ssue of IPR) an truy ntegrated IPR servces (ere severa IPRservces suc as a subsy, nformaton matera on IPR an tranng n IPR matterstogeter form a arger IPR servce portfoo). An exampe of an embee servcecou be a tematc support programme n te ie of botecnoogy, ere R&dprojects are supporte an a sma servce eement eas t IPR consutng.Smary, IPR avce offere n ncubators an tecnoogy parks can be aso seen asembee servces.

Severa optons exst on o to cassfy suc servces, ncung tose pre-eveopeby te wor Inteectua Property Insttuton (wIPO) an by te European

Commsson (see Tabe ). Foong an nta assessment by te researc partners,an a reve of te avaabe nformaton–especay te quatatve servceescrptons –, t as ece to use te wIPO einton as a bass for cassicatonan revse t sgty for te scope of te uneryng stuy. Te goa as to eveopa cassicaton system t a mnmum amount of mutpe counts, a compreensvenumber of categores an t a abeng system c, on one an, provesmore nformaton on te type of actvtes mpemente by te servces an, on teoter an, relects te rea or of servce provson (n te sense of evence-base pocy anayss).

Tus, te cassicaton system appe n te scope of te uneryng stuystnguses beteen ive fferent categores (“functona cassicaton system”):

1. (Pro-active) awareness raising activities and public relations: Ts servcetype actvey aresses an/or contacts SMEs an promotes teusage of te IPR system. Servces of ts type are usuay roa sos,open ays, exbtons, etc.

2. (Passive) information provision services: Tese servces provenformaton on a stan-by bass for ntereste SMEs, suc as patentnformaton centres, searc servces n atabases, etc.

3. Training: Ts category subsumes a eucatona actvtes n IPRmatters ere SMEs o beneit to a arger proporton.

Graph 7 Phase of IPR usage targeted, percentage of servces *)

49

60

37

74

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

%

research on innovativeprojects and related IPRs

process of development/registration of IPRs

acquisition of existing IPRs

utilisation of IPRs


Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, n = 279

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 52 17-01-2008 11:10:15



3



R T S E R V I C E S

4. Customized in-depth consulting and advisory points/services: Servces nts category go muc more nto te etas of IP protecton an offer customze support to SMEs. Ts category often conces tntegrate servces ose broaer scope mpes an approac

nvuay taore to te nees of partcuar SMEs.5. Financial assistance & legal framework: Ts category ncues servce

offerngs n te ie of inanca subses (many for te regstratonof patents) an/or n te oman of tax provsons SMEs can beneitfrom an c are a on n te natona ega frameorks.

Ts “functona” system as te avantage tat t s qute specic on tenstruments empoye by te servces an ter functons/ams. By contrast, te

wIPO einton tens to mx up nstruments an pases of usage (for exampe, an“assstance for IP expotaton” servce mgt aso be n ts very nature a “customzeavsory servce on IP”). Te “functona” approac, beng base on broaemprca observatons n te course of ts stuy, may aso ea to sgty essoube an mutpe counts. An t proves a cear stnctve category for teinanca an ega frameork measures, as oppose to te rater eterogeneous

nformaton servces, a feature suggeste by te resuts of a custer anayssperforme on te entie servces n te scope of te uneryng stuy.

Grap 8 proves a frequency count of te entie servces consere reevantfor te foong researc steps12 accorng to ts functona evence-base

12 Ony tose servces ere ncue, for c tere ere suficent ncatons tat tey may spay eements of goopractce t regar to te stuy goas (210 servces).

Tabe 5 Pre-deveoped cassicaton systems for IPR support servces for SMEs

wIPO CassicatonCassicaton accordng to the

Commsson Staff workng Paper

1. Aareness-rasng an tranng on IP 1. Recepton, factes an bascnformaton,referra

2. Tecnoogca nformaton servces 2. Professona nformaton servces3. Fnanca assstance 3. Avce an rect support

4. Customze avsory servces on IP 4. SME-specic tranng. Assstance for IP expotaton an

tecnoogy transfer . Fnance

6. Premses7. SME-specic strategc measures

Sources: WIPO 2003a, 2004; European Commission 2001

Graph 8 Functona evdence-based cassicaton, percentage of servces

Customised in-depthconsulting services

Informationprovision services

Proactiveawareness raising

TrainingFinance &legalframework

3 9

8

15

303 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

%

*) Multiple counts allowed, n =210

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 53 17-01-2008 11:10:15



4


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



cassicaton system. By appyng ts categorsaton, 39 % of te servces are n teoman of inance an ega frameork. 31 % are customze n-ept consutngservces, an aroun 28 % are (passve) nformaton provson servces. Pro-actveaareness-rasng actvtes make up 1 % of te entie servces. Surprsngy,

tranng servces account for ony 9 % of te measures. Ts o sare mgtncate a ack of respectve servce offerngs – c as n ater researc pasesaso corroborate by te experts ntervee.

despte of te mutpe count ssues, te functona cassicaton system ams tooffer – togeter t te frequency count of Grap 8 – a compreensve overveof te man actvty areas of IPR support servces for SMEs. It as to be rememberetat ts cassicaton tres to be as evence-base as possbe, an as suc t oesnot necessary relect a te pocy optons avaabe. An, gven te mutpe countprobem, one cou st argue for sgty fferent cassicatons.

In fact, f pocy makers ou ece to ncrease te varety of servces n certanactvty ies, e ecreasng te number n oter ies, te cassicaton systemou ave to be upate n orer to better relect te cange structure. Casesn pont are, for exampe, te currenty observabe rse of support servces c

ea t counterfetng ssues n Cna (an a number of oter emergng markets)an c offer support on-ste. Sub servces cou very muc form a cass of ter on n te future, f more of tese are to be estabse. Te same cou aso appyto fostere ypotetca IPR tgaton nsurance scemes, or equay ypotetcastate-supporte patent poos for SMEs.13

In te foong bencmarkng exercse an n te goo practce anayss, ueaccount of te cassicaton system be taken n orer to ao for performanceassessments n stnctve actvty areas, tout gvng a preference to specicservce types n avance. Some generc servce types (c are subsume uner one of te ive eangs) be, noneteess, scusse separatey as tey avepecuartes c pocy makers, o s to set up smar servces, ouprobaby nee to aress.

5.2 Looking for gold:The benchmarking process

5.2.1 The selection process for the benchmarking phase

Te 210 servces cassie accorng to te functona cassicaton system serveas a poo for te next pase of te researc exercse, te bencmarkng proceure.Te am of te bencmarkng proceure as to measure te performance of teservces n queston an to snge out canates an prncpes of goo practce.Tese 210 servces ere ntay consere asprng canates c cou maket nto te next researc pase. Te ina seecton as ten mae by torougyscrutnsng te avaabe nformaton an appyng te foong seecton crtera:

1. Clear- and soundness of the objectives of the service stated: Te servce as toave ceary entiabe goas from c SMEs cou beneit an c ere

sensbe n te stuy context (e.g., tey aresse an mportant IPR-reatessue an ere state n suc a ay tat tey cou be aceve).

2. Clearness of the service design and service offerings: Te organsaton an temoes of operaton ere to matc te servce goas, an, eay, aso nt atan effectve an eficent moe of operaton.

3. Focus on registrable IP protection methods: Te servces ere to ave a focus onregstrabe IPR. Ts requrement s n ne te am of te uneryng stuy, butt aso keeps track of te inng tat most servces focus on regstrabe IPRanyay.

13 See te respectve recommenatons of Kngston, 2000 an Moun & Tue, 200.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 54 17-01-2008 11:10:15





R T S E R V I C E S

4. Level of innovation employed: Servces c empoye ne ays of pursungcertan goas ere especay ooke nto, as respectve experences couprove vauabe nsgt nto promsng nove ays of offerng IPR support toSMEs.

5. Take-up by SMEs and or other available performance measures: In te seectonprocess, conserabe empass as pace on nformaton concernng teactua performance of te servce, as ncate, for exampe, by te SME take-up, avaabe evauaton resuts, te reputaton of te servce, or any oter avaabe performance igures. Overa, te servce as to ave a proven trackrecor.

6. Country context: Ts seecton crteron as put n pace n orer to accountfor fferent stages of economc eveopment (foong te assumpton tatess eveope countres mgt nee fferent types of IPR support servcestan eveope countres) an, smary, to account for fferences n countrysze.

7. Policy context: Ts crteron refers to te ay te servce nteracts t oter nnovaton support measures, nsttutons an servces.

In tota, 72 servces ere subjecte to te bencmarkng process. Of te 72servces, t as possbe to obtan 66 orkabe questonnares from te servceprovers.

5.2.2 Benchmarking criteria – dimensions along whichthe performance of services can be assessedon a comparative basis

In anaysng a eterogeneous set of support servces an etermnng eter onesupport servce s ong better tan anoter, t s necessary to ensure, on one an,tat te measures use ao for comparsons among a types of servces anayse,an on te oter an tat te measures aso take nto account servce an contextspecic moes of acton c contrbute to te success of te servce an are notmmeatey entiabe as suc by an outse person. It s cear tat no snge

performance ncator can fui tese functons smutaneousy.Nottstanng ts, tere are a number of requrements c ave beenrepeatey entie n researc an terature an c a pocy nterventon (bet a pocy tsef, or a support servce or programme erve from t) must meet norer to be consere successfu (Freea et a., 2004): Te pocy nterventonas to be necessary (tere as to be a market faure c nees to be aresse)an achievable (c reates foremost to ork one n te esgn pase of tenterventon). It aso as to be manageable (ts reates to te abty to quckyrespon to canges n te frameork contons of a servce), measurable (oneougt to kno eter a servce s currenty performng e or not; ence, tenecessty of a montorng system), connectable (te measure must be abe to reacout to key stakeoers an target groups an nteract t tem) an, eventuay,t as to prove an added value . Te atter aspect emans tat a pocy acton/

support servce sou aceve sometng c ou oterse not aveappene at a (pure atonaty) or ou ave appene to a esser extent (e.g., ater n te future). A furter requrement can be seen n te fact tat experencesgatere sou ao for long-term learning.

Te so-cae policy cycle model s, especay n Europe, a generay accepte ay of tackng te requrements outne above; t s beeve (an tere s penty of evence to ts en) tat pocy nterventons of a sorts c foo te cyccmoe perform better tan nterventons c pursue oter ays of acevngter goas. Te moe suggests tat a pocy nterventon eay stngusestree pases, eac accompane by evauatons c assess o e te servces performng n tat partcuar pase (Raauer & Znöcker, 2006):

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 55 17-01-2008 11:10:15



6


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



• In te design phase , amongst oters, te nee for te nterventon an ots nterventon sou be esgne s assesse, te goas are state, tenstruments t c to tacke te probem are consere, an te possbeoutcome s gauge.

• In te implementation phase , attenton s pa to te ay operaton of teservce, suc as can be seen n te amount of overeas nvove, te nes of responsbty, te compexty of nterna communcaton los, te operatonof avaabe montorng systems or te ay an extent to c marketngactvtes are carre out.

• Te results phase focuses on te performance of te servce, e.g. n terms of aceve goas t respect to te target group. Lessons earne form te ex-post evauaton tackng ts ssue are ten use for te esgn of a nefoong pocy nterventon or moicaton of te exstng. As a consequence,te cyce s restarte from te begnnng.

Te systematc approac of te pocy cyce moe (t ts cose aerence toevauatons) – togeter t te entie frameork contons – etermne testructure of te system of bencmarkng ncators c as eveope for te

purpose of te uneryng anayss. Te ncators eveope are to relect tefferent eements of te pocy cyce. In te context of IPR support servces; tsmeans tat stnctve groups of ncators ave to separatey aress te treepocy pases outne above. At te same tme, te ncators ave to take accountof te specics of IPR. Te atter aspect as a speca caenge regarng teesgn of performance ncators. As as been son n preceng capters, te

Tabe 6 Overve of mportant benchmarkng ndcators used for assessng theperformance of the IPR support system

Benchmarkng dmensons and benchmarkng crtera

Development and design

expert nput preparaton tme sounness of te goa system

stakeoer nput exstence of a preecessor servce bugets aocateex-ante assessments exstence of target igures uman resources empoye (quatyan quantty)

Implementation

coce of servce offerngorgansaton

reatonsp t natona, regonaan EU poces

eve of ntegraton t oter (IPRan non-IPR) servces of te servceofferng nsttuton

cooperaton patterns beteenfferent epartment unts an/or externa organsatons (vson of ork(contractua agreements)

exstence of n-ouse an externareferra actvtes

eficency of amnstraton

nterm evauatons montorng oter types of quaty assurancemecansms urng mpementatonpase

marketng actvtes geograpca ocaton of servce

provson – spata stance tocustomersPerformance and results

nput: expentures for servceactvtes (e.g. voume of provesubses)

output: Take-up by SMEs (e.g.,number of SME beneicares)

output: Leve of knoege aboutte servce n te target group (e.g.,t rates for eb pages)

output: outcome measures (e.g.,number of patents ie tsupport from te servce)

ae vaue/atonaty cange atttues toars teusage of fferent IP protectonnstruments

reputaton of te servce tnte target group

ncrease aareness of SMEsregarng IPR

genera user satsfacton

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research/Technopolis

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 56 17-01-2008 11:10:16



7



R T S E R V I C E S

usage of fferent IP protecton/utsaton metos (ncung IPR) s gy specicto te busness-envronment n c a irm s operatng.

Tabe 6 sts te most mportant bencmarkng ncators use n te scope of tebencmarkng exercse. For makng tese ncators operatona, an n orer to

account of te eterogenety of te servces anayse, a rater quatatve approacas taken, usng a mx of open-ene an stanarse questons for te esgnof a guene (see aso secton 2.2). Ts guene as appe to an nterve tte respectve servce prover, an to te subsequent assessment of te nformatongatere.

It as to be recae from secton 2.2, toug, tat te bencmarkng ata of pase2 s prmary base on esk researc an foremost on prover perceptons. It canbe argue tat especay te atter mgt ony gve a base (an to an extent asosuperica) ve on te success of a servce. Ts probem s nerent nbencmarkng stues suc as te one conucte, ere tere s a trae-off beteen gettng a compreensve overve an at te same tme provng asmuc etae nformaton as possbe.

hoever, te possbty to conuct user surveys t a sgnicant amount of SMEs

an to nterve more tan one person per servce t regar to stakeoers anIPR experts prove a unque opportunty to g eeper an substantate camsregarng goo practce eements on a muc broaer emprca bass. Furtermore,te user survey aso aoe te enticaton of eements of goo practce cere not reporte as suc by te servce provers.

5.2.3 Selected services to display elementsof good practice

Tabe 7 proves an overve of te seecte servces for case stues use toanayse an emonstrate eements of goo practce, as erve from te scussonan te resuts of te bencmarkng process escrbe n te preceng secton.Te case stues are presente n ose orer – te numberng oes not represent arankng of any type an s use ony for easer referencng. For a fu escrpton of

te case stues, pease refer to annex I of ts report.

5.3 Elements of good practice

5.3.1 A first glance: The quest for good practices(and the regress to elements of good practice)

Te foong secton eaborates on te fferent eements of goo practceentie n te context of IPR servce provson for SMEs. Te scusson ras onone an on te resuts of te bencmarkng exercse (pase 2 of te researc) anon te oter an on seecte resuts of te tr pase, te goo practce anayss.

wt respect to te atter, an as state n secton .2.2, t s especay te user survey tat epe to unerpn ypoteses erve from te bencmarkng process

regarng eements of goo practce.One mgt oner at ts pont y trougout te stuy te term “ eements

of good practce” s use, rater tan smpy te term “goo practces”. Tereason s tat espte te rater arge number of servces entie, “goo” servcesere ar to spot. A very fe seeme to be of outstanng quaty, te restexbte some postve performance features but aso areas for mprovement. As aresut, te noton of goo practce servces as roppe n favour of a noton of unernng servce features c cou, eac for tsef, pose as a bueprnt for teesgn of smar offerngs. Ts approac aso better accounts for te eterogenetyof te servces anayse, an te verse nsttutona an potca contexts teservces are embee n tn eac country.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 57 17-01-2008 11:10:16



TOwARDS GOOD PRACTICES – THE REA

Nr. Tte of the servce Type of servce Comments th respect to servce descrpton and

9 Inteectua Property Assstance Sceme(IPAS) (IRL)

• Customze n-ept consutng an avsoryservces/ponts

• Fnance (& Lega Frameork)

• Fnanca subsy for patent appcatons

• Long-stanng programme (snce te 1970s)• Integrate approac & unqueness

10 Te VIVACEProgramme (hUN)

• (Pro-actve) aareness rasng measures/ PubcReatons

• Tranng

• Exampe of IPR support n an EE context

• Broa approac

• Ltte storc burens to cope t11 SME Servces pf te

Center for PubcResearc henr Tuor (LUX)


• Integrate approac: tranngs, aareness rasng, pubc

• Exampe of at can be one n a sma country

• Expert staff

• Course (dIPS) eas t IPR management on a broa e12 Founaton for Fnns

Inventons (FIN)• Customze n-ept consutng an avsory

servces/ponts


• One-stop-sop for nventors an patentees

• Offers ts servce n regona centres, evere by expert

• Organsatona approac (broa, ntegrate)13 Promoton of Inustra

Property (ESP)• Fnance (& Lega Frameork) • Exampe of at can ork n regona context

• Fnanca subsy for patent appcatons n a regon t

• Compements some oter IPR support measures

• Reatvey g mpact

14 SME Servces of tedans Patent anTrae Mark Ofice(dKPTO) (dEN)

•

Customze n-ept consutng an avsoryservces/ponts•

hg actvty eves of te dans PTO n ts respect• Renon an compreensve ebste

• Operate “IP Score” (IT-base IP assessment too)

• Tranngs courses1 Tecnoogy Netork

Servce–InteectuaProperty (TNS IP)(FRA)



• Operate natone usng a netork of experts t re

• Subsy avaabe for a -ays n-ept consutng regarpatent appcaton, carre out by apponte expert

Tabe 7 Seected Servces for the good practce anayss n Phase 3 (continued)



60


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



5.3.2 Design of the services: History and governance matter

The pocy cyce mode revsted

Te ease pocy cyce moe escrbe n secton .2.2 orks uner te

assumpton tat reguar evauatons are carre out n eac cyce pase – preferabyby an externa evauator – an te nformaton gatere s excange t aactors nvove, especay key stakeoers an pocy makers. In ts context, onecan stngus beteen ex-ante evaluations , interim/on going evaluations an ex-

post evaluations . Evauatons usuay empoy a range of nstruments (mosty a mxof quatatve an quanttatve metos of soca scences) n orer to aceve ter goas, an t s te scope of te ssues aresse, togeter t te metooogyempoye, as e as te aerence to certan quaty stanars, tat setsevauatons apart from oter types of quaty assurance mecansms.

So, one of te irst questons to ask s o e te servces esgne foo tepocy cyce moe. Te anser to ts can be gven by examnng a) o teservce came nto exstence (esgn pase) an b) at quaty assurancemecansms ave been put n pace urng ts operatona tme. As te range of quaty assurance mecansms scrutnse eren comprses aso ex-post evauatons,

tere s – for te purpose of te queston eter te pocy cyce s aere to –no rect nee to ook more nto te actua resuts/performances of te servce

Hstory of the servces

Te servces seecte for te bencmarkng process n te scope of te uneryngstuy vary conseraby t age. About 30 % of te servces ere mpementebefore 1998; 16 % are oer tan 20 years. By contrast, about % of temeasures ere mpante n 2001 or ater. By far te argest number of servces areon-gong an ave no specie en ate (78 % of tose for c suc nformatonas retrevabe).

Te man actvty areas aresse by pocy n te past years seem to e n teoman of passve nformaton provson (12 ne servces snce 1999; 3 st actvefrom before tat tme pero), pro-actve nformaton servces/aareness rasng(10 suc servces or servce eements ere ata as avaabe on ts ssue ereset up after 1999, 4 are oer), an subses/ega frameork (6 suc servcesenacte before 1999, 11 afterars). By contrast, servces of type III (tranng) anIV (customse n-ept consutng) (see secton .1) are, on average, oer. For type IV servces, ts can be expane by te greater amount of tme necessary norer to estabs ntegrate servces of a er scope – some form of contnutyan a earnng curve are neee ere.

wt respect to inanca subsy servces, a sft can be observe: we oer servces ten to be more soate offerngs supportng patentng as suc (e.g., te

Austran Patent Loan Acton or te Irs IPAS sceme), neer subsy servces aremore taore to specic target groups (especay irst tme patentees) an aso fuian aareness rasng functon (cases n pont are te Frenc 1er brevet (1st patent)servce an te German INSTI SME patent acton) (see aso secton .4.1).

Te preparaton tme for te servces – at east for tose ere nformaton on

ts ssue as st accessbe – vare tn a range of 1 mont to 72 monts,epenng on te type of preparatory actvtes unertaken (see Grap 9 for tetypes of actvtes). On average (mean vaue), sx monts ere neee to set upa servce.

About af of te bencmarke servces a a predecessor servce. In te groupof te case stuy servces (.e., te 1 servces c ere seecte for anayss npase 3 – see secton 2.2), te respectve sare as ger (6 %). Te exstenceof preecessor servces can be seen as a postve aspect, but may consttute aso anegatve caracterstc. On te postve se, one can earn from experence an useor respectvey aapt exstng structures to ne nees t tte effort. On tenegatve se, tere s te anger of ock-n stuatons: Preecessor servces create

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 60 17-01-2008 11:10:17



61



R T S E R V I C E S

earmarke bugets, customer poos, job escrptons an operaton moes. Inmost extreme cases, an tout proper nput from te outse, te o structuresetermne te ne ones. Ts s y servces set up n Eastern Europe, for exampe,may ave a beneit over te ones n o EU countres – tey smpy o not nee to

cope t egacy structures. Ang to te probem s aso te often vsbe ay of ecson makng, nvovng cangng sets of actors an/or te pervasveness of subjectve ves on a subject – te en resut mgt be a “garbage can” of IPRsupport servces, c ooks caotc from te outse an c as evove ntots state by cance rater tan by ratona ecson makng. 14

Grap 9 sos te actvtes c ere carre out for the preparaton of

the aunch of te support servces scrutnse n te bencmarkng process. It canbe easy seen tat user nee exporaton (use n 67 % of te bencmarkeservces) an te nvovement of stakeoers (c took pace n 2 % of tenvestgate servces, an even more t te case stuy servces (9 %))accompany for te most part te ntroucton of IPR servces. dsappontngy, ony17 % of te bencmarke servces a forma an toroug ex-ante assessmentsconucte; ony about a ift of te servces use foresgt exercses. Te eve of nvovement of externa consutatons es at about 32% for te bencmarkeservces. Ts sare s ger for te case stuy servces of pase 3 (41 %). About13 % of te bencmarke servces a no anaysabe preparatory actvtes. Moretan 4 % of te bencmarke servces an 6 % of te case stuy servces a“oter” acton taken n orer to set up te servce.

Taken togeter, tese resuts suggest tat te esgn pase ffere a ot amongte servces anayse, an tat – most key – t evate n many nstances asoconseraby from te ea pocy cyce moe. Ts seems not ony to becorroborate by te o sare of ex-ante exercses conucte, but aso by terater conserabe sare of servces for c no preparatory acton as beentaken. Furtermore, te varety of pats taken to esgn servces tn te groupof “oter preparatory” actvtes party supports te argument tat te exstence of servces n ter partcuar operaton moes s ony to an extent te resut of atorougy panne process: Mentone actvtes range from “rect governmenta

14 Te garbage can moe eveope by Coen, Marc & Osen n 1972, offers a escrpton of o ecson makngprocesses are ane n organsatons: decsons are many taken aganst te backrop of probematc ansubjectve preferences (c become ony cearer tn te process), te ack of knoege of organsatonareguatons an structures governng te ecson makng process an lu partcpaton, meanng tat actng peopean ecson makers cange constanty an certan subjects are scusse repeatey on an on. Probems, soutons,actng persons an opportuntes to reac ecsons are nepenent long mensons c create a contextere te ecsons taken are not te resut of ratona tougts, but stem from te nteracton of te mentonemensons. Te resutng stuaton s a rater caotc one (.e., a garbage can), ere te coce of soutons appeto probems s more key ue to cance (Coen et a., 1972) tan to ratona tnkng.

Graph 9 Type of preparatory actvtes conducted for settng up the servcesnvestgated, percentage of servces

Foresightexercises

User needexploration

Stakeholder involvement

External consultantsinvolvement

Formal ex-anteassessments

Other activities

No preparationactivities

211 7

1 2

59 59

41

18

1 2

54

32

5 2

13

6 7

65

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

benchmarked services case study services

%

Source: Benchmarking process, n (benchmarked services) = 66, n (case study services) = 15

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 61 17-01-2008 11:10:17



62


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



orer”, to “persona ntatve”, to “[usage of earnng] experences gane trougte actvtes of te oe organsaton”.

Te extent to c user nees ave been actuay scrutnse may aso be subjectto scusson: In some nstances, te consutaton of focus groups as nvove; n

oters “...demand was clear form the number of questions the ‘parent service’ received about IPR” (service provider). For many oer servces, te ay te servces camento exstence as not even traceabe.

Quaty assurance

Grap 10 proves an overve on te type of quaty assurance mechansms

empoyed, fferentate by servces n te bencmarkng pase an by servcesc ere actuay seecte as case stues for pase 3 of te uneryng researc,te goo practce anayss. As can be seen, a rater arge sare of servces (23 %)as no quaty assurance mecansms n pace. Te majorty of te servces (9 %)conuct reguar montorng exercses, uner c actvtes suc as te coectonof feeback forms or reportng actvtes to te funng organsaton (e.g., yearyreports) are summarze. “Oter” quaty assurance mecansms (suc as orknggroups t customers) are mpemente n 3 % of te servces n te

bencmarkng pase. Overa, ony af of te servces ave forma evauatonsconucte (nterm, ex-post evauaton or reguar auts). In aton, evauatonsseem to be conucte ess frequenty on servces from te patent ofices tan ontose from oter types of organsatons. Aganst te backrop tat te servcesseecte for bencmarkng areay present te better performng ones, ts resutmay tus ncate a ack of evauaton cuture n te IPR-for-SMEs servce or.

One can observe tat servces tat are evauate ten to perform, on average,better tan non-evauate ones. Te servces seecte as case stues for presentnggoo practce eements ave, on average, tgter quaty assurance mecansms npace tan te bencmarke ones.

Not usng evauatons on te IPR servces anayse seems to ave mpcatonsespecay n terms of accountabty an customer orentaton – te atter opposeto te servce prover’s sef-percepton. In te irst case, t s questonabe eter

te funng boes of te servces actuay o ave a nformaton necessary togauge performance. In oter cases, t seems tat te knoege of te servceprovers about ter customers may be mte. Even t some case stuyservces, t as ficut to obtan arge enoug contact atabases c contanea necessary contact nformaton as e as nformaton on te types of customers(SMEs, patent attorneys, arge enterprses, etc.). data protecton ssues pay a roe,but tey seem to be ony part of te story.

Graph 10 Quaty assurance mechansms n pace, percentage of servces*) **)

Regular monitoring exercises

Interimevaluations

Ex-postevaluations

Regular audits

Other qualityassurance

mechanisms

No qualityassurance

mechanisms

50

31

59

47

12

23

36

29

24

35

3 5 35

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Benchmarked services “Good Practice” elements exhibiting services

%


**) Ex-ante evaluations would in the strictest sense also be part of quality assurance mechanisms, but are discussed for better readability as part of the preparatory activities (see Graph 9).

Source: Benchmarking process, n (benchmarked services) = 66, n (case study services) = 15

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 62 17-01-2008 11:10:17



63



R T S E R V I C E S5.3.3 Institutional set up: A case of systems fallacy

Te nsttutona background (n terms of at type of organsaton s offerngte support servce) may consttute a vta ssue concernng te probabeperformance of an IPR support measure. hstorc context, customer base,quaicaton proies of te staff, mnsets present an embeeness of teorgansaton n te overa nnovaton pocy anscape are a key to ave anmpact on te ay te servce s evere.

Grap 11 sos tat IPR servces are to a sgnicant extent operate by natona

patent ofices (36 % of te bencmarke servces are run by ts type of nsttuton), an to a muc esser extent by tecnoogy/eveopment agences(c account for 14 % an 8 % of te bencmarke servces, respectvey).Governmenta boes (natona an/or regona ones) can be consere to form toa certan egree a group togeter t many of te organsatons subsume uner te “oters” eang. Ts relects contractua arrangements beteen te govern-menta boes an, e.g., assocatons, researc nsttutes (te dIw Coogne, for exampe, c s responsbe for te INSTI programme; an IPR programme nGermany) or prvate companes, ereby te servce s eter offere jonty t

or on beaf of te governmenta boes. Te remaner of oter n te “oter”servces s comprse of tecnoogy parks, cambers of commerce or ncubatorsc usuay offer smaer IPR servces (e.g., referra servces to patent attorneystn te scope of open ays).

Ts nsttutona set-up may come n many ays as a surprse:

• Deveopment/technoogy agences are usuay concerne t servcesofferng support for R&d projects an/or projects ame at mpementngnnovatons. Tey are at te eart of many natona nnovaton systems anave been actng ncreasngy as executng agents for te operaton of supportmeasures n te to above mentone ies (ts tren s aso cae“agencicaton”) (OECd, 2002). hence, ter servce portfoo covers a rater arge range of topcs, of c many are of rect reevance to SMEs. Onecou tus expect tat eveopment agences ou aso pay a vta roe n IPR

servce provson, even more n te gt tat – recang from te prevoussecton – IPR management sou be eay aresse as part of nnovatonmanagement. It seems tat f IPR servces exst tn eveopment/tecnoogyagences, tey are often margnase tn te overa servce portfoo: IPRservces are often run by a rater sma team of experts tn te agency oenjoy a kn of “exotc” status among te agency staff.

Graph 11 Type of servce offerng nsttuton of benchmarked servces,percentage of servces*)

Nationalgovernmental

body

Regionalgovernmenta

lbody

P atent o ff ic e Na tion aldevelopment

agency

Regionaldevelopment

agency

Others(e.g., associations)

30

8

3 9

14

3 6

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

%

*) multiple counts allowed

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, benchmarking process, n=66

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 63 17-01-2008 11:10:18



64


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



• By contrast, te reatvey g number of servces run by natona patent

ofices s at irst sgt astonsng, aganst te backgroun tat te orgnatask of te patent ofices as (s) te anng of patent appcatons an teprocessng of respectve ings as a pubc autorty. hoever, accorng to

expert opnons, ter emergence as servce provers may be vee as areacton to te eveopment tat te European Patent Ofice (EPO) as beentakng over more an more tasks of te natona ofices. Natona patent oficesin temseves ncreasngy uner pressure to ook for ne roes an actvtyies or face te prospect of beng cut/sut on n te ong run. Becomnga servce prover s n ts context an obvous opton.

havng a servce operate by a eveopment agency or a patent ofice may entaavantages an savantages n eter case. deveopment/tecnoogy agencesare, accorng to te experts ntervee, generay sa to be e knon amongSMEs (because of ter e range of servces avaabe) an to possess a ot of busness kno-o. hoever, ter IPR kno-o may often not be e eveope,an tey aso o not ave a track recor regarng IPR.

By contrast, ue to ter hstory, patent ofices ave knoege of IPR – at east

to te extent of patents an te tecncates regarng ter amnstraton.Furter on te pus se, patent ofices are consere to be reabe an mparta.On te onse, most experts agree tat patent ofice staff ave rater ttebusness knoege an may be too muc focusse on patents (as mpe by teorgansatona story). Furtermore, te status of a pubc autorty brngs t tte nee to aere to a certan bureaucracy, c many experts ou see nconlct t customer-orentaton. Certan servces (suc as subsy servces) may,furtermore, ave te potenta to arm te mparta caracter attrbute to tepatent ofice as a pubc autorty.

Te ack of evauaton cuture, togeter t te ncreasng an mportant roe of natona patent ofices n IPR servce provson for SMEs, suggests tat IPR servcesare, n terms of nvesttgate nnovaton pocy nstruments, to a arge extentuncarte terrtory. Te man cast of actors n IPR servce provson often seems tobe fferent from tat of te more genera nnovaton an R&d support or, te

or of te tecnoogy an eveopment agences. Ts can be seen as anexampe of system faacy, as te IPR servces ceary operate t nnovaton-reate goas. Ts system faacy s furter aggravate, as te subject of proper IPmanagement an te usage of ess forma IP protecton metos are ary tacke– tus, “bn spots” are create.

5.3.4 Employed resources: Expert staff and budgets askey issues

hg mpacts of pocy nterventons can ony be aceve f approprate resourcesare spatce to tacke te ssues surrounng te nterventon. Te resourcesc ere nvestgate n ts context comprse avaabe bugets, suc as for subssng patent appcatons, an te avaabty of uman resources n suficentquaty an quantty.

The factor human resources

As regars te number of staff , one can say tat a g sare of te bencmarkeservces s operate ony by sma teams: 3 % of te staff teams empoy at most 3fu tme equvaents (FTEs); 18 % see ony one FTE n carge. On te premum en,one can in a fe servces c empoy 80 FTEs or more, comprse mosty of servces c ra on a netork of experts or servce provers an c ave asma coornatng team at te eaquarters. hoever, servces t more tan 10FTEs account for ess tan 18 % of te bencmarke servces. Bearng n mn tatte seecte servces for bencmarkng are presumaby among te arger ones(because of te requrement to be anaysabe an to ave a poo for successfuynterveng 0 users n te course of te goo practce anayss), one can concue

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 64 17-01-2008 11:10:18



6



R T S E R V I C E S

tat te majorty of te IPR servces offere are sma n terms of manpoer empoye.

An mportant core success factor, as t s perceve by te servce provers an asocorroborate by te resuts of te user survey on te case stuy servces, s te

competence of the servce operatng staff (Grap 12). Ts s unerne byservce provers an users of te servces ake. Most of te servce prover’sstatements about servce strengts reate to te eve of quaicaton of te staff (8 %). Issues c cou be summarse as “customer orentaton” rankesecon; a oter factors ere mentone ony about af as frequenty as tequaicaton ssue.

Te user survey conucte on te 1 case stuy servces prove even morecompeng evence on te sgnicance of expert staff. wtn te scope of tesurvey, te users ere aske to rate a range of aspects accorng to ter reevancefor te quaty of a servce smar to te one tey use. Grap 13 sos tat 77 %of te users eeme te factor of staff competence to be of g reevance, anoter 12 % gauge ts factor to be of meum reevance. Taken togeter, tecompetence eve ranke irst as a quaty ssue. Ts can be seen rater nepen-

ent of te type of servce use. Breakons accorng to te nvua casestues soe a smar pcture. Te resuts are comparabe because te questonas pose n entca manner to a users, regaress of te type of utseservce.

Te sgnicance of quaicaton eves rests on te fact tat matters reate to IPR– deay – requre technca, ega an aso busness kno-ho. Teserequrements enta a cascae of consequences for te set up of IPR supportservces, te irst one beng tat te eve of experence emane tens to ca for senor staff t reevant acaemc backgroun an ork experence rater tanfor younger staff o just grauate from unversty.

Respectve canates are, oever, key to be scarce – an tus aso expensve.Te stuaton s furter aggravate n te gt of mtatons arsng from payroregmes an career opportuntes n te pubc sector as oppose to tose of teprvate sector. Yet anoter mtng factor s te ack of eucatona offerngs (see,for exampe, Moun & Tue, 200 for te Norc countres n Europe). Ts ack s,accorng to expert opnons, especay apparent t regar to te busnessmenson of nteectua property management: Tecnca knoege seems to be,by comparson, more frequenty avaabe (patent examners n te patent oficesare usuay scentsts or engneers), an ega knoege s avaabe from teprvate sector n te form of patent attorneys o aso ave a tecnca or scenticbackgroun.

Graph 12 Perceved strengths of the servces by the servce operators,percentage of servces *)

Expertstaff

Customer orientation

Integrativeess/networking

Cos ts U niquenessand unique

service elements

Reputation Other Regional Activit ies

58

18 1720

2530

18

47

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

%

*) mutpe counts aoeSource: Bencmarkng process, n = 66, custerng of responses to open queston nto groups performe by AustranInsttute for SME Researc

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 65 17-01-2008 11:10:18



66


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



As a matter of fact, anecota evence suggests tat te tgt market for knoegeabe IPR experts s nee a mtng factor for expanng te servceofferngs:

“Maintaining knowledgeable staff has proven difficult.” (service provider 1)

“We are faced with a lack of skilled and multilingual staff.” (service provider 2)

“[We have] difficulty of retaining staff at regional level; the salaries are not

attractive.” (service provider 3)

“One of the greatest benefits we had [from using this service] was to note that

there are indeed very few knowledge people – and to learn to live with that.”

(SME user of an IPR support service)

Te statement mae by te tr servce prover as an mpcaton arsng fromte ack of uman resources: It not key be possbe to offer g quaty IPRsupport servces to SMEs n eac an every regona outet or ocaty. hoever, tsmgt not pose a bg probem, as spata dstance s consere to be te east

mportant quaty factor for an IPR support servce by te user base. Agan, tsresut regarng ess mportance for spata stance os for amost a servcesanayse – probaby because tere s not an every ay nee for suc measures, an

f suc a nee arses SMEs are ng to trave a reasonabe stance. Aganst ts backgroun, t appears sensbe to opt for a centrase approac: Anaton-e offerng cou poo knoege an uman resources at some maneaquarter ocaton, e regona outets market te servce an refer nterestepartes to te man unt. Ts cou aso ave postve mpcatons t regar tomarketng an vsbty.

Graph 13 Key quaty factors for the provson of IPR servces, user perceptons accordng to reevance, servce users n %, aggregatedansers

1 4

26

2 9

4 0

42

44

4 7

49

51

67

67

77

31

35

3 5

25

3 1

3 3

24

26

3 1

19

17

12

0 10 20 30 40 5 0 60 7 0 80 90 100


%

Competence of Staff

Ease of access & identification

Timely delivery

Costs

Individual contact

Information on different IP strategies(”why/why notto patent”)

Scope of service

Administrative efforts

Technical information (”how to patent”)

Referal to & availability of other services in-house

Referal to external services

Spatial distance

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, services considered = all (15); n = 630

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 66 17-01-2008 11:10:19



67



R T S E R V I C E S

Budgets

Of te servce provers n te bencmarkng process, 73 % eventuay provebuget ata. Care must be use n comparng buget igures because te servcesave fferent servce goas an esgns an aso fferent accountng an costng

stanars.Te reporte numbers suggest noneteess tat te bencmarke servces may, onaverage, be fune at rater o eves. Te mean amounts to € 187,000 p.a.,c means tat about af of te servces may ra on ess tan tat amount.Takng overeas nto account, te mean ou be at aroun € 18,000 p.a. –ence, aroun 0 % of te servce provers can spen at most € 18,000 p.a. onrect support actvtes. For te case stuy servces, n contrast, te average bugetavaabe amounte to amost € 400,000 p.a., a avaabe for rect servceactvtes, agan usng mean vaues.

Tese resuts prove atona evence tat, espte te arge number of entie servces, ony sma pockets of e-fune scemes exst for supportngSMEs n te ie of IPR.

5.3.5 The performance of the IPR support services we te preceng secton examne te resource (or nput) se, ts secton noooks at te output/outcome se. Te anayss presente ras on te one anon nformaton prove by te servce provers n pase 2 of te researc msson,e.g., montorng ata. On te oter an, mportant nsgts are gane from teresuts of te user survey n pase 3.

5.3.5.1 User take-up and out-reach

User take-up

Grap 14 sos c ncators are use by te servce provers to montor tetake-up of te offerngs. It sos tat most of te servces coect nformaton onte number of users or beneicares of te servces (71 %). Te usage of more

Graph 14 Indcators used to measure take-up of the servces,percentage of servces

No. of users/beneficiaries of the service

No. of participants in sessions/courses

No. of persons/institutions approached

No./Share of SME users/beneficiaries

No. of queries and/or information requests

No. of applications

No. of applications by SMEs

No. of SMEs approached

No. of queries and/or information requests by SMEs

other indicators 1 1

2 2

29

3 2

4 3

45

48

48

5 2

71

0 1 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

%

Source: benchmarking process, n = 66

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 67 17-01-2008 11:10:19



68


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



etae ncators s oer, but ts, of course, as to be seen n te gt of tesutabty of specic measures n te nvua servce context.

Ony about af of te servce provers reporte actua igures for te number of beneicares. Te range – beteen 4 an 286,244 – as qute spectacuar an as

to be seen () aganst te nvua servce esgns/type of servces an, foongts, () n terms of at servce provers count as beneicares. Accorngy, teres a quatatve fference beteen, for exampe, te number of vstors to a ebstean te number of persons o receve one-to-one n ept consutng.Furtermore, some provers actuay o not ave nformaton on te number of beneicares as suc, but use proxes as estmates, e.g., te number of supporteprojects nstea of te number of supporte companes. Te usage of suc proxesmay nvove ssues ke oube countng. Gven aso fferent servce goas anscopes, t oes not make sense to compare ata concernng for te number of usersof te servce, oever reevant ts mgt be as a montorng ncator for tenvua servce.

havng sa tat t s st nterestng to note tat about 70 % of te servcesreporte avng more tan 100 users p.a. Te mean vaue recore amounte

to 463 users. Yet, en ookng for servces for te case stuy anayss, servcesc ou forar contact ata for as many as 0 users ere ar to in. dataconientaty may pay a roe n ts context, as may aso ssues reate togovernance (see aso secton .3.2). Accorng to experts, te actua SME user basefor many IPR support servces – especay for servces c exten funng or prove n-ept consutng, .e. at one cou conser to be ger eve servces– may be rater sma.

User out-reach

Aganst ts backgroun, many servce provers, an aso users of te servcesanayse as case stues, pont to te ack of vsbty of te offerngs an rater eak marketng actvtes, especay n Europe. An expanatory factor for teficutes n reacng out to te target group can be often seen n te nsttutonaset-up (see aso secton .3.3). Rater o enorsement t inanca resources

aso seems to frequenty consttute a constrant for arger outreac actvtes.

5.3.5.2 Expected and actual outcome and impactof the IPR support services

Grap 1 sos te ncators use by servce provers to measure te outcomeof ter actvtes. Nottstanng te fact tat some of te measures mgt notbe reevant for specic types of servce, one can ceary see tat servce proversten to focus most on customer satsfacton an on te number of IPR ttes(especay patents) ie an/or grante t support from te servce engaterng nformaton on te actua outcome of ter actvtes.

Most provers o take account of user satsfacton beeve tat ter customer base s generay appy t te servces offere. Te extent to c tesestatements are backe up by evence, oever, vares conseraby. we some

conuct user satsfacton surveys an fe carry out evauatons, oters base ter opnon on crcumstanta evence (suc as tat peope usuay o not compan)or on earsay ony. Te resuts of te user survey, oever, so tat te vastmajorty of te users of te 1 case stuy servces are gy satsie. Ony at tmesave tere been compants about ssues reate to tmey every or amnstratveburens.

Patents ied th support from a servce – a mseadng ndcator?

Te ncator n Grap 1 “patents ie t support from te servce” s use tofferent extents by about a tr of te bencmarke servces. hoever, t aspossbe to obtan actua igures ony for about a ozen measures; te otersrejecte quotng igures for one or a combnaton of te foong reasons: () ataprotecton ssues () apparent young age of te programme, an tus te ack of a track recor partcuary gven tat tere may be conserabe tme ags beteen

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 68 17-01-2008 11:10:20



69



R T S E R V I C E S

te start of te support an te actua patent ing, () te ncator s onyrecore sporacay (e.g., tn te scope of evauatons), an (v) f vaues arecoecte, but tey o not relect te fu pcture of support gven because teyso ony a snapsot base on a sampe of beneicares ntervee.

Furtermore, practcay a servce provers ntervee, ncung tose o make use of te ncator “patents ie t support from te servce” as e astose o not, ere extremey estant n acknoegng te practcabty

and usefuness of the ndcator as a performance measure. It as to be recaefrom te scusson n prevous sectons tat a patent can be a oube-egesor: It may be a usefu too to expot an protect te IP of a irm, but t couaso prove armfu, e.g., f an SME as not te means to efen te patent n court.It as subsequenty aso been son tat te ecson-makng process to patent or not to patent s compex an must take nto account te busness context of tecompany an te many aternatves to patentng.

Ts opens up one of to probem mensons for usng te patent-ie ncator aone for gaugng performance: Frst, t cou exert pressure on a servce to pusa ts customers to go for patents, even en t s actuay cear to te servce

operatng staff tat patentng ou not be n te best nterest for a partcuar supporte company. An, secon, even f one assumes tat patentng ou ateast not arm te company recty, gven te cost stuaton, an SMEs s key tobeneit from patentng ony n to cases: n a busness envronment erepatentng starts to become prevaent, an f te nventon (an te busness moeben t) as true an rater g commerca vaue:

“In general, I would not recommend an SME to patent except for two cases:

First, if the competitors start patenting because at some point later in the future,

if one does not react to it, one will be basically patented out of business; and

second, if the invention is really great and commercially promising – and by that

I mean really great” (Patent attorney).15

1 Te stuaton n c a patent s ntrouce nto an nustry c as been terto not been affecte bypatentng, s currenty anayse n researc uner te tem “patent sock”. Te basc moe ou assume tat oncean mportant patent s ntrouce nto an oterse IPR-vo nustry compettors ave to pck up on ts an startpatentng, too. Ts creates a oop of patentng actvtes c may eventuay ea to a pont ere patentng s soomnant tat te seer number of patents (a so-cae patent tcket) n tat nustry s key to ecreaseseveryone’s freeom to operate an ence nbts aso nnovaton actvtes (see water & Moere, 2007).

Graph 15 Indcators used for measurng the outcome of the servces,percentage of servces

5

6

9

15

17

22

22

26

32

51

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

%

User satisfaction

No. of patents filed with support from this service

No. of patents filed by SMEs with support from this service

Other outcome indicators

No. of patents granted to SMEs with support from this service

No. of other IP rights registered

No. of patents granted to SMEs with support from this service

No. of other IP rights registered b SMEs

IPR exploitation: achieved turnover from IPR trade

Default rates (e.g., for bank guarantees)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 69 17-01-2008 11:10:20



70


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Tus, for gaugng te performance of a servce, an epenng on te servcegoas, not ony te number of patents ie, but aso te vaue of these patents as e as nterdependences and recproctes th other IP protecton

methods ave to be taken nto account. Suc nterepenences/recproctes

arse, for exampe, en companes refran – as a resut of avce taken from asupport servce – from patentng (resutng n a ecrease or no cange t respectto te measure “patent ie t support of te servce”), an use oter IPprotecton toos nstea, e.g., a trae mark, c ou mean an ncrease trespect to ts ncator. Te queston ten s o a te respectve ncreases/ecreases of te nvua measures sou be vaue on an aggregate eve.

A n a, a cear dstncton must tus be mae for usng te ncator “IPR tteie t support from te servce” tn a montorng system an ts usage for performance measurement. Te evence gatere ponts to a stuaton erepartcuary carefu ex-ante pannng s neee n orer to eveop a set of performance measures tat () go beyon smpe countng of patent or oter IPRtte appcatons an tat () are cosey te to te goas of te servce. A servcec, for exampe, as as ts goa to foster ony te best patent eas s key totake te vaue of te supporte patents an ter actua commerca success mucmore nto account (c n turn probaby entas feer supporte patentngprojects) tan a servce c as te goa of epng SMEs get irst experencest te patentng process.

Evdence from the user survey empoyed n the case study anayss

One of te goas of te user survey conucte n te course of te case stuyanayss n pase 3 of te researc as to assess te mpact on te beneicares of te servces, .e., te outcome of te servce actvtes seen at irm eve by te user base. To assumptons ere mae: Frst tat a goo practce servce not onyencourage te usage of a partcuar IP protecton meto, but aso dscourage ts use f t s not approprate n te busness context of te supporte SME. Tsassumpton entas tat te usage/attenton eves gven to fferent IPR annforma IP protecton toos may eter ecrease or ncrease, an no “postve”jugement concernng a partcuar recton of te cange s a pror possbe.

Secon, tat te mtatons presente above ou not make t feasbe to usemetrcs of te type “IPR nstrument ie t support from te servce” for measurng te outcome of te servce.

In orer to assess te outcome an mpact of te servces, a more quatatve

approach as cosen by appyng te concept of “beavoura atonaty” (seeaso OECd, 2006). In ts context, t as ame to capture beavoura an/or atttue canges – togeter t ter recton – t respect to IPR-reateactvtes c ere nuce by te servces tn te supporte SMEs. Grap 16sos te aggregate resuts for a 1 case stuy servces.

Te foong observatons can be mae:

• Most of te canges took pace t respect to te aspects “genera

aareness” (c ncrease for % of te users of te servces) an“genera knoege management kno-o” (c ncrease for 46 % of te users). Te knoege of te patent envronment mprove for about42 %. Tus, te tree most mportant beavoura canges nuce concernte IP an IPR kno-o of te company.

• Te ncrease kno-o as e to a sgnicant sare of SMEs poong ther

IPR kno-hot certan epartments or persons – forma IPR responsbtestn te enterprse ave ncrease n about 28 % of te supporteenterprses.

• Interestngy, an espte te patent centrcty of most IPR servces, patent

usage tn te company’s IPR strategy ncrease ony t 27 % of tecompanes. Tus, a ger focus on patents ranks ony ift, f compare to teoter aspects scrutnse.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 70 17-01-2008 11:10:20



71



R T S E R V I C E S

• In aton, t s surprsng to see tat dspacement effects (nformaprotecton practces beng substtute by forma IPR) are rater sma – reanceon esgn compexty as ecrease t ony 4 % of te enterprses, reanceon ea-tme avantage t ony 3 %. Moreover, te usage eves of nforma

protecton mecansms as ncrease overa sgnicanty – te ncreaseattenton eve gven to trae secrets (+20 %) fas ony sort by 7 %-ponts totat of patents. It may be tat n many nstances an troug usng an IPRsupport servce nuces SMEs to use nforma practces more conscousy.

• Te oest behavoura effects can be seen t censng actvtes. Tsresut may relect te fact tat te servces anayse (as e as tose entien te irst pase of te researc msson) prmary focus on te irst pases of IPR usage an eveopment an ess on ater expotaton pases.

Tese resuts so tat te servces seecte for spayng eements of goopractce ere abe to nuce behavoura changes on a e range of aspectsreate to te usage of IPR an/or nforma IP protecton metos. Toug noeinte assessment can be gven of eter tese canges are a for te better,one mgt st argue tat, at east to a certan extent, te servces ere abe to

tacke te fu range of IP protecton mecansms – avsng aso on aternatves topatentng – an offer ter servces n a manner sutabe to te busness context of te nvua supporte SMEs.

It sou be note tat te case stuy servces – nottstanng te fact tat tenoton of goo practces as been roppe (see aso secton .3.1) – representrater e performng servces tn te set of entie an bencmarkeservces. Yet, te subject of IP management – especay te seecton an executonof te rgt IP protecton/expotaton strategy n te gven busness context of airm – s, accorng to IPR experts, st a caenge even for many of te case stuyservces.

Integraton and netorkng matter

One expanatory factor for te e range of beavoura mensons te servcesere abe to reac s te fact tat practcay a case stuy servces can be

Graph 16 Outcome of the case study IPR servces – behavoura addtonaty,users n %

General awareness

Knowledge management Know-How

Patent knowledge in business environment

Formal IPR responsibilities within enterprise

Patent usage in IPR strategy

Trademark usage in IPR strategy

(Trade) secrecy usage in IPR strategy

IPR training

Design pattern/utility model usage in IPR strategy

Reliance on lead-time advantage in IPR strategy

Reliance on design complexity in IPR strategy

Copyright usage in IPR strategy

Out-licensing

In-licensing 8

9

10

11

15

17

19

20

2 2

2 7

2 8

42

4 6

5 5

- 1

- 1

- 1

-4

-3

- 1

0

- 1

- 1

- 2

-1

- 1

0

- 1

- 4 0 - 20 0 2 0 4 0 60 8 0

increased decreased

%

Source: Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, services considered = all (15); n = 630

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 71 17-01-2008 11:10:21



72


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



consere to be ntegrated servces. Even n te set of te bencmarkeservces, about 9 out of 10 servces state tat tey ou offer aso oter IPR-reate servces (48 % ou even offer servces tat ave notng to o t IPR).Nottstanng te fferent scopes an goas of te nvua IPR servces tn

te IPR servce portfoos, t can be argue tat te packages as a oe aress arater e range of smar IPR matters, n many nstances aso t smar toos.Ts oes not mean necessary tat servces c are smaer n scope cannot avea favourabe performance n te ie of IPR. For suc servces, smaer sze can becompensate troug referra actvtes to oter more specase nsttutons.

Trty percent of te servce provers n te bencmarkng pase see te fact tatte servce s eter offere as a part of a package of IPR servces or greatynetorke t oter nsttutons as a notceabe strengt of te servce (see Grap12, page ). Ts s te tr most mportant success factor note after expert staff an customer orentaton. Accorng to experts, te stnct avantage of takngan ntegratve approac s many reate to synergy effects. Competence s buttrougout te fferent servce packages, an ntra-organsatona earnng effectsare aceve far more easy. In te current context of a sortage of suppy of quaie staff, ntegraton eps to poo te avaabe resources. In prncpentegraton aso resuts n more easy entiabe measures. hence, ntegratveapproaces sou be consere uner most crcumstances f IPR servces are tobe set up.

5.4 A closer look at selected generic service types

5.4.1 Cheerleading for IPR – Success factors for IPRawareness raising services

The dfferent eves of aareness

As mentone n secton 3.4, ack of aareness of an knoege of o to use teIPR system are seen as major constrants for ger IPR utsaton eves by SMEs. Inte foong secton t s outne o ts ssue can be tacke by support servces

an at probems ave to be taken nto account en measures amng to raseaareness are esgne.

As a prerequste, a coser ook at at actuay consttutes beng “IPR-aare” sabe taken. Te term aareness can mpy a oe range of knoege eves, froma very basc knoege of te exstence of an IPR system to a very etaeknoege on te functonng of IPR, cose to at can be expecte from IPprofessonas. Aganst ts backgroun, one can stngus, on a very genera eve,beteen IPR aareness of users an nfrngers an tat of oners an creators of IP (see Grap 17) (Ptkety, 2007). Te atter can be furter broken on nto“vaue aareness” an “effectve aareness”.

Graph 17 Dfferent eves of IP aareness

aareness of usersan nfrngers

aareness of onersan creators of IP

vaueaareness

effectveaareness

Smpe knoegeof te functonngof t eIP system

Avance knoegeof te functonngof t eIP system

Source: Pitkethly, 2007, adapted by Austrian Institute for SME Research

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 72 17-01-2008 11:10:21



73



R T S E R V I C E S

Vaue aareness refers to te abty to assess te beneits of usng IP protectonmetos; e.g., peope o are vaue-aare can ece eter t s ort to renea patent (.e. pay te yeary mantenance fees) or not. Tey may ack, oever, tebasc knoege of o te IPR system orks an are tus not abe to make

quaie ecsons regarng te coce of te best IP protecton/appropratonnstrument to be use n a partcuar busness context, an, more mportanty, atsou be taken care of n suc a ecson-makng process. For exampe, peopeo are vaue aare mgt assume tat a patent ou n prncpe be a goomeans to protect ter nventons, but tey fa to kno tat pubcaton of respectve researc resuts pror to a patent ing mgt make t mpossbe for tenventon to be patente – a stuaton c s, accorng to ntervee patentattorneys, rater common.16

Peope o kno, by contrast, suc tecnca partcuars are sa to be effectvey

aare of te IPR system, as tey can put te IPR system “effectvey” to use. wtneffectve aareness one can, eventuay, aso stngus beteen a more smpeform (ere SMEs kno te necessary bascs of o to use te IP system an areabe to entfy an seek out te rgt servce provers en tey nee supportfor speca ssues) an avance knoege (as e by IP professonas, e.g. n IPepartments of arge enterprses or freeance patent attorneys). Beng effectveyaare goes, accorng to Ptkety, an n an t vsbe IP management prac-tces tat can be measure an observe, e.g., n terms of censng actvtes, nforma responsbtes for IPR tn te enterprse, n te formuaton of an IPpocy or n usng IPR tranng.

Te experences n te course of conuctng te uneryng bencmarkng stuysupport te noton tat “vaue aareness” an “effectve aareness” areseparate forms of aareness. For exampe, SMEs mgt kno e te tecncatesof o to ie a patent (e.g., to keep te nventon secret before ing te patent,to use te rgt appcaton forms or to revert to te rgt autortes an patentattorneys), but tey may not be entrey sure eter appyng for a patent sactuay te best ay of protectng ter nventon n te gven busnessenvronment. Vaue aareness can tus be sa to refer to te busness aspect of

ecsons regarng te usage of IP protecton practces, ereas effectveaareness as a ger focus on tecnca an esp. ega aspects.

Expert opnons pont to a stuaton ere SMEs, acknoegng ter resourceconstrants, sou eay be vaue aare as e as effectvey aare n ts smpeform (toug t can be argue tat ts “smpe” form of aareness may not besmpe after a).

(Pro-actve) aareness rasng servces n pace

Te queston s at can pubc pocy o to rase aareness of SMEs to te esreeves. Te evence coecte n te bencmarkng stuy suggests tat servcesmpemente an aressng ts ssue can take a varety of forms, c can begroupe n to categores. Te irst group comprses measures c try to createsmpe aareness n te form of a irst ntroucton to te IPR system – tey aretus key to resembe irst parts of te puzze toars fu vaue an (smpe)

effectve aareness. Suc servce types typcay ncue:• Roasos/campagns: Roasos enote a seres of events, usuay e at

fferent ocatons an abee uner one bran, c may ast from toours to a oe ay. Te attenng auence s usuay pro-actvey nvte topartcpate (e.g., troug netorkng partners) an te topcs usuay focus onbascs of IPR (e.g., wat s a patent? ho can one ie for a patent?). Teevents are usuay aso use for presentatons on oter support programmessurrounng IPR.

16 Aong te same ne, n te stuy conucte by Ptkety, ony 11.2 % of te ntervee mcro-enterprses (0 to 9empoyees) an ony 1.8 % of te sma enterprses (10 to 49 empoyees) ere abe to anser te queston of eter pubcaton of an nventon before ing a patent ou prevent te patent from beng grante; te sare of rgt ansers t arge enterprses (more tan 20 empoyees) amounte, by contrast, to 33.1 % (Ptkety, 2007).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 73 17-01-2008 11:10:21



74


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d


I N d U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y The campagn “what s the key?”

“wat s te key?” (abbrevate wITK n te foong) s an IPR aarenessrasng campagn organse an run by te UK Inteectua Property Ofice

(UKIPO) n partnersp t natona an oca autortes. Its objectve s tooffer an overve of te a reatng to IPRs, to so ter mportance tobusnesses an o tey are reevant to companes of any sze. Te purposeof te campagn s to make busnesses, especay SMEs, more aare of ter nteectua assets an ter potenta an to offer nformaton an support ono to protect tem. wITK can be seen as an “nformaton ay”, set up as ato-part IPR event: urng te irst part, a sort ntroucton to nteectuaproperty rgts coverng patents, trae marks, esgns an copyrgt s gvento nform te ntereste auence about recent eveopments an avaabepubc support servces. depenng on ere ts event s presente, ocaservce provers are aso nvte to tak about ter support servcesconcernng ega protecton of IP. Te secon part of suc an event presentscase stues c escrbe an ustrate o (oca) entrepreneurs beneitefrom usng IPR to protect ter nteectua assets. Pane scussons an open

queston/anser sessons are offere at te en of eac event. Te programmes manage n coaboraton t te Cartere Insttute of Patent Agents(CIPA) an te Insttute of Trae Mark Attorneys (ITMA), tus ncung asoreevant servce provers from te prvate sector. Events to promote teprogramme ave been e a over te UK n co-operaton t oca partnerssuc as Busness Lnk Ofices an regona eveopment agences, cunernes te regona caracter an menson of wITK.

• Open ays: To forms of open ays ere many observe n te context of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy: () Open ays, ere te IPR servce-provng organsaton aos free access to ts premses an nforms vstorsabout aspects reate to IPR; often, suc open ays are accompane by an

exbton ere at fferent boots nformaton on IPR-reate subjects sspaye. () Open ays, ere patent attorneys make a sort presentatonon (mosty ega) aspects nke to IPR an anser questons from te auence.Te atter type of open ays s generay organse by servce-provngorgansatons c usuay o not operate IPR servces n-ouse (see asosecton .4.3).

• Pubcatons: Brocures an ebstes: Te creaton of brocures on fferentaspects of IPR an/or presentaton of suc nformaton on a ebste (e.g., for onoa but aso n a more nteractve manner) seem to be strong actvtyies, especay for many patent ofices.17 An exampe s te LIIP (LnkngInnovaton an Inustra Property) pubcaton by te Tecnoogy watcCentre of henr Tuor n Luxemburg (an outcome of an nternatonacooperaton nvovng Spans, Luxemburgs, Irs, Itaan an Greekorgansatons (mosty patent ofices)) c proves 10 pragmatcrecommenatons for SMEs “…highlighting the importance of IP to companies´

business strategies” (LIIP, 2003: 4). Anoter exampe s a seres of treenformaton bookets pubse by te Czec Inustra Property Ofice nEngs an Czec anguage on trae marks, esgns an te protecton of tecnca soutons. wt respect to ebstes, a noteorty exampe ou bete IP Tookt offere va te ebste of te Canaan Insttute for InteectuaProperty (CIPO) c ncues extensve aareness-rasng materas (e.g.,brocures an nteractve earnng gues) t respect to IPR (see aso Grap18).

17 Toug te stuy focuses on natona offerngs, t sou noneteess be mentone tat wIPO (ttp://.po.nt/sme/en) an te EPO (ttp://.epo.org/focus/nnovaton-an-economy/sme-case-stues.tm) proveextensve matera of ts kn, too.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 74 17-01-2008 11:10:21



7



R T S E R V I C E S

• IT-Toos: Te term “IT-toos” subsumes computer appcatons c may beuse for assessng te knoege of an SME on IPR, usuay by computngscores to mutpe coce questons. Cases n pont are te “IA Bencmarkngappcaton” accessbe va te ebste of te IA Centre Scotan, te “IP

Toobox” appcaton c s an nteractve scorng too ncue togeter t te LIIP pubcaton on Cd-ROM or te “IP SCORE” appcaton eveopeby te dans Patent Ofice an so to te EPO. IP SCORE ffers from oter toos n so muc as t attempts to prove an assessment of te vaue of acompany’s IP – te oter toos “smpy” compute scores t respect to teaareness/”maturty” eve of te company t respect to IPR.

Te second group of measures try to tacke te ssue of IPR aareness n a mucmore toroug ay an aress vaue/effectve aareness as a oe. Sucservces count conseraby ess n numbers, an te borerne beteen teseservces an n-ept consutng/ tranng servces may be at tmes burre. Often,servces n ts group eveope aso aareness rasng matera suc as brocuresan pubcatons tat cou be, on ter on, aso consere as aareness rasngmeasures smar to te ones subsume n te irst group. To stnct servce typesemerge n te scope of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy:

• (Frst-tme) IP aut servces: IP aut servces try to nuce aareness by tryngto prove a irst gue on o to vaue an use te IP of a partcuar enterprse.Usuay, ts s one n a one-to-one process manner, ere te company savse by an experence IP professona. Te IP professona ntrouces tecompany to te concept of Inteectua Property an te fferent toos of IPprotecton. Eventuay, e/se attempts to make an nta assessment of tevaue of te company’s IP an a ay an IPR strategy sou be esgne. Casesn pont are te “IP Préagnoss” programme n France or te offerngs of te“IA Centre” n Scotan.

Graph 18 The IP tookt provded by the Canadan Insttute for InteectuaProperty (CIPO)

Source: CIPO 2007, screensot of web Ste Juy 22 2007

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 75 17-01-2008 11:10:22



76


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d


I N d U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y IP Prédagnoss (FRA)

Prove by te Natona Inustra Property Insttute (INPI–Insttut natona ea proprété nustree; te Frenc Patent Ofice), te overa am of IP

Préagnoss s to anayse SMEs as a oe t regar to ter IP an IPRusage. Te servce s tus not focuse on a partcuar project or nventon. Tetarget group conssts of enterprses tat ave not regstere a patent before(tn te past ive years) an usuay o not possess an IPR strategy an/or reevant IP management. durng an IP Préagnoss (c can ast beteen1. to 2 ays) te servce prover (an IP rgts expert) scusses te company’sstuaton t ts manager n orer to entfy te enterprse’s nees, antsan expectatons n te ie of IPR. A stanarse guebook as beenspecicay esgne an teste for ts purpose. Te expert anayses te stateof te art of te IP management an/or strategy of te enterprse, evauateste sgnicance of IPR n te present stuaton an formuates ssues tat canprobaby nluence te future ambtons of te company. Nees, prortes anexpectatons are entie an put nto a report outnng te fferent optonsfor te enterprse to protect an use ts IP.

• Servces tat rase aareness mpcty: Anoter ay encountere to conveyvaue an effectve aareness n a toroug manner s troug te use of nstruments c one ou normay not assocate as a typca means of rasng kno-o on a partcuar subject. For exampe, subses toarspatentng costs mgt be esgne n suc a ay tat te supporte SMEs intemseves n a poston ere tey get avce/consutng on IPR tnfferent stages of te patent ing process. Te payment nstaments of teGerman “INSTI SME Patent Acton” subsy are, e.g., nke to fferentmestones of te patentng process, an te servce team accompanes teSME troug a tese fferent stages. Te subsy (.e., te possbty to getmonetary support for a costy process) tus acts as a vece (“ygene factor”,

as one mgt be tempte to ca t) to create an entry pont for SMEs n orer to receve – probaby muc more mportant – “frnge beneits” n te form of IPR kno-o (see aso secton .3.7 an annex I, case stuy nr. 1).

Thngs to consder hen settng up aareness rasng support servces

n the ied of IPR

Te foong ponts emerge as sgnicant factors nluencng te success of aareness rasng measures:

• Te eve of knoedge needed to aceve “vaue” as e as “smpeeffectve” aareness s most key so g tat snge one-ay events an tetypcay 20-to-40 page brocures ony be abe to tacke a rater smanumber of ssues nvove n eang t IPR. Tey mgt sufice to aert SMEsto certan ssues, but a hoe range of harmonzed events, brochures

and nformaton matera s neee to aress te fu spectrum of

probem areas. Anoter mportant consequence cou be tat aarenessrasng measures sou tus aso ea to furter eucatona offerngs (e.g.,tranngs n te ie of IPR), c are oever, as note n secton .1, rater scarce.

• Smary, an t respect to te scope of te offerngs, aareness rasng nte ie of IPR ncues tackng te subject of IP management, .e., tecorrect coce an usage of fferent IP protecton/appropraton forms nfferent busness contexts. In ts context t s nterestng to note tat, onaverage, users of te case stuy servces c aresse aareness rasng(e.g., serv.p roasos, te “wat’s te key”-campagn, reaers of te LIIPpubcaton, IP Préagnoss users an te users of te on-ne servce PVSOnneof te dans patent ofice) gauge te avaabty of nformaton of “y an

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 76 17-01-2008 11:10:22



77



R T S E R V I C E S

y not to patent” (c refers more to vaue aareness) to be of moremportance tan te queston of “o to patent” (c covers tecncatesof te patentng process an refers more to effectve aareness) (see Grap19). Tere s tus a einte nee to expan to users te varous pros and

cons of patents and other IPR toos, pror to expanng n eta egatecncates of appcaton/regstraton proceures.

• Te to most mportant quaty factors (n terms of “g reevance” assgneto tem by users from te case stuy servces) for IPR aareness servces arete “competence of staff” an te “ease of access” (see Grap 19). Teatter refers n partcuar to aequate marketng an vsbty of te servce.Servces n te US an partcuary Austraa (see secton .6.1) ave, to tsen, been abe to bran ter actvtes rater successfuy, probaby more sotan n Europe. Te nvovement of an netorkng t oter actors n tennovaton anscape (e.g., eveopment/tecnoogy agences, or even sngetecnoogy centres at oca eves) are, n ts context an for promotonareasons, of partcuar mportance for patent ofices creatng aareness rasngmatera or organsng respectve events. Experence gatere n te course of te case stuy anayss suggests tat suc cooperaton patterns ave beename for, t varyng egrees of success. Overa, as aso note n secton.3.3, te eve of cooperaton beteen eveopment agences an patentofices remans n many nstances an area for mprovement. Interestngy,“spata stance” oes not pay muc of a roe for aareness rasng measures,not even for roasos.

• User segmentaton s an mportant topc for aareness rasng actvtes. Aste case stuy anayss as son, IPR aareness rasng servces are key torun across SMEs t very fferng backgroun knoege on IPR – somemgt be compete IPR begnners o ony ant genera nformaton, oters

Graph 19 Key quaty factors for servces smar to case study servces hchhave epct aareness rasng as ther man goa, percentage of

respondents

14

25

26

4 1

46

48

51

54

6 5

71

73

8 4

3 5

52

5 3

4 6

39

42

34

28

23

24

18

12

0 1 0 2 0 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


%

Competence of Staff


Timely delivery

Information on different IP strategies ("why/why notto patent")

Technical information ("how to patent")


Scope of service

Costs

Individual contact



Spatial distance

Source: User survey, services considered = 5, n = 100

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 77 17-01-2008 11:10:22



78


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



mgt just ook for recent upates an canges t respect to te IPRframeork, e agan oters ave very specic questons regarng, e.g.,ongong patentng projects. Aganst ts backgroun, t seems necessary totaor pubcatons an especay events ceary to specic target groups an

communcate corresponng stnctons accorngy: Te Austraan SmartStart ntatve by IP Austraa, for exampe, focuses expcty at enterprsestarters. Te “wat’s te key”-campagn, anoter exampe, prove tepossbty to partcpants to pose questons va a ebste before te actuaevent as e, aong t to prepare ansers an aapt presentatonsaccorng to te nees of te customers.

• Te vaue of case studes as a means to convey te practcabty of tepresente nformaton n pubcatons, on ebstes an events as beenunerne n statements of SME users n te case stuy anayss as e as nstatements gven by servce provers.

• Of course, te quaty of the nformaton/content prove n tevarous bookets an on te ebstes s an mportant etermnant for tesuccess of an aareness rasng measure. As te content of most of te

aareness rasng matera as not been subjecte to a peer reve by IPprofessonas n te course of ts stuy, tte can be sa t respect to tsssue. Anecota statements receve by IPR experts suggest tat ts may beess of a probem, an n ts context t s noteorty to state tat te user satsfacton eves of te users of te aareness rasng case stuy servces tte quaty of te nformaton prove s rater g.

• Very tte can be sa about te vaue of IT toos n te context of IPRaareness rasng, ue to ficutes n obtanng reasonabe amounts of contact aresses of users or any oter types of ocuments ncatng teperformance of te appcatons for tat matter. Tere s, oever, some formof consensus on te se of te ntervee IPR experts, o ncate tat nottoo muc sou be expecte from IT toos – e probaby usefu for creatngpremnary an basc aareness on some IPR ssues, te mts of entreycomputer-base appcatons are key to be reace very fast.

A n a, one can say tat tere are penty of – mosty vauabe – exampes crase aareness of SMEs to a basc eve ere te irms be e to beeve tatIP an Inteectua Property Rgts are an area c nees to be ooke nto furter an c s of mportance to te operaton of a busness. Te queston s eter te pentfu avaabe nformaton bookets an ata presente on ebstes suficeto create te ntene vaue an smpe effectve aareness eve as escrbe byPtkety. Most key, foo-up eucatona offerngs an tranng mgt be neeeto create suc knoege eves beyon ts irst very irst type of aareness. If sucfoo-ups o not exst, SMEs mgt reman stuck t ter “nta” knoege.

A secon mportant ssue concerns te marketng an vsbty of te aarenessrasng measures; as escrbe, nsttutona set-ups are often a mtng factor for ager user take-up (see aso secton .3.3).

5.4.2 Fee reductions and subsidy services –an alternative to a reformed IPR framework?

The cost ssue revsted

As state n secton 3.4, te costs of usng IPR are, partcuary n Europe, conserabean are frequenty mentone as te man barrer for a er usage of te system of Inteectua Property Rgts by SMEs. Ts ssue appes especay to patents – tno Communty Patent on te orzon an ongong ebates regarng tentroucton of te European Patent Ltgaton Agreement (EPLA) an EuropeanPatent Jucary (EJA) (see aso secton 3.2.1), one as to assume tat te coststuaton s not key to cange n te foreseeabe future n te EPO member states.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 78 17-01-2008 11:10:23



79



R T S E R V I C E S

Takng tus te current IPR system as gven, an acknoegng a market faure of te system n c irms in temseves n savantageous postons smpybecause of company sze, te subject of patentng costs can st be aresse bypocy by offerng speca provsons to SMEs. To basc optons exst n ts respect:

Frst, a genera exempton an/or reucton of fees for SMEs reate to tepatentng process (e.g., n te form of tax exemptons), an, secon, te esgn of subses toars patentng costs for a seecte target group of sma an meum-sze enterprses tn te scope of a ecate support programme or servce.

Encouragement of patentng by SMEs through isca ncentves or

genera fee reductons

Severa countres ave cosen te irst pat an offer genera fee reductons for patent appcatons ie by sma irms. In te USA, for exampe, canges n 2004n te U.S. Coe (U.S. Coe: Tte 3, Secton 41() (1)) ao for a 0 % reuctonon a range of fees reate to patentng (e.g., basc ing fees, searc fees,examnaton fees, extenson of tme fees or mantenance fees, patent ssue fees,) for sma enttes, c comprse sma busness concerns (usuay companes t esstan 00 empoyees), nepenent nventors an non-proit organsatons (“Sma

Entty Act”). Te preferenta rates can be obtane smpy by ing out te sectonof te reevant forms for sma enttes. A smar offerng s aso avaabe at teCanaan Inteectua Property Ofice (CIPO) an – snce 2000 – at te JapanesePatent Ofice (JPO). Te EPO, oever, oes not ave an equvaent to te SmaEntty Act for Europe.

Tere are arguments for an aganst te ntroucton of genera fee reuctons or tax exemptons for SMEs an ter patentng projects:

• On te postve sde, a genera fee reucton for sma enttes s abe to reacout to a arge target group (namey te oe SME popuaton, f t s eyknon) an can be aso rater easy set up. Te amnstraton of sucmeasures s – by comparson t subses– often smper, as t sufices tocoect te appcaton forms an ceck f te box entte “SME” or “smaentty” s tcke off an respectve evence for te company sze s prove.It can be aso consere to be “far”, as no fferentaton s mae t respectto varabes oter tan company sze.

• A donsde t “smpe” fee reuctons can be seen n te fact tatfferences t regar to barrers encountere by fferent target groups maybe reatvey ficut to cater to. One mgt, for exampe, teorse tat tebarrers to patentng for SMEs n certan nustres are ger tan n oters;or tat mcro-enterprses an/or start-ups are muc more affecte by te gcosts of patentng tan meum-sze enterprses. Lterature sources (Agnger,Tcy & waterkrcen, 2006) anaysng te effect of isca support for R&dactvtes suggest tat isca measures sou be taore to specic targetgroups; tere s no reason to beeve tat ts sou not appy aso to smar measures or fee reuctons n te ie of IPR – te queston s o specic oneas to be tout makng te appcaton process overy compex.

• Fsca ncentves often operate ke a ater-can: Avaabe funs (.e., “osses”n tax earnngs) are strbute among a rater arge popuaton of beneicares,c means tat eac beneicary gets a reatvey sma sare of te avaabesupport voume. Gven te fact tat many patents may be of tte commercavaue, pocy makers mgt ant to conser to make support ony avaabe totose SMEs ose patent projects ave a g probabty of commercasuccess, an ere te cost barrer s a true constrant (.e., no prvate nvestor s foun to take te rsk). For suc cases, t mgt be better to revert to specasubsy support programmes.

• A cruca pont of fee reuctons/genera isca measures s te etent of the

reducton etended. If t s too o, t ony be perceve as a sma rebatec s “nce to ave” but oes not cange te SMEs stance toars

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 79 17-01-2008 11:10:23



80


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



patentng – tose tat conser te costs of patentng to be n genera too g st refran from usng patents, an tose o in t orte contnue to use patents as aays an utse te preferenta rate as a gft (.e.,te atter group ou tus to a arge extent relect “eaegt osses”). If,

on te oter an, te reucton s too g one mgt run te rsk tat SMEs an n patents of oer quaty, just “to gve t a try”. Ts ou a tote areay g stran of te patent ofices c are confronte t soarngpatent appcatons.

• Te possbe ssue of a soarng number of patent appcatons by SMEsf fees are generay reuce as aso to be seen n te gt of operatonaconseratons: In te specic context of patentng, te fees retane are useto cross-subsse te examnaton process of te patent appcatons (haroff,Enge & Mösce, 2007). A toroug examnaton process can be conserecruca for te quaty of a patent grante. Many experts ntervee pont tote ger quaty of patents grante by te EPO as compare to US patentsan see ts as an asset for Europe; t s sa tat te ger quaty s ue tomore strngent examnaton stanars tan n te US. Te reance on g-quaty patents means tat ega proceengs c queston te vaty of patents (an c – f tey ncrease n number excessvey – most keynbt nnovaton actvtes) are ess key to occur. In ts context, haroff,Enge & Mösce argue tat oerng te fees for SMEs – an inancng ts bytakng funs aay from te examnaton ork – ou enanger te quatyof te examnaton process an at te same tme oer te barrer toquestonabe patent ings.

• Steerng possbtes exst t respect to te many fees encountereurng te patentng process. Pocy makers mgt ece to oer onyspecic fees or to prove a genera reucton for a fees.

Gven te arguments presente above, one can concue tat genera reuctons of fees or tax exemptons are a possbe ay of tackng te cost barrer tn tecurrent IPR system, f tey are mpemente te rgt ay: Tey sou be taoreas muc as possbe to te target groups (tout makng te appcaton process too

compex), an tey sou not be inance at te expense of te examnaton ork.deaegt osses – smar to tax provsons tn genera R&d support (Agnger,Tcy & waterkrcen, 2006) – may be consere acceptabe, f te preferentarates are set at a eve ere te cost barrer s more or ess abose, but ere teSMEs st ave to contrbute on funs to an extent tat te amount of irms ctry to make a run t o-quaty patent appcatons s mnmse.

The many lavours of subsdy servces

Beses genera fee reuctons (an/or tax exemptons), tere s aso te possbtyto set up support servces or programmes tat exten subses toar patentngcosts to SMEs. A number of countres ave mpemente suc measures, an ananayss sos tat te moe of operatons ffer conseraby aong te mensonsof te pase of IPR usage targete, te targete user group or te type of costs/feessubsse. Exampes of suc subsy scemes ncue te foong servces:

• INSTI SME Patent Acton (GER): Te subsy offere remburses costs reateto irst-tme patent-appcatons ony. Te maxmum amount of subsyamounts to € 8,000, pa out n fferent nstaments c are nke tofferent mestones n te patentng process an offere n ive stnctve“servce packages”. Te subsy can, for exampe, be use to cover te costsof patent attorneys or for nternatona appcatons (see annex I, case stuy nr.1).

• Te Inteectua Property Assstance Sceme IPAS, offere by Enterprse Irean(EI) (IRL): Te funng sceme s a hghy seectve scheme: Te experts atEI must be convnce tat te nventon s capabe of patent protecton,tecncay feasbe an t pans for a commerca expotaton. If grante,te subsy s to be pa out to te patent attorney unertakng te patent

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 80 17-01-2008 11:10:23



81



R T S E R V I C E S

protecton servce on beaf of te SME. Normay, te subsy can amount to€ 30,000. Companes tat are consere to ave a g grot potenta maybe egbe even for a ger eve of support (up to a maxmum of € 10,000)(see annex I, case stuy nr. 9).

• Promoton of Inustra Property by SEGAPI (ESP): Ts type of subsy targetsSMEs from a dstnctve regon n Span, namey Gaca. Companesregstere n ts area can appy for ts subsy c covers te costs of IPR-reate actvtes, among c are aso te costs for patent appcatons. Tesubsy s not mte to patents but may aso be use for trae marks. Tesubsy may cover up to 70 % of ncurre costs t a ceng set at € 36,000(2006; 200: € 30,000). As survey resuts so, te servce mosty attractsSMEs c are nvove n trae mark regstraton (see annex I, case stuy nr.13).

• Tecnoogy Netork Servce – 1er brevet by Oséo nnovaton (FRA): Amongoter servces, te Tecnoogy Netork Servce offers te so-cae “FrstPatent” servce (1er brevet). Ts servce subsdses consutancy ork byan IPR expert c s reate to te ing of a patent. A ceng s set at

€ ,000, c correspons to about ive orkng ays. Te subsy s parecty to te consutant n carge. As n te case of te INSTI SME Patent Acton, ony irst-tme patentees are aoe to take avantage of te offerng(see aso annex I, case stuy nr. 1).

• Fnns founaton for nventons (FIN): Te Fnns Founaton for Inventonsextens subses for payng te costs reate to patentng, ater-stage proucteveopment an commercasaton. Te subsy ncorporates a condtona

re-payment cause to te founaton epenng on te success of teproject an on te revenue receve from t by te nventor. Te amount to berefune s mte to te amount of support grante by te Founaton, .e.te subsy s nterest-free. If te nventon fas to aceve commerca success,te nventor s uner no obgaton to pay te subsy back. Te averageamount of subsy s € 10,000 (see annex I, case stuy nr. 12).

In anaysng te subsy servces escrbe above, one irst an mportantobservaton concerns te target groups: On one an tere seems to be a cass of servces c am expcty at SMEs c ave not patente before (INSTI SMEpatent acton, TNS 1ere brevet). On te oter an, a secon cass of servcesfocuses on SMEs (regaress of eter tey ave a patent story or not) osepatentng eneavours are especay promsng commercasaton-se. Te atter servces are, as a consequence, muc more seectve an, on average, proveger funng voumes. Servces suc as te INSTI SME patent acton ave, bycontrast, more of an aareness rasng functon but n: Te subsy seemsto consttute a ygene factor an a catayst for te every of kno-oconcernng IPR an ts mportance for te busnesses.

Grap 20 sos te combne beavoura atonaty of te INSTI SME Patent Acton, te Frenc “1er brevet” servce an te Irs IPAS sceme – a servcesc exten inanca support soey for actua patent ings (.e., tey subsse

cost ncurre n te patentng process ony).18 Te igures ceary relect tat tesesubsy servces seem to ave te most effect n kno-o reate areas (aareness,genera knoege management kno-o an patent knoege n te busnessenvronment).

Especay n te context of te Frenc an German servces – c aress SMEstat not patent before – one cou, f an ncrease of patentng actvty assoey ame for, be tempte to nterpret ts sare as a “faure rate” of te servce.Te ncrease usage eves t respect to oter IP protecton metos an te

18 It as to be note tat n te course of te case stuy anayss oter servces c offere funng for patentappcatons ere aso scrutnse. hoever, subses ere n tose cases aso avaabe for purposes (tecncafeasbty stues, etc.) oter tan patentng projects, an t te questonnare gven t as not possbe tostngus beteen te fferent types of subses/grants prove.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 81 17-01-2008 11:10:23



82


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



ncrease kno-o surrounng IPR pont, oever, to a stuaton ere n manynstances servce beneicares erve kno-o for usng nstruments oter tanpatentng, an approprate ts knoege by cangng ter genera atttuetoars IP protecton.

Grap 21 sos te aggregate atonaty of te subses of te tree servces(INSTI SME Patent Acton, TNS “Frst brevet”, IPAS) n terms of projects tat ounot ave been pursue tout te inanca funs grante. Pure atonatyeffects (.e., te patentng eneavours ou ave eintey not been carre outtout funng from te servce) amount on average to 13 %; pure eaegtosses (te patentng project ou ave been carre out tout any cange/moicaton, regaress of te exstence of te servce) are recore at 20 %. For te remanng 67 %, te subsy a some form of catayst effect – te patentngprojects ere eter execute faster or to a arger scope (e.g., arger geograpcacoverage) tan before.

Takng te tree anayse servces as references, one cou postuate tat, as a rueof tumb, te ntroucton of a inanca subsy for patentng projects ou keycreate patents tat ou not ave exste tout support n about 1 to 2 out of

10 supporte projects; aroun tree out of ten supporte companes cou beexpecte to pace more empass on patents, resutng from usng te servce.hoever, as as been son, te subsy servces anayse o not ony ave a costreucton functon, but ork on mutpe eves c ave to be taken uy ntoaccount en nterpretng te performance of servces of ts type. Te respectvean resutng “frnge beneits” arsng often from te fact tat te subses are asopart of an ntegrate portfoo of IPR servces t rater strong nformaton/consutng eements cou prove to be a key success factor. Ts cou be moremportant tan one ou assume at irst gance, gven te “substtuton of cost”functon, as te servces are abe to nuce astng canges n te oe atttue of te supporte SMEs toars IP appropraton/protecton.

Graph 20 Combned behavoura addtonaty of subsdy servces hch offer inanca support for patent appcatons, users n %

8

9

1 2

1 4

17

17

2 0

2 1

2 2

3 1

33

4 9

5 5

59

- 1

- 1

-1

- 1

-3

- 3

- 6

-3

- 3

-3

-3

- 6

- 6

40 -- 20 0 2 0 4 0 60 8 0

inc reased decreased


General awareness








IPR training


Out-licensing


In-licensing

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, services considered = 3; n = 143

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 82 17-01-2008 11:10:24



83



R T S E R V I C E S5.4.3 A single white rose in a bucket of red roses:

The case of embedded IPR services

Embee IPR servces are eine for te purpose of ts stuy as servces coperate n te ie of nteectua property rgts an are part of portfoos of servces c o not recty am at IP-reate ssues. Embee servces are tusIPR offerngs tn oter non-IPR focusse servces. In te course of tebencmarkng stuy, te foong stngusabe generc types of suc embeeofferngs emerge:19

• IPR support gven to SMEs n technoogy centres or ncubators

• IPR support prove tn te frameork of a thematc (R&D and

nnovaton) support programme (c s usuay aso te to atecnoogy ie, most promnenty botecnoogy)

• IPR support for SMEs tn te scope of a technoogy transfer

programme from unversty to ndustry

• IPR support gven to SMEs thn genera nnovaton and R&D

support programmes (e.g., programmes ere subses an grants

extene for R&d/nnovaton support programmes may aso be use for patent ings)

Tese types of servces ave to a certan extent been subjecte to te enticatonan bencmarkng process n te scope of te uneryng stuy, but t as to benote tat tey ere – ue to te caracterstcs of many of tese servces (eter sma scope; ficuty n assessng te extent to c SMEs are actuay targete;or ack of cear borer nes beteen te IPR an oter servce parts, makng tficut to anayse te IPR eements n an soate manner) – not te foca pont of te stuy esgn. Noneteess, suc servces can be n many ays consere to beessenta for everng IPR kno-o to SMEs.

Technoogy centres and ncubators

Tecnoogy centres an ncubators are mosty pubcy fune support nsttutonsoperatng on a regona eve tat am () to support te entrepreneura process an

19 Beyon te arcetypes ste beo, one cou aso conser a snge IPR servce or support programme offere, for exampe, by a eveopment/tecnoogy agency or a camber of commerce as ‘embee’, f t s seen t respectto a oter servces offere by tese nsttutons; te borerne beteen at consttutes an embee servce ana snge/soate servce s tus burre. For te sake of better carty, te bencmarkng stuy refers to te termembee servces f embeeness can be seen at te nvua servce/programme eve.

Graph 21 Combned addtonaty of the subsdes provded thn the scopeof servces hch subsdse costs reated to patentng, users n %

20 %

20%

2 0%

13 %

1 4%

13%

Undertaking carried out withoutany change/modification

Undertaking NOT carried out -different IP instrument used instead

Undertaking carried out at a later stage

UUndertaking carried to a smallerscope(e.g. less geographical coverage)

Undertaking carried out with other sources of finance

Undertaking NOT carried out at all

“pure” deadweight lossesre additionality

Source: Austrian Institute for SME Research, services considered = 3; n = 143

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 83 17-01-2008 11:10:24



84


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



() to ep ncrease survva rates for nnovatve start-ups. For ts purpose,ncubators offer a range of servces suc as provson of ofice space an/or aboratory factes t te necessary nfrastructure, avce on o to set-up anmanage a company or netorkng servces. A part of te offere servces may aso

ea t IPR.Te bencmarkng stuy resuts ncate – n ne t inngs from oter stues20 – tat most tecnoogy centres, f tey offer IPR support servces, o so manythrough referrng to outsde IPR eperts (e.g., n te form of “open ays”t patent attorneys). Ts mtaton to a sgnpostng functon s mostyetermne troug sze constrants – most ncubators smpy o not ave enougmanpoer to offer n-ept consutng on IPR ssues n-ouse; furtermore, tescarcty of staff trane n IPR matters as to be note agan (see aso secton.3.4).

we te scope of te IPR servces prove s tus consequenty rater sma, tesgnicance of te support prove sou not be unerestmate: Frst, becausemany of te SMEs supporte operate n busness envronments ere patents payan mportant roe (e.g., g-tec nustres suc as bo-tec or ICT arare

sectors) an, secon, because ncubators ave, more tan centray offere supportservces, rect contact to te entrepreneurs/tenants on ste. Tecnoogy centrescan tus aso be mportant carrers an strbuton cannes for nformaton onarger IPR support programmes.

Thematc programmes

In secton .1, t as note tat most servces c offer support to SMEs n teie of IPR are not expcty focusse on certan tecnoogy ies or nustres.Tematc programmes can be eine or fferentate from oter programmes byexacty ts trat – tey offer a broa range of support to actors (unverstes an/or companes) n a specic tecnoogy ie (frequenty n te ies of botecnoogyor nanotecnoogy).

Servces offere tn suc a programme may ncue, for exampe, te supportof arge an ong-term cooperatve researc projects n acaema, grants to snge

researcers (e.g., for rtng ter octora teses an/or mobty grants),netorkng actvtes or promotona actvtes for te tecnoogy ie as oe(e.g., te organsaton of “summer scoos” for g scoo stuents). Advce on IPR s often a servce eement, too, not te east because most of te tecnoogyies aresse operate – smar to ncubators – n an nustry envronment erepatentng s of speca reevance.

IPR support s mae avaabe by tese kns of tematc programmes as a resourceon a stan-by bass for a nvove partes (among c may aso be SMEs), ann many ays smar to tat of tecnoogy centres. Often, te servce conssts of referra actvtes base on contractua reatons t IPR specasts (e.g., patentattorneys); sometmes a patent attorney s even empoye recty by teprogramme. Patent attorneys ntervee n te course of te uneryngbencmarkng stuy an orkng for suc programmes state tat offerng IPRcounseng tn a tematc programme s a sensbe approac, f te actorsaresse are rater ne to te topc of IPR. Once te IPR kno-o matures, tstype of support as, oever, ts mtatons.

Bot t respect to ncubators/technoogy centres and thematc

programmes, one can concue tat ter coseness to the SME target group

can be consdered the bggest asset an make tese type of servces an

20 A stuy by wIPO (wIPO, 2003b) ncates tat, e 60 % of 63 ntervee ncubators n Europe a a person ncarge of IPR, most offere ony basc avce, an tenants ere usuay referre to oter nsttutons (t coften fferent types of contractua agreements exste). For exampe, ony 12 % of te ncubators assste rectyt te raftng of patent ings; by contrast, 71 % referre to externa partners. Issues reate to enforcng IPrgts, to negotatng cense agreements an to vaung IP ere, on average, ane n a smar manner. Morerect ep from te ncubators seems to be avaabe t regar to avce concernng conientaty agreementsan trae secrets an – surprsngy – t patent nformaton searces: 90 % of te ncubators ou ave patentsearces conucte on beaf of te tenants, an 41 % ou even conuct suc patent searces n-ouse. A szeeffect – te arger te ncubator, te ger te cance to in broaer n-ouse IPR support – as, as cou beexpecte, note.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 84 17-01-2008 11:10:24



8



R T S E R V I C E S

mportant carrer n the ied of IPR support. Bearng mtatons regarngresources n mn, embee servces are mosty n a e-eine poston tocompement arger, natona offerngs, many by externa referra an sgnpostngactvtes on a regona eve.

5.4.4 Patent database and information search services

Patent atabase searc servces are an mportant par of te pubc IPR supportsystem for SMEs n a varety of countres (e.g., n Austra, Te Neterans, denmark(over te ebste of te dans Patent Ofice), n Itay or n Germany). In very smacountres, suc as Lectensten, patent searc servces offere by specaseepartments of genera-purpose brares consttute even te man type of pubcsupport servce avaabe for SMEs n te ie of IPR. Aganst ts backgroun, tseems mportant to take a coser ook at te specic goas, te moes of operatonan key success factors for suc servces.

The usefuness of patent nformaton and ts under-usage by SMEs

Te man ratonae ben offerng patent atabase searc servces s, on te onean, seen n te fact tat unnecessary an reunant R&d can be avoe.

Accorng to te Austran servce serv.p, for exampe, te patent ofice estmatestat aroun € 10 mo are save eac year, because companes in out tat attey ere to researc an/or patent as areay nvente. On te oter an,usng patent nformaton may aso serve a number of oter functons: In a stuyconucte by ha, Oppenem an Seen ten motvatons to use patentnformaton–n aton to te avoance of oube researc costs–ere entie(ha, Oppenem & Seen, 2003):

1. For purey tecnca nformaton/eucatona purposes

2. For inng out f sometng s patentabe

3. For compettve postonng (n orer to stay nforme about at compettorso)

4. To ceck for possbe nfrngement (.e., to ceck eter anoter company

nfrnges a irm’s patent rgts or eter te irm nfrnges anoter company’spatent rgts)

. For inng ne areas to get nto an/or opportuntes for censng n

6. For “nventng aroun” oter patents

7. For costng/prcng ntegence, n case nformaton on proucton an/or operatng costs can be erve from te patent ings (c s sa to be oftente case)

8. For probem sovng (n orer to get eas for sovng smar probems n-ouse)

9. For nformaton about manufacturng processes (processng generay entas agoo ea of tact knoege c a company, even f t os a patent, try to keep to tsef. Noneteess, a ot of nformaton about suc processes canbe foun n patent atabases)

10. For mprovng te success rate of patent appcatons

despte of te beneits escrbe, te – sparsey avaabe – emprca ata on tsssue suggests tat SMEs ary use patent atabase searc servces. Evence tots en as been coecte by te ha, Oppenem & Seen stuy. Te stuynvestgate te use of patent nformaton t 390 SMEs n patent-afine nustresn te UK. Te inngs ncate tat 44 % of te enterprses never use patentnformaton an 80 % of tose companes tat carry out searces o so ony oncea year or ess frequenty. A sze effect as observe, .e., arger irms a a ger propensty to conuct patent searces tan smaer ones.

wtn te scope of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy, te usage of nformaton

channes utse by users of IPR support servces for nnovatve unertakngs

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 85 17-01-2008 11:10:24



86


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



(ncung patent nformaton) as aso enqure nto. Te resuts are son nGrap 22. Tey ustrate tat even for irms c are usng pubc support n teie of IPR (an tus are aso more expose to nformaton promotng te usageof patent atabase servces) patent nformaton s not a prmary coce as regars

sources of nformaton for nnovaton projects. Te most mportant of suc sourcese “tn te enterprse” or come from “customers”. Tese nformaton sourcesare of g reevance for 69 % an 39 % of te users of IPR support servces,respectvey. Patent nformaton from atabases s ony of g reevance for 17 %of te companes, an of meum reevance for anoter 14 %. Yet, tese sares arecomparabe to tose for unverstes (c 17 % of te responents eem gyreevant, an an atona 1 % moeratey reevant as a group of nsttutonsfrom c to get eas for nnovatons).

Users c specicay use a patent atabase searc servce suc as te expresssearces of serv.p (see annex I, case stuy nr. 8) or Innovaton by patent Informaton(IOI) (see annex I. case stuy nr. 4), for exampe, naturay pace more mportanceon patent nformaton: About 0 % of te users of te IOI servce assert tat patentnformaton s of g or meum reevance to tem for nnovaton projects, as oaso about af of te serv.p users ntervee.

Base on te resuts presente above, t can noneteess be sa tat a sgnicantnumber of SMEs c cou make goo use of patent nformaton o not utsepatent atabases. Te reasons for ts are, accorng to expert opnons anterature sources, escrbe as foos (ha, Oppenem & Seen, 2003):

• Te ack of knoedge on o to access te patent system an o toperform patent searces on te se of te SMEs.

• Te compcated anguage of patent ings c refers especay to teega termnoogy use (ts factor as specicay unerne by tentervee experts).

• Te ack of tme on te se of te SMEs to get to kno o to perform patentscans, especay f tey are to be one on a contnuous montorng bass.

• Te costs nvove (e.g., for tranng staff or for te necessary manpoer to

screen te atabases)• Te overoad of nformaton. In ts context, te ha stuy escrbes te

stuaton of a irm n a partcuar nustry, ere an estmate 10 patents per ay are grante ore. Uner suc crcumstances, over 3,000 patentocuments sou be eay revee every year, c s – tout proper pre-seecton an prortsaton – mpossbe to ane by a sma enterprse.Ts factor as aso very muc unerne by te ntervee experts.

Graph 22 Reevance of seected sources of nformaton used by companesutsng IPR support servces for SMEs for nnovatve projects,percentage of servce users *)

69

1119

39

18 178

20 18 23 17

13

8

1 9

20

2015

10

16 2224

14

2

5

0

20

40

60

80

10 0


%

Withinenterprise

Fromenterprise

group

Suppliers Customers Competi-tors

Universities Gover-nment

institutions

Develop-ment

agencies

PrivateNPOs

Conferen-ces

Fai rs Patentdatabases

*) Multiple answers allowed

Source: User Survey, Services considered: all (15); n = 630

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 86 17-01-2008 11:10:25



87



R T S E R V I C E S

Te barrers escrbe above pont to te fact tat conserabe expertse s notony necessary n terms of o to carry out patent searces, but especay tregar to te nterpretaton of te resuts. Te stuaton s, accorng to expertopnons, furter aggravate by te fact tat te patent cassicaton systems

becomes more an more sopstcate, e at te same tme te amount of nformaton store ncreases sgnicanty, too.

As a consequence, many SMEs c recognse a nee for conuctng patentsearces revert to an ntermeary o conucts te patent scans on beaf of tecompany. Suc ntermeares may be prvate consutants or pubc supportservces; n most nstances, oever, patent attorneys seem to be contracte for ts purpose (ha, Oppenem & Seen, 2003). we probaby sensbe at irstsgt, ts approac mgt n tsef consttute a barrer to usng patent nformaton,gven te rater g ay an oury rates of patent attorneys. As many SMEsou be abe to conuct a conserabe sare of te searces by temseves, haet a. argue tat many irms “…do not seem to have learnt the knack of using a patent

agent constructively” (ha, Oppenem & Seen, 2003: 11).

By contrast, some patent attorneys ntervee even argue tat IP epartments n

arge irms ncreasngy empoy patent attorneys o are specase n te area of patent cassicaton systems an ant tem ony to conuct patent searces. Tsmpes tat te nformaton eve n ts area may ave ncrease to a pont cexcees te kno-o of a “reguar” patent attorney, suc as a sef-empoyepatent agent o acts as a one-stop sop regarng IPR for SME customers.Important consequences may arse because of tat for tgaton cases. Anecotaevence suggests tat many possbtes to igt cams (e.g., ere a companyaccuses an SME of nfrngng ts patents) by conuctng pror art searces aninng evence tat te patent sou not ave been grante n te irst pace(c s often a successfu strategy), are forgven; nstea, many patent attorneysassume tat te efenng SME knos ts busness an patent envronment anbu up te case from ts pont.

Modes of operaton of pubcy funded patent database search servces

Te market faure t respect to patent nformaton usage by SMEs s aresseon a natona eve many by tree types of pubc nsttutons n Europe: (1) speca“patent nformaton” departments of brares (ones t a genera purposeor brares of tecnca unverstes), (2) specase patent nformaton centres

and ponts (c may ave starte out temseves or as part of a brary) an (3)– ncreasngy – te ndvdua natona patent ofices. 21 For many natonapatent ofices, patent searc servces seem to be, as a matter of fact, key bungbocks n ter attempt to estabs temseves as servce provers for SMEs. Tseveopment s, oever, not unspute as t may ea to te spacement of prvate IPR servce provers (ts ssue s eat t n more eta n secton .).

we te goas of te servces are smar, .e., create aareness of IPR an especayte utty of patent nformaton an ncrease te knoege of SMEs t respectto patentng actvtes n ter busness envronment, te moes of operaton for suc servces ffer sgnicanty:

• Patent nformaton centres usuay operate on a stand-by bass, .e., nterestepartes may come n person to te premses of te ofices an rea trougocuments, Cd-ROMs an oter avaabe matera. Some of te arger patentnformaton centres n te PATLIB netork ave ene ter nformatonofferngs to aso ncue nformaton on esgns an trae marks, to actveyssemnate nformaton (brocures) on te usefuness of IPR or to organse open

21 In te context of te brares an patent nformaton centres, te PATLIB (PATent LIBrary) netork as to bementone. Estabse by te EPO an natona patent ofices, te PATLIB netork nks patent nformaton centres,accrete as suc by te natona patent ofices, n a member states. Te am of te netork s to mprovecommuncaton an coaboraton among tese centres an to promote patent aareness to te genera pubc. TeEPO an te EU fun tese centres to an extent, an te EPO aso proves servces suc as tranng of staff. TePATLIB netork as suc s, because of beng a supra-natona ntatve, not part of te anayss. hoever, nvuaPATLIB centres ere scrutnse, f tey ere of speca mportance for te IPR support system n a country or regon(especay n smaer countres). Currenty, te EPO counts about 300 PATLIB centres (ata of 2004).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 87 17-01-2008 11:10:25



88


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



ays togeter t patent attorneys (ere ntereste partes ave te possbtyto ask questons); sometmes, tranngs are offere on o to use patentnformaton (see German Patent Informaton Centre Stuttgart; see annex I, casestuy nr. 2). Tese servces can be caracterse by te fact tat access to searc

factes are offere, e te actua searc s mosty conucte by te customer. An nterestng exampe of o patent nformaton centres can be furter enance by combnng natona an EU-e programmes can be foun nItay t te INFOBREVETTI servce (see text box beo).

Infobrevett – The Itaan netork of patent nformaton ponts

and patent brares as an eampe of an attempt to enrch the

PATLIB system on a natona eve

INFOBREVETTI s a netork – manage by Unoncamere, te Assocaton of te Itaan Camber of Commerce–c nks togeter a outets anepartments of te Itaan Camber of Commerce eang t IPR, as eas te Itaan PATLIB Centres an te smar PIPs (Patent Informaton Ponts).Te netork s bascay centre aroun a ebste (ttp://.nfobrevett.

camcom.t) c as te overa goa to promote te eveopment of IPknoege n Itay. More specicay an t respect to SMEs (te most keyman target group gven te backgroun of te Camber of Commercerunnng te servce), t s sougt to ep SMEs n utsng patent nformatonan referrng tem to te servces of te nvua Patent InformatonCentres. Infobrevett encourages SMEs to use te patent atabases temsevesan tres not to act beforean as an ntermeary conuctng searces onbeaf of ts customers.

Te netork proves fferent types of nformaton servces. Some of tem,bascay genera nformaton servces, are free of carge. More etae ansopstcate servces are, oever, so. One of te man nstrumentsempoye beses te ebpage s a nesetter nformng about trensregarng patent nformaton an patentng actvtes. Te key strengt of te

servce s seen n te natona an netork caracter, e te Camber of Commerce can run, usng ts oca ofices, PATLIB Centres an PIPs n amostany reevant regon of Itay. It as been observe tat patent appcaton actv-tes ave ncrease more n regons ere PATLIB Centres an PIPs ave beenpromote troug Infobrevett tan n regons ere suc centres annformaton ponts are absent.

• Te nformaton technoogy no enabes many patent nformatonatabases to be searce onne. Natona patent ofices are often n teprocess of reesgnng ter eb pages to ncue suc searc possbtes (e.g., te dans patent ofice, see annex I, case stuy nr. 14) – ts s one ason response to te eman expresse by SMEs an many IPR experts tatceap, smpe an accessbe ays of conuctng patent searces are neee.Te EPO aso aos for onne searces n a varety of ts atabases.

• One can stngus beteen o-eve patent nformaton servces anhgh-vaue nformaton servces (vaue ae nformaton servces)(Lagemaat & Frackenpo, 200). Lo eve searc servces can be eine asrater “crue” searc servces, ere te resuts of te searc are notnterprete, itere an/or ranke. By contrast, n vaue ae g-eveservces, te servce prover aso unertakes to quatatvey nterpret teresuts of te scan an gauge te reevance of te ocuments. we patentnformaton centres are more concerne t o eve servces, t seems tatte natona patent ofices are movng t ter servce offerngs n terecton of vaue ae servces. A case n pont s te express searc servcesof te serv.p parta ega entty n Austra (see text box beo).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 88 17-01-2008 11:10:25



89



R T S E R V I C E S

serv.p: Eampe of a servce deveoped by a subsdary of a

natona patent ofice and focussng on patent database searches

Serv.p s te name gven to an outsource unt of te Austran Patent Ofice

ose man task s to prove patent atabase searc servces, for te mostpart to SMEs. Searc servces are offere usng a range of stanarseservces. wt te prouct “Expressrecercen” (express searces), serv.punertakes to ever te resuts of a pror art searc tn four eeks for aunie prce of € 1,320. More sopstcate an taor mae searces are asopossbe. In aton to searc servces n te oman of patents an traemarks, serv.p aso offers tranngs courses an transaton/copyng servces.

Te ega form of te servce s tat of a “parta ega entty”, meanng tatt as to operate ke a prvate irm an to at east cover te costs of operaton.Te status as a “parta ega entty” aos t to separate te soveregncaracter of te patent ofice as an ofica nsttuton an te ess mpartaan more customer-beneit focusse approac of a servce unt. In tscontext, serv.p can aso r tsef of bureaucratc structures necessary n a

pubc amnstratve nsttuton. Yet, serv.p can st make use of synergyeffects t te parent patent ofice by resng tn te same bung.

Anoter exampe s tat of te nta set up of te IOI programme n te Neter-ans:

IOI: Eampe of a patent database search servce, here a

technoogy/ deveopment agency cooperated th the natona

patent ofice

wtn te scope of te programme IOI (Innovaton by patent nformaton,Innovate oor Octroo-nformate) te dutc Patent Ofice an a tecnoogy/eveopment agency (Syntens) teame up to offer patent atabase searces

to SMEs. Te servce ame at eucatng SMEs an transferrng knoegean sks enabng SMEs to in nformaton on patents. Orgnay, te servcefocusse on performng peroc (custom mae) patent scans for users ansenng te “front pages” of te seecte patents to tem. After a commercapatent agency’s compant t te Neterans Competton Autorty(NMA), ts actvty as termnate on 24/02/2004.Te measure afterarsoffere nformaton servces, tranng programmes, taor mae avce servces,referrng entrepreneurs to specase commerca partes, an provng co-funng to re commerca partes n support of usng IPR. In prncpe, IOI,from 2004 on, soe SMEs o to conuct a “irst-tme” patent searc anreferre tem subsequenty to commerca partes, notaby patent attorneys.Te programme as suc oes not exst any more, but as nstea become partof ay operatons at Syntens an at te dutc Patent Ofice.

Performance and key success factors for patent search servces

Tree patent nformaton searc servces ere subjecte to te user survey carreout n pase 3 of te researc exercse. Tese searc servces ere (1) Innovatonby patent Informaton (IOI) (see annex I, case stuy nr. 4), (2) serv.p (see annex I,case stuy nr. 8) an (3) German Patent Informaton Centre Stuttgart (see annex I,case stuy nr. 2) Te resuts of te survey gve nsgt as to at can be expectempact-se from suc servces an at ssues customers eem as mportantquaty factors for te estabsment of smar offerngs. Toug te esgn of teservces ffers a ot, tere are common ponts observabe t a tree servces.

One irst an strkng observaton concernng te user-take up of te anaysepatent nformaton searc servces s tat t to of te tree servces (te PIC

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 89 17-01-2008 11:10:25



90


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Stuttgart an serv.p) a g sare of te suppose SME user base conssts of patentattorneys (etermne by te aress matera).22 Ts someat surprsng resut– gven te suppose focus on SMEs – can be attrbute to to factors: Frst, trelects te ntermeary roe of patent attorneys o conuct searces on beaf

of SMEs. Ts aso unernes te entie nee of externa expert nterpretatonof searc resuts. Secon, an ts reason s gven many by te provers, n orer to ease amnstratve burens customers o not nee to regster t te servceprovers, for exampe, en enterng a reang room. Tus, eavy users t amuttue of searc nees are more key to ave regstere at some tme, an suceavy users are more key to be patent attorneys an representatves of IPepartments of arge irms.

In terms of performance, te servces seem to ave aceve ter goas to a far extent. Foremost, tey ncrease te patent knoege n te busness envronmentfor 67 % of ter users, ncrease genera aareness for 64 %, an mproveknoege management kno o for about a tr of te user base (see Grap23).

Interestngy, patent usage n te overa IPR strategy ncrease ony for 22 %. At

te same tme, many irms no pay more attenton to te usage of nformaprotecton mecansms (suc as trae secrets, c as ncrease for 18 % of teservces). Noteorty aso s te cange of atttues toars reance on testrategy of compexty: About 9 % rey more on tat strategy, e anoter 8 %rey ess on t. Ts resut ggts te very nvua mpact searc resuts canave on a company, epenng on ts busness an patent envronment, anunernes te argument tat no pror empass sou be gven to patentng or any oter IPR protecton strategy for tat matter.

Grap 24 sos o users of patent nformaton servces gauge te mportance of a number of factors for te set-up of searc servces smar to te ones tat erenvestgate n te course of te case stuy anayss. Interestngy, te factor tatas consere most mportant as te ease of access an denticaton (for

22 In te case of IOI, ony SMEs are egbe for support.

Graph 23 Changes of atttudes or usage eves and/or attenton gven tocertan IPR reated subjects, resutng from usng patent searchservces, percentage of users of patent nformaton servces

5

6

9

9

1 1

1 3

14

16

2 2

27

3 0

33

6 4

67

-1

-1

-1

-1

-8

- 1

- 3

- 1

- 4 0 - 20 0 20 4 0 6 0 80

increased decreased

%


General awareness



IPR training






In-licensing


Out-licensing


Source: User survey, services considered: serv.ip search services, IOI and PIC Stuttgart, n = 95

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 90 17-01-2008 11:10:26



91



R T S E R V I C E S

62 % of g reevance, an for anoter 2 % of meum reevance). Aganst tebackgroun tat many servce provers (ncung serv.p an te PIC Stuttgart)contempate tat te vsbty of te servce to SMEs an respectve marketngactvtes are areas n nee of mprovement, ts resut can be seen as a strong

ncaton tat marketng nees sou be especay aresse en settng uppatent atabase searc servces.

Te secon most mportant factor s seen n te competence of the staff , c4 % conser to be of g reevance. Ts s n ne t te inngs tat staff quaicaton s a key ssue en settng up IPR support servces n genera, ue tote compex cross-scpnary nature of te subject. In te context of searcservces t mgt be assume tat SMEs expect personne to be fuy famar tte searc toos an te atabase recors avaabe; furtermore, t can be expectetat ep t nterpretng searc resuts s ame for, at east to a certan extent.hoever, as te scope of te servce offerngs an referra actvtes are not amongte ger rate factors, t can aso be assume tat te expertse of te staff sexpecte to focus mosty on te very subject of patent nformaton; a furter extenson of te servce offerngs, .e., to cover tranng, eucatona an consutngnees beyon tose possbtes areay offere, s tus not antcpate.

Ts oes not mean tat te ntroucton of suc vaue-ae servces sou notbe unertaken; te reatvey g sare of users o beeve tat ssemnatonnformaton on “y an y not” to patent s mportant (for 32 % of greevance an for anoter 12 % of meum reevance) ponts to a nee n tsrecton. It may be suspecte, oever, tat ang servce offerngs mgt aso

Graph 24 Reevance of key quaty factors for the desgn of patent databasesearch servces smar to the ones nvestgated n the good practceanayss, aggregated perceptons of user of patent search servces


Competence of Staff

Timely delivery

Scope of service

Spatial distance

Costs




Individual contact

Information on different IP strategies (”why/why notto patent”)

Technical information (”how to patent”) 26

32

1 5

12

1 8

2 1

2 0

6

25

45

54

6 2

1 9

1 2

15

2 4

24

2 1

3 6

27

2 2

9

7

2

0 1 0 2 0 30 40 50 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 10 0


%

Source: User survey, services considered: serv.ip search services, IOI and PIC Stuttgart, n = 95

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 91 17-01-2008 11:10:26



92


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



cange te structure of te user group an attract SMEs c ou otersenot use patent searc servces.

Anoter sgnicant factor for ts type of IPR servce s tmey devery: 4 % of te users assert tat ts aspect s gy reevant, anoter 9 % see t as moeratey

reevant. Te mportance gven to tmey every s ue to te prortsng conceptof IPR: For exampe, oever ies irst (n Europe, Japan) or oever nvents irst(USA) s te one o be grante te patent. But aso n tgaton cases or stopan go ecsons regarng R&d projects, eanes ave to be aere to. Teres of course a trae-off beteen conuctng a very toroug patent scan anrecevng resuts as eary as possbe. An, as t many suc trae-offs, te a of ncreasng margna costs an ecreasng margna utty appes. Anecotaevence suggests tat some SMEs may mtgate te osses ncurre by teescrbe trae-off by contractng to separate partes to conuct a patentsearc:

“For us, it is vital to get patent information as fast as possible. If a patent

search covers 80 % of the ground in a certain amount of time, it is for us

of more use than a search which covers 99 % but takes forever. In practice,

we contract two service providers to perform a scan within a specified time period. We then compare the results, and the combined findings are usually

much more informative than if we would have contracted only one party

and given it more time to perform its task.”

(User survey: serv.ip SME user)

wt respect to te remanng key quaty factors scrutnse, to tngs are npartcuar notceabe: Frst, costs are rater o on te prorty st of te users.Secon, spata stance s gven o sgnicance.

Ts reacton to costs can be nterprete as meanng tat as ong as te costs arenot excessve, an te quaty of te searc resuts s reasonabe, SMEs ou beng to pay a certan amount of money for goo patent searc servces. As oter stues ave unerne te mportance of o cost patent searc possbtes for SMEs (see ha, Oppenem & Seen, 2003), tese resuts may soun contractory.It sou be note, toug, tat te user survey specicay aresse exstng anprobaby experence users of patent searc servces. Suc users mgt aveovercome an nta anxety about costs an gane a fferent percepton of tecost/beneit rato. In aton, t can be expecte tat te costs experence for patent attorneys actng as ntermeares for SMEs may pay a roe n te SMEves, too (.e., patent searces may be consere costy as te patent attorneyso conuct searces on beaf of SMEs cost a ot). Ts percepton s aso n net te inngs of ha, Oppenem & Seen (2003) o state tat “patent

attorneys may…present a professional barrier rather than an enabling function.”

Te reacton to spata dstance s n ne t te inngs for oter IPR supportservces. It can be taken as a cear ncaton tat t s key unnecessary to estabspatent atabase searc servces n every ocaty. It seems very key tat successfuympemente user freny onne searc possbtes even oer suc a emann te future.

Taken togeter, t s ficut to assess eter patent nformaton servces soube te man vece to foster IPR usage by SMEs. Most key, toug, tey soube precee by offerngs eucatng SMEs on subjects of genera IP an IPRmanagement. In suc an envronment patent searc servces ou be an eementof te IPR servce portfoo an not ts man par. havng sa tat, t seems tatsome eve of knoege on te beneits an te mecancs of conuctng patentsearces sou noneteess be estabse n SMEs.

Beses te key quaty factors escrbe above, one mportant ssue nees to bearesse: Namey, to at extent SMEs can conuct patent searces bytemseves an at c pont atona ep t nterpretaton sou beprove. Future tecnooges (suc as semantc patent anayss) (water, Brusc &

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 92 17-01-2008 11:10:26



93



R T S E R V I C E S

hartung, 2007) may make t easer for SMEs to perform patent scans on ter on.In te meantme, SMEs o ece to use te servces of a patent attorney soumake sure tat tey cose a patent attorney t profoun tecnca an egakno o n te SME busness envronment.

Pocy makers sou be aare tat by ntroucng vaue-ae searc servcestey may enter te teatre of prvate servces provers (patent attorneys anoters). It appears tat pubc provson of searc servces as te potenta of conlctng t prvate-sector provson of tese servces, but, at te eve of tepatent attorney, aso offers compementartes. Tese ssues be eat t n tenext secton.

5.5 The interaction between private and publicsupport services

Te uneryng bencmarkng stuy set out to anayse te performance aneffectveness of te system of pubc support gven to SMEs n te ie of IPR on anatona an regona eve – prvate sector offerngs ere tus not rectysubject to scrutny. Nottstanng ts, t seems necessary to comment onexstng prvate servces an o tey o (or sou) nteract t pubc measures.In ts context, t sou be irst recae tat pubc nterventon sou eay onybe carre out f a market faure can be entie. As as been son n tepreceng capters, te exstence of a market faure can be argue, as SMEs mayface more barrers n puttng ter IP to use tan arge companes.

hoever, f servces offere by te prvate sector are up te task an meet tenees of sma an meum-sze irms to te fu extent, te ntroucton of pubcmeasures ou ony ea to unante spacement an crong out effects.

Te foong scusson rees to a arge extent on anecota evence, expertopnons gatere troug te course of te stuy an some terature sources(Lagemaat & Frackenpo, 200; ACIP, 2003; Ebersoe, 2003). As a consequence,t not be abe to anser te queston on an emprcay irm bass, as prvateservce offerngs ave not been uner scrutny n te scope of te uneryng stuy.

Yet t sou prove a startng pont for furter scussons an anayss.Te prvate sector of IPR servce provers seems to many comprse to groups of professonas/companes:patent attorneys (resp. patent agents) an commerca

patent nformaton provders (c ncues companes suc as derent,Europatent, INCOM an IFI Cams). Tese commerca patent nformatonprovers run ae-vaue searc servces an operate sef-esgne atabases tpatent nformaton. In aton, externa busness consutants an ayers may asopay a roe en t comes to ssues reate to marketng/trae marks or generaknoege management.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 93 17-01-2008 11:10:27



94


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d


I N d U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y Prvate sector support for SMEs n matters reated to IPR:

The patent attorneys

Te professon of patent attorney (oter terms use are patent agent or

patent ayer) as ntrouce soon after te estabsment of patent ofices,as t as recognse tat n orer to ane patent ssues, specaze ega ase as tecnca kno o s neee beyon tat offere by reguar ayers.Patent attorneys, n contrast to reguar ayers, o a unversty egree nnatura scences or n engneerng as a necessary requrement for ter eucaton. Foong ter unversty grauaton, tey ave to ork nnustry on patent-reate ssues for some tme, enro n post-grauate acourses an may ten appy to take an exam n orer to become an accretepatent agent. In Germany, te oe process to become a patent attorneytakes at east 34 monts (sort pat to become a patent agent) or up to 10

years (ong pat).

Te man task of a patent attorney s te ega representaton of patentees

vs-à-vs te patent ofices an patent courts, an n ts roe tey exercse amonopoy. Furter, tey aso gve avce regarng IPR matters. In practce,tey ep patentees to ie ter patents, a n tgaton cases, conuct pror art searces an aso offer consutng on genera IPR matters. It s mportantto notce tat te concept of a patent attorney s boun to terrtores: InGermany (as n oter countres), one can stngus beteen German patentattorneys (o are ony aoe to represent cents n front of te Germanpatent ofice) an European patent attorneys (o can ony represent n frontof te EPO). For eac of tese to cases t s necessary to take separate examsn orer to be accrete.

Grap 2 sos at type of provers (pubc an prvate) te irms questonen te user survey ncate tat tey seek for support of nnovaton projects.

Atoug one cou expect a certan bas toars pubcy support offerngnsttutons because te nterveees are actuay users of suc measures, annottstanng te fact tat te user survey cannot be representatve for teoe group of SMEs seekng support n nnovaton matters, some mportant annterestng concusons can st be ran.

Te most strkng observaton s tat 18 % of te responents frequenty sougtsupport from patent attorneys; an atona 27 % so occasonay. In tota,

Graph 25 Usage frequency of dfferent types of servce provders for nnovaton projects, percentage of servce users*)

15 114

121 8

8

353 7

2 2

34 27

24

11 13

3 20

20

40

60

80

10 0

frequently occasionally

%

Nationalagency

Regionalagency

Chamber of Commerce

Patentoffice

Patentattorney

Externalconsultants

EU Other

*) multiple answers allowed

Source: User Survey, n = 630

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 94 17-01-2008 11:10:27



9



R T S E R V I C E S

4 % reporte usng patent agents. Ts igure paces te patent attorneys tr onte st of servce provers use, after natona an regona tecnoogy/eveopment agences. If one consers ony “frequent” usages, patent attorneysare even n te ea by 3 %-ponts. Ts pcture s observe not ony at te

aggregate eve, but aso at te eve of most of te nvua servces anayse.Togeter t anecota evence coecte n te course of te user survey, onecan assert tat patent attorneys are of vta mportance for te functonng of tepubc IPR support system:

1. Patent attorneys seem to be the irst choce of many SMEs hen

they are concerned th ssues coverng IPR. Te expectatons regarngte kno-o of patent attorneys are qute g among SMEs, an tere arencatons tat many SMEs o not kno o to put te patent agents to ter best use (see aso secton .4.4 on patent nformaton servces)

2. Many pubc support servces act as entry pont servces for patent

attorneys. Cases n pont are especay open ay servces organse bytecnoogy centres/ncubators or cambers of commerce. Smar “open ays”are aso offere by patent nformaton centres (see German Patent Informaton

Centre Stuttgart, annex I, case stuy nr. 2). Referra servces, suc as te onesoperate by te IOI servce or te Irs IPAS sceme aso ave an entry pontfuncton for patent attorneys (see te respectve case stues n annex I).

3. Evence as been foun to support te argument tat patent attorneys

hep SMEs n successfuy appyng for and usng pubc IPR support

schemes. For exampe, te support from patent attorneys can be conserequte mportant for te success of te German INSTI SME Patent Actonservce, as tey often ep SMEs n te appcaton process for te subsy (seeINSTI SME Patent Acton, annex I, case stuy nr. 1).

4. Patent attorneys use pubc support servces targeted at SMEs

themseves. Ts especay refers to patent searc servces, t te ep of c patent attorneys conuct searces on beaf of SMEs.

Te above mentone ponts so nstances ere te prvate sector servce

offerngs of patent attorneys an te pubc servce provsons are compementaryan appear to serve te nees of SMEs.

Tere seems to be, oever, one type of servce actvty – patent database

search servces – c may become ncreasngy a conlct zone beteen

prvate and pubc servce provders (see aso secton .4.4). Some patentattorneys an especay irms focusng on conuctng patent scans seem to fear tat neer servce offerngs of patent ofices eventuay rve tem out of temarket, f te scope of te searc servces ens. Exampes to ts en are ony of an anecota nature, but noneteess ep to ustrate te possbe probems:

• Te ntroucton of te IOI servce n te Neterans an ts focus on patentscans prompte concerns of a patent attorney o ie a compant for reasonsof unfar competton. In orer to avo controversy, t as ece to ater teesgn of te support programme n suc a ay as to create a n-n stuaton

for a nvove. Ts “ne” IOI servce esgn ony eucate SMEs on tebeneits of usng patent nformaton an performe ony a very irst patentsearc for tem. For subsequent searces, IOI referre te SMEs to patentattorneys/commerca partes (sometmes subssng tem). Usng tsapproac, IOI manage to ncrease te aareness an knoege of SMEs,e at te same tme actng as a market enarger an catayst for te prvateservce sector. Accorng to experts, ts moe of operaton orks rater e.

• Accorng to Lagemaat an Frackenpo (Lagemaat & Frackenpo, 200), tenformaton pocy of te EPO regarng te future evouton of ts freeyavaabe patent atabases rase concerns among prvate patent nformatonservce provers n te ate 1990s: On te one an, te EPO stresse tat tou st offer ony o-eve servces for free (n orer to ao for te genera

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 95 17-01-2008 11:10:27



96


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



pubc to nform tsef about neest tecnoogca eveopments), but on teoter an te prvate nformaton servces notce atabases (suc asINPAdOC) tat supposey ceary go beyon basc searc servces. As a resut,a jont communcaton patform – te PatCom – as foune by a number of

patent nformaton provers t te am of promotng nformaton excangean mprovng nformaton pocy beteen te EPO an te prvate sector.(Later on, te practce of reguar nformaton excange – emboe n b-annua meetngs – as extene aso to wIPO an te German Patent Ofice.)In ts context, Lagemaat an Frackenpo pont to te necessty of acompettve prvate market for patent nformaton provson. Tey argue tatte prvate servce provers ere aays n te ea n terms of te ntrouctonof nnovatons (e.g., offerng “atcog” servces or Engs abstracts) ancustomer-orentaton (e.g., more convenent ofice ours).

Interestngy, tere are aso patent ofices c purposey o not enrc ter servce portfoo by mpementng “ae vaue” patent searc servces. Te USPatent Ofice, for exampe, favours an aternatve opton of creatng quatystanars for a yet to be fostere prvate market, an ten avng te patent oficeact as a centra quaty assurng nsttuton (ACIP, 2003). Ts approac s aso bengbacke up by respectve researc (Ebersoe, 2003). Generay, IPR experts agreetat te pubc sector sou focus on te o-eve servces an on creatng anmantanng frameork contons, e eavng more sopstcate servces toprvate offerngs. Aganst ts backrop, t as suggeste tat – conserng tefunctona cassicaton system (see Tabe ) – servces of type 1 (pro-actveaareness rasng), type 2 (passve nformaton provson), some aspects of type 3(tranng), an type (subses an ega frameork) sou be te oman of pubc servce provers, e a conserabe amount of te offerngs of type 3(tranng) an especay type 4 (n-ept consutng) sou be eft to prvateenterprses (consutancy irms an/or patent attorneys).

One ina tougt s tat by ntroucng pubc support servces n te ie of IPRfor a mte amount of tme, a market for respectve prvate offerngs cou keybe create or enarge. Te ratonae s tat troug marketng actvtes SMEs

ou become ntereste n suc servces, eman ou be booste, cou n turn make te market for prvate provers more appeang ancompetton ou be stmuate, c ou n turn boost servce quaty.Concernng te offerngs of patent searc servces, ts s te pat envsage by teUS Patent Ofice – n a market of prvate searc servce provers offerng g evesearc servces, te patent ofice ou act ony as a centra quaty assurance unt(ACIP, 2003). Te Austran servce serv.p, an outsource subsary of te AustranPatent Ofice conuctng patent searces an organse ke a prvate irm, may nparts be consere to be a roe moe n Europe for suc a eveopment (tougserv.p s neter a tme-mte offer, nor are tere true tenences vsbe toarsfurter prvatsaton).

5.6 IPR support services overseas –

Lessons to be learned from Australia, Japan,Canada and the USAIn orer to substantate cams regarng eements of goo practce n Europe anaso to ao for earnng effects, a number of servces ave been examne n teUnte States, Japan, Canaa an Austraa tn te irst to researc pases of te stuy. Overa, overseas IPR support servces for SMEs ere scrutnse. Teentie servces ere, a n a, not tat fferent from tose operate n Europe.Tey consste, for exampe, of aareness rasng measures, grants for IPR-reateactvtes or tecnoogy transfer nsttutons at unverstes.

hoever, some servces a an nnovatve eement c pocy makers couconser en settng up servces n Europe. Oters, e smar to offerngs n

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 96 17-01-2008 11:10:27



97



R T S E R V I C E S

Europe, are operate n subty fferent ays – especay t regar to ncentvescemes, or te empoyment of uman resources. Te foong secton brelyook nto suc servces an scuss possbe mpcatons for te European IPRsupport servce anscape.

5.6.1 IPR services in Australia, Canada and the USA

Te pubc IPR servces operate n te US, Canaa an Austraa for te beneit of SMEs seem to fa many n to casses: (1) aareness rasng measures, c arefor te most part operate by te natona patent/IP ofices an (2) a broa rangeof consutancy/nformaton servces c are embee n oter supportprogrammes – tematc support programmes n te bo-tec area or generannovaton/R&d support programmes. decate IPR programmes ke tose n teUK (e.g., IA Centre Scotan), Germany (INSTI) or France (IP Préagnoss) are essvsbe. Fnanca support programmes n te form of subsy servces c amspecicay at IPR ere aso ar to in – te U.S. an Canaa ave nstea agenera fee reucton avaabe uner a speca provson for “sma enttes” (seeaso secton .4.1).

A n a, te foong observatons can be mae:• wt respect to aareness rasng measures, te patent ofices of te US,

Canaa an Austraa ave aareness rasng measures specicay for

SMEs n pace c comprse a de range of actvtes: Semnars anevents are organse, eb pages for SMEs operate, to-free 24/7 otnes for IPR matters nstae, an pubcatons on fferent matters of IP protectonprnte. A ot of vaue s seen n presentng case stues, resp. success stores.

• we te Canaan an te Austraan patent ofice actvtes seem to ave aer approac toars IP protecton an prove broaer coverage of fferent IP protecton metos, te recent actvtes of te USPTO (.e. the

programme “stopfakes.gov”) seems to focus prmary on regstrabe

IPR and the objectve of preventng counterfetng. Ts empassseems to be n ne t te genera US strategy c as put te igt aganst

counterfetng at te eart of ts SME IPR pocy (NIPLEEC, 2006).• A aareness rasng actvtes n te tree countres nvestgate seem to am

prmary at IPR novces, an to a esser extent on ntermeate or avanceusers. Aganst ts backgroun, experts note tat te matera (e.g., brocureson fferent forms of IPR, guenes etc.) as presente usuay n a very

user-frendy ay.

• Te eve of marketng actvty seems to be rater g. In Austraa, for exampe, te “Smart Start” aareness rasng campagn bus expcty onbran creaton an reporte, as a resut of ts respectve actvtes, a sgnicantncrease n te vsbty of te servce t SMEs. Ts can certany be seen asan eement of goo practce t respect to marketng actvtes n comparsont many European servces.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 97 17-01-2008 11:10:28



98


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d


I N d U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y Austraa: “Smart Start” aareness rasng programme as a

shocase for programme brandng

Smart Start s an IP aareness rasng programme operate by IP Austraa,

te Austraan patent ofice. It s speca n severa aspects: Frst, t ntrouceste concept of IP usage an protecton partcuary to peope o ant tostart ter on busness or o ant to acqure an areay exstng company.It foos te ratonae tat en ne eas arse for creatng a start-up or buyng stakes n oter companes, te ssue of IP protecton as to be eatt especay. Secon, te programme tres to gve ans-on nformaton toIPR begnners regarng a e range of IP protecton possbtes – not teeast t regar to nforma protecton mecansms. In ts context, t snterestng to note tat IP Austraa strbutes a wnos appcaton cae“Conientaty Agreement Generator” an paces t promnenty on tsebste, aong t busness pan tempates. Smart Start actvtes comprsete executon of af-ay orksops on IPR an IP protecton (70 suc eventsere e beteen May 200 an June 2006, c ere attene byaroun ,200 peope n tota); te servce pubses IP-reate brocures

(crcuaton voume: 22,000 p.a.) an mantans ts on ebste. Tus, tetake-up seems to be very g. Ts ebste acts aso as an entry pont for oter actors n te IPR servce ie (.e., patent attorneys). A bg success factor s seen n branng actvtes, c are sa to ave e to a reatvey grecognton an reputaton of te servce t Austraan SMEs.

• An nterestng combnaton of offerng expert kno-o for free an anaareness rasng actvty can be seen n te Canaan Bank of Speakersntatve. we t ooks very smar to many of te “open ays” servcesoffere by European nsttutons n conjuncton t patent attorneys, temarketng efforts (t a centra entry pont for ntereste partes an tusprobaby ger out-reac to more potenta target groups) set ts type of

servce apart:

Canada: Bank of Speakers ntatve – Combnng free epert

advce th aareness rasng and th a centra entry pont

Te Bank of Speakers (BoS) targets SMEs an oter cents t very tte or no knoege of IP. It s esgne to rase aareness an ntrouce testrategc vaue of IP. Te objectve of te ntatve s to ave a poo of tranespeakers on IP avaabe across Canaa for engagement t organsatonsservng SMEs (e.g. busness assocatons) an for partcpaton at specazetraesos. CIPO (Canaan Insttute for Inteectua Property) promotes ancoornates te Bank of Speakers ntatve. Ts ntatve s a coaboratveeffort beteen CIPO an te Inteectua Property Insttute of Canaa (IPIC).IPIC s te prmary professona assocaton of patent an trae-mark agents

n Canaa. Speakers are IP practtoners an members of IPIC, o vounteer ter tme to ever a basc IP Aareness presentaton. Event organsersrequest a speaker for ter event va a CIPO on-ne form or by contactngter cent servce centre. Presentatons are beng mae across Canaa. CIPOBusness deveopment Oficers aso present on occason, en an IPICspeaker s not avaabe. To ate, te ntatve s ame at rasng aarenessof IP by ntroucng basc concepts suc as te mportance an strategcuse of IP; an ntroucton to trae secrets, patents, trae-marks,copyrgts an nustra esgns; usefu resources an tps; nks to IPpubcatons an on-ne toos; an contact nformaton.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 98 17-01-2008 11:10:28



99



R T S E R V I C E S

• As t regar to servces offere outse of patent ofices, conserabe effortsare pace on IPR servce eements offere tn te scope of tecnoogytransfer programmes at unverstes or state-run aboratores an/or tematcsupport programmes e.g. n te bo-tec area.

• Interestngy, t seems tat servces, ere vounteers prove avce ancounseng for free, are more promnent n te US or Canaa tan n Europe.

Accorng to experts, ts seemngy ger popuarty of a “busness ange”-ke approac – oever, mte n scope to IPR counseng ony – may avecutura roots: nvovement of retre executves an experts s sa to bevaue gy n te US an Canaan socety. It ou be certany nterestngto examne f programmes suc as te SCORE servce ou be aso a vabeopton n Europe.

USA: The Servce Corps of Retred Eecutves (SCORE) programme

– a servce hch nvoves vounteerng eperts n IPR servce

provson

SCORE s a source of free an conienta busness avce to ep bu sma

busnesses from ea, to start-up an, eventuay, to commerca success.SCORE uses more tan 10,00 vounteers ran from orkng an retrebusness oners, executves, an corporate eaers n 389 capters ocateacross te U.S. to assst sma busnesses t a aspects of busnesscounseng an tranng, ncung nteectua property ssues, toutcarge. An actve onne counseng ntatve aos sma busnesses tosearc for a counseor n a gven specaty, suc as protectng IP. we onya fe regstere vounteers (42) are ecare IPR experts, oter busnessexperts may be abe to entfy n te course of ter counseng IP-reatesubjects an refer te SMEs for more specaze ep.

More tan ,000 busness orksops an semnars are offere eac year ona free or o cost bass (on a subjects). In 200 SCORE prove on te orer

of af a mon servces troug face-to-face, pone an onne counsengsessons, orksops an semnars. More tan seven mon entrepreneursave receve counseng from SCORE snce t as starte. Te SCORE

Assocaton receve te prestgous Summt Aar from te AmercanSocety of Assocaton Executves n 2004 for ts outstanng sma busnesscounseng programme.

Overa, nnovatve eements c can be seen n servces overseas an care ort conserng for mpementaton n Europe reate () to offerngs cra on vounteerng IPR experts an act as ntermeares beteen tese expertsan support-seekng SMEs. Te avantage of mpementng suc a sceme oube to actvate kno-o at reatvey o costs. Furtermore, t seems tat () temarketng an branng actvtes of aareness rasng measures ave to be notean cou serve as roe moes for many servces n Europe.

5.6.2 The case of Japan: Towards an IP culture

As t te case of Japan, t s te magntue of te efforts aong fferent pocyies tat catces te eye an creates a favourabe envronment for IPR usage tSMEs, a so-cae IP Cuture. Te outcome of suc a broa approac s orteto examne, c s y te Japanese case s gven partcuar attenton n tefoong.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 99 17-01-2008 11:10:28



100


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



An IPR strategy for Japan

Japan pursues, after a pocy statement of Prme Mnster Kozum on February 4,2002, te goa “…to become an intellectual-property based nation” n orer tostrengten ts compettveness (Satraku, 2006). Foong tat announcement, a

number of actons ave been taken n orer to boost quaie IP usage, te mostmportant one beng te aopton of an Inteectua Property Strategc Programme.Enacte n 2003, t as esgne by te “Inteectua Property Strategcheaquarters” – specay set up for ts purpose. Te programme outnes tefoong actvty areas:

1. Foster measures to igt counterfetng an pracy

2. deveop a or eang IP system

3. Improve support for SMEs an start-up companes tat use venturecapta

4. deveop strategc actvtes n goba stanarsaton

. Move toars becomng a creatve naton

6. Promote uman resources eveopment

7. Acceerate nustry-acaema-government coaboratonTe ntroucton of te IP strategy fooe earer egsatve eveopments tomprove te frameork for IPR utsaton – suc as te ntroucton of te La on“Promotng Unversty-Inustry Tecnoogy Transfer” (TLO La) n 1998, te “Lafor Revtazng Inustra Actvtes” (te 1999 La) or te “La for EnancngInustra Tecnoogy” n 2000 (Nszaa, 2007). Te ntroucton of te IPstrategy gave mpetus to te creaton of a coerent IPR support pocy c ouaress te ssue of IPR at mutpe pocy eves. Te ratonae for te strategyas to be aso seen aganst te backgroun of te unfavourabe economceveopment of Japan n te 1990s, c s frequenty referre to as te “Lostdecae” (Satraku, 2006).

Te IP strategy a to aress frameork contons of c some ere, an toan extent may contnue to be specic to Japan. For exampe, tratona ays of

anng IP an IPR, tecnoogy transfer or even te more genera ays of conuctng busness affecte o IP as ane. Some of tese contons coube consere favourabe: Japan as, for exampe, among te irst natons tontrouce utty moes as an IPR at te begnnng of te 20t century (Suzuk,200), ncatve of a e-roote IPR traton.

On te oter an, many seemngy successfu features of moern nnovatonsystems (suc as ncubators, custers, tecnoogy censng ofices) ave not beenpresent n Japan unt recenty (Rssmanen & Vtanen, 2001: 3). Technoogy

transfer occurre many recty from unversty professors to arge companes byusng a system of onatons. As a resut, bg companes approprate tus “…a far

larger share of university discoveries than what they actually supported ” (Kneer,2007). Anoter case n pont – an t g reevance for SME pocy – seems tobe te “keretsu” system of coaboraton beteen arge irms an SMEs (Satraku,2006). It bascay escrbes a system of ong term partnersps ere SMEsprouce on beaf of ter arger counterparts. Ts system seems to make t veryficut for ne SMEs to enter a market; n aton, Japanese SMEs epen to arater arge extent on te actvtes of bg enterprses tn ts system. Te overaJapanese nnovaton performance s sa to ave been affecte by ts epenency,too, as urng te “ost ecae” bg companes reverte to a o-rsk pocyconcernng te ntroucton of nnovatons an fostere more ncrementamprovements to secure estabse market sares.

The IP strategy n practce – mpcatons for Japanese SMEs

Te keretsu system an te donaton system n unversty tecnoogy transfer are consere to consttute man nbtng factors for te eveopment of entrepreneura an reate nnovatve actvtes. Tese systems prove a ratonae

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 100 17-01-2008 11:10:28



101



R T S E R V I C E S

y pocy focuses on tree mensons to ncrease economc compettveness:tecnoogca nnovaton, entrepreneursp an IP creaton (te atter s consereto be nke to te irst to mensons) (Satraku, 2006). For te 200 upate of te Japanese IP strategy paper, a task force commssone by te IPR heaquarters

eaborate on measures to promote te nteectua property strateges of sma anmeum-sze companes. In tota, te 200 programme ste 40 supportmeasures c aress IPR usage an aareness n SMEs, n eucaton, atunverstes an te genera pubc (Satraku, 2006).

Support servces n pace

Unversty-busness coaboraton (.e., tecnoogy transfer) s a key cornerstonetn te IP strategy. Its man vece s te system of Tecnoogy Lcense Ofices(TLOs). It s ope, as far as te SME menson s concerne, tat trougappropratng te IP of unversty researc, start-up actvtes as e as out-censngto exstng SMEs ncrease.

The Japanese TLO system

Te Japanese Tecnoogy Lcense Ofices (TLOs) – c numbere 34

(Nszaa, 2007) as of te begnnng of 2007 – ave been born out of tenecessty to boost te transfer of nventons from unversty to te nustryproitaby. Te Amercan TLO system – an ts perceve success foong tentroucton of te U.S. Bay-doe Act n 1980.23 – serve as a roe moe n teesgn of ts Japanese counterpart. Te purpose of te TLOs s seen ncommercasng nventons create n te unverstes: IP ttes are transferre tote TLOs, c are organse as separate boes an c cense tetecnoogy out to nustry; royaty vens are receve n return. In tsrespect, te Japanese TLOs are not tat fferent from tose encountere atEuropean unverstes. In aton, te TLO system ams to foster te creaton of

spn-offs from unversty c cou be aso consere a form of tecnoogytransfer an aso as a secon an specic SME menson to ts type of servce. Te man ncentve for researcers to support a Bay-doe Act system es

n te professona management of te IP c creates atona ncome for teunversty an for te nventors.

hence, te professona management of te IP s te key success factor, ansevera measures ave been taken to secure success: Frst, te factor “umanresources” s recognse to be of utmost mportance. Te am s tus to attractabe an experence IP managers by provng tem ncentves, e.g., n te formof sares of royaty ncome. Secon, t as aso been ece tat, after an ntapero urng c government funs are receve, te TLO as to stan on tson feet an act ke a prvate company. Tese to factors cou be consereto consttute subte fferences from te operaton of tecnoogy cense oficesn Europe an tey cou make a uge mpact n terms of te effectveness aneficency of suc nsttutons.

23 Te Bay-doe Act enotes a pece of U.S. egsaton. Among oters, t tackes te onersp of IP rgts emergngfrom government-fune researc; t respect to sma busnesses, non-proit organsatons, an unversty. It statestat suc IP beongs to te entty carryng out te researc, not te nvua researcers.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 101 17-01-2008 11:10:28



102


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Te Japanese TLO system seems to ave aceve respectabe success snce t asbeen mpemente: Patent appcatons ncrease from ess tan 300 n 1999 to104 n 200; te amount of cense revenue create ncrease amost by a factor of 20. Tere seem to be, oever, fferences n te percepton of experts on o

far reacng te success of te TLO actuay s. Kneer, for exampe, mantans tatt as to be kept n mn tat te igures st fa sort n absoute terms encompare to te US (Kneer, 2007). Te recrutment of abe staff s n s vemost key a caenge n Japan: “…TLO personnel will have to come up the learning

curve in terms of being able to communicate with university researchers and market

inventions.” (Kneer, 2007). By contrast, oter experts ntervee n te courseof te uneryng bencmarkng stuy see exacty te TLO´s performance nattractng expert staff as te bg success story of te Japanese TLOs.

Lterature ncates tat n terms of support ame recty at SMEs, a number of nsttutons ave been pegge for puttng te natona IP strategy to practce. Tabe 8sts te man actors mentone an ter respectve major actvty an ie of support. Noteorty are te exstence of a natona centre for IP tranng an tearge portfoo of servces of te Japanese Patent Ofice.

Te European experence as son tat ebpages, servces escrptons or strategy papers aone offer reatvey tte nsgt nto te actua performance of teservces, an tat ar fact evence s neee. In ts context, opnons about oe certan servces offere n Japan are ong vare conseraby.

Tabe 8 Pubc nsttutons n Japan mentoned n terature to provde IPRsupport servces to SMEs

Insttuton Abbre-vaton

Actvty ieds for support servcesoffered for SMEs

Organsaton for Sma anMeum Enterprses anregona Innovaton

SMRJ Avce on strategc IP management

Japan Insttute of Inventonan Innovaton

JIII Consutaton servces on IP ssues

Aareness rasng semnars/orksops onIP

Patent nformaton searc servces

Appcaton avsors (orkng trougoutte country)

Lcensng avsors (orkng trougoutte country)

Natona Centre for Inustra PropertyInformaton an Tranng

NCIPI Consutaton servces on IP ssues


Japanese Patent Ofice JPO Consutaton servces on IP ssues


Patent nformaton searc servces Appcaton avsors (orkng trougoutte country)

Lcensng avsors (orkng trougoutte country)

Exemptons for SMEs concernng patenting costs

Patent Ofices of teRegona Bureaus of Economy, Trae anInustry, an SMRJ

— Consutaton servces on IP ssues

Source: Sathirakul, 2006

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 102 17-01-2008 11:10:29



103



R T S E R V I C E S

Aganst ts backgroun, a number of oter organsatons ess knon to outsersare, accorng to IPR experts, very actve n supportng SMEs n te ie of IPR, of c – most notaby – eveopment banks stan out. Ter man actvty area trespect to IPR seems to be avce an te evauaton an acceptance of IPR as

coatera n te cret busness. Varatons to ts subject exst (see Tabe 9) tregar to te exact moe of operaton or te man customer group targete (e.g.,ony SMEs or aso oter types of organsatons or prvate persons).

Tabe 9 Overve of pubc nsttutons n Japan ho offer drect support nthe ied of IPR to SMEs

Insttuton Actvty ieds for support servces offered for SMEs

Natona Insttute of Inustra Scence anTecnoogy (AIST)

Consultation services on IP issues:

AIST s Japan’s argest pubc researc nsttutoncomprsng 1 researc nsttutes. It s specase npromotng nnovatve researc projects an brngngtem to fruton troug te acquston of patents.

AIST aso asssts SMEs t ter researc projects toget patente an to be cense.

deveopment Bank of Japan Consultation services on IP issues and financial assistance:

Te dBJ offers oans to revtase fang, estabseSMEs troug usng te company’s IP as coatera. Teoan can aso be use to assst SMEs c seek IPRprotecton. durng te course of provng oans tedBJ aso offers avce concernng IPR, o to protect tan n case of ne-start-ups o to gan t.

Te Oknaa deveopmentFnance Corp.

Consultation services on IP issues and financial assistance:

Te servce promotes busness start-ups aneveopment n Oknaa by offerng equty inancngto SMEs an mcro busnesses. IPR s use as coaterafor te varous types of avaabe oans. In te course of ts, avce an assstance t IPR ssues may be

prove.Natona Lfe InsuranceCorporaton

Consultation services on IP issues and financial assistance:

NLFC proves oans (busness oans) to SMEs anmcro busnesses tat ave ficuty obtanng oansfrom prvate inanca nsttutons (venture busnesses).Te NLFC busness oans requre a guarantor or coatera an IPR may be use as coatera. Te NLFCa probts oans for enterprses engage n bankng,nsurance or specuatve transactons.

Soko Cukn Bank Netork Consultation services on IP issues and financial assistance:

SMEs are at te eart of te Soko Cukn BankNetork. Te bank specase n supportng start-ups,nnovaton an revtasaton as e as inance an

promotes cooperaton beteen companes an regons.Te netork aso proves support n IPR ssues anoffers unsecure oans to SMEs for patenteveopment.

Japan Fnance Corporatonfor Muncpa Enterprses

Financial assistance:

JFM rases funs troug te ssuance of bons nomestc an nternatona markets tout borrongfrom te government. Te funs rase are use tosubsse assstance an support n IPR ssues for SMEs.

Source: Identification process (phase 1)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 103 17-01-2008 11:10:29



104


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Nottstanng possbe varatons n te quaty of snge servces prove, onecan concue tat te scae of te efforts for estabsng IP an IPR knoege nte Japanese economy – an especay t SMEs – seems to be an orer of magntue ger tan n te oter countres scrutnse. IPR s not tacke by a

mte set of snge support servces but by a petora of measures from fferentnsttutons, coornate by a country-e IPR strategy. If measures amng at teeucatona sector or te genera pubc are aso ae to ts pcture, one caneasy recognse a strong rvng force ben estabsng an IP cuture.

Te ntenton of ts approac s to create a sno-ba effect: Knoege anaareness on fferent forms of IP appropraton/protecton metos are to sprean te prvate sector to a pont ere reta banks an nsurance companes anevauaton of IP ssues (ncung te usage of IPR as coatera) n ay-to-ay busnesst SMEs. Ieay, suc kno-o sou be avaabe not ony at centraeaquarters, but aso at te branc eve. Ts goa may not be yet aceve.

Accorng to te Kamyama, Seean & Martnez, nsttutons oter tan te onesmentone n Tabe 9 are st estant to use IPR as coatera on a er scae,prmary because of sortcomngs of vauaton metos, but t seems tat Japan sfarter aea n ts ie tan European countres or te US.24

24 Te deveopment Bank of Japan mpemente, for exampe, ts oan system for usage of IPR as coatera n 199 anprove snce ten more tan 20 IPR-backe oans to venture irms. By contrast, ony a ecae ater as t tat teGermany’s Feera Fnanca Supervsory Autorty (BaFn) offere German banks te possbty of acceptng patentsas soe coatera for bank enng (Kamyama, Seean & Martnez, 2006).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 104 17-01-2008 11:10:29



10

C O N C L U S I O N S A N D R E C C O M

A N D A T I O N S6. Conclusions and

recommendations

In search of “best practce”’

Te uneryng stuy sougt out to entfy an bencmark pubc support servcesn te ie of IPR for SMEs, an to snge out goo practces. In ts process, arater arge number of servces n te ie of IPR support for SMEs as beenentie, assesse for more etae nvestgaton, an eventuay seecte for n-ept anayss. As a matter of fact, tere s tte evence for makng a bg reeaseon ‘best practces’ n te ie. At te same tme, tere s ampe evence for compng ‘eements of goo practce’, unerstoo as eements n te esgn or executon of tose servces ose caracterstcs an quates are ‘generc’,mpyng tat ter aopton runs a g probabty of success. Accorngy, teres a set of eements of goo practce ere eac of te eements can be foun ‘outtere’, oever not te set as a oe.

Te strongest exporatory factors for expanng te varatons n performance arecontextua factors, n c te respectve servce as been esgne, enoet resources an responsbtes, an utmatey performe. As a consequence, nsearcng for eements of goo practce, t s necessary to ook at te servces, atte overa nsttutons tat ever te servces, an at te overa pocy eve,c prmary etermnes enoment t resources, nsttutona ocus an te(erarcca) poston of te servce.

In te remaner of ts concung capter, inngs, concusons, an essonsearne are tus organse n tree parts: te servce eve, te nsttutona eve,an te pocy eve. As aays, borers are burrng. Terefore, some of teconcusons are aresse n more tan one part. As a rue an tus as a esgnogc, te respectve sectons can be rea as an agena or requrement specicatonfor ong a goo job as manager(s) of a servce, as te top executve(s) of

nsttuton(s) n carge of provng a servce or parts of t, or inay as pocymaker(s).

Servce eve

1. Overa performance of IPR servces. Te performance of te present IPRsupport system s gy ambguous. despte a rater arge number of entie servces, fary fe servces can be escrbe as g performers.Some “sans” of e esgne programmes exst, but te majorty of measures o not seem to ave a strong track recor.

2. Scope of IPR servces. IPR servces are often gy specase n comparsonto te possbe subjects suc servces cou tacke. Not te east of te reasonss poor enoment t resources (buget, staff, erarcca poer, etc.).

Anoter mportant factor n ts context arses from te specic mn-sets of te nvove actors: Te support servces n pace many focus () on tecnca

aspects (“o to patent”, Regstraton ssues) an () on patents; tey arytacke ater pases of usages of IPR an seom aress IP protecton/utsatonas a oe (.e., te subject of IP management), ncung non-formaapproaces.

3. Integrated IPR servce packages / referra to other servces. Of a teaspects note n te course of te uneryng stuy, ts one stans out:Servces sou be offere n ntegrate packages, takng nto account tecompexty of te subject of IPR. Ts can be one by genuney ntegrateservces or, n orer to account for scarce expert kno-o an n orer toncrease vsbty an accessbty, by referrng to oter servces an/or nsttutons, tus amng at jont provson of servces. Ts its ncey t anatona servce esgn, ere te one-stop sop ea can be rease more

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 105 17-01-2008 11:10:29



106


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



easy, agan for te reason of poong of expert kno-o an access. Becauseof te compexty of te subject, one ougt to be noneteess aare of te facttat an IPR servce coverng a IP protecton or rater IP management ssues sary a feasbe opton. hence, referra an netorkng actvtes seem to be

mportant.4. IPR management over IPR protecton. Te compexty of te subject of

IPR as a strategc ssue eserves ncrease attenton. Partcuary, te busness/nteectua property management aspect s one factor ere many arger enterprses seem to be far aea of te average IPR-afine SME. wt IPR bengncreasngy use to create revenue, e at te same tme many patentsc are of no economc vaue are grante, an t many tecnoogcaeveopments ookng for appcatons c prove ncome, t seems tatnot te patent so muc for tsef, but te surrounng busness moe s tesgnicant success factor. Accorngy, ts ponts to te fact tat te busnessperspectve sou be gven more pace n IPR servce provson.

5. The cruca roe of quaied staff . A bg botteneck can be seen n tenumber of quaie peope avaabe for provng IPR support. Suc peope

sou ave tecnca, ega an busness expertse, an t s especay teatter aspect tat nees te gest eve of attenton. As a preconton tofosterng IPR usage, t seems necessary to foster eucatona ntatves atunverstes (busness facutes an tecnca facutes, a “tran te traner”ssue), but aso – n terms of genera aareness – at g scoo eve (“eucatete pubc” ssue). Ts may be aso one of te reasons y tranngs for SMEsare rater scarce. In esgnng approprate syab, oever, care must be takentat te quaty of te eucatona offerngs s up to te caenges – beforeany suc courses, egrees, etc. are fostere or ntrouce, exstng offerssou be cecke t respect to ter quaty (e.g., by nvovng experts formte IP epartments of arge enterprses n evauatng), as te scarcty of sucoffers may aso mpy a g varabty regarng ter true vaue n reabusness fe.

Insttutona eve

6. Insttutons matter: mnd-sets, tradtons, nsttutona archtecture.For mpementng ne or mprove IPR servces, t s not unmportant toconser o s offerng suc servces. dfferent mnsets an tratons antus fferent nsttutona arctectures make IPR servces ork n fferentays.

7. The key queston n ths contet s: what shoud natona patent

ofices do? Foong ter traton, t s questonabe f natona patentofices ave a neutra stance toars a form of IP protecton an appropratonmetos (ncung nforma nstruments), conserng ter (mpct)preference for forma approaces, an, a preference for protecton rater tanmanagement. In ts regar, t s esrabe to ave tecnoogy/ nnovatoneveopment agences act as entry ponts for cents (aso because of vsbtyssues), regaress of eter te patent ofices are eveope furter nto

fuy-lege IP ofices or reuce to ter core competence of regstratonofices.

8. Brngng the ord of patent ofices and nnovaton agences

together . IPR support servces are many te oman of patent ofices, coperate more or ess on ter on, separate from tecnoogy/nnovatonagences c aress nnovaton an R&d-reate ssues. Tere s a nee tobrng bot ors togeter, foong te ratonae tat IPR managementsou be part of overa nnovaton management. Te separaton can be seenas an ncaton of system faure. Te separaton as muc to o t testatus of a monopostc autorty t a ong traton an a cear unerstan-ng of te n- an te outse. hoever, ue to te grong ffuson of

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 106 17-01-2008 11:10:29



107


A N D A T I O N S

concepts of ‘ne pubc management’, most patent ofices ave aoptesome of tese prncpes an ave, as a consequence, been turnng temsevesnto cent-centre servce organsatons.

9. The governance of IPR servces provdng nsttutons. As patent ofices

are a rater ne type of payer n SME servce provson (an because of bengmore or ess soate from genera nnovaton support), te governance of teservces s a crtca ssue. Ts partcuary empasses te mportance of ()carefu nees anayss an servce esgn, () a systematc co-ornaton anco-operaton beteen reevant nsttutons, partcuary beteen te patentofices an te tecnoogy/nnovaton agences at te eve of servce provson,() an overarcng pocy, an, eventuay, (v) te estabsment of ncentvesfor coaboraton at a reevant eves2.

10. The nteracton of prvate vs. pubc servce provson shoud be

addressed. It seems cear tat pubc offerngs sou not space prvateones, but rater enance or gnte a market for tem. In ts context, eesgne rear scemes (ncung a ater prvatsaton of ntay pubcyfune servces) cou attract te rgt peope to o a goo job. Aong te

same ne, t seems tat cooperaton t patent attorneys s a key successfactor for IPR servces.

11. Attractng quaied staff . Te uge mportance of expert staff an teevent ack of eucatona offerngs n ts respect, especay n terms of tebusness menson, ave proven to be te most crtca factors n teacceptance an performance of IPR servces. In ts regar t s cruca tounerstan tat tere s a strong reatonsp beteen te sgnicance of teservce (coverage, buget, staff, access to oter resources, erarcca poston,expectatons, tus pannng orzons, etc.) an te abty to attract competentstaff.

Pocy eve

12. Dvson of abour beteen patent ofices and nnovaton agences . A specic queston arses partcuary t respect to te vson of abour an

te attrbuton of roes beteen te natona patent ofices an te tecnoogy/eveopment agences. Agan, te partcuar ecson epen on teesgn of te natona nnovaton system an te storca context. St, somegenera arguments can be put forar bot for an aganst te to types of organsatons. Patent ofices are tratonay concerne t te ssue of protecton of IP, tus tey focus soey on regstrabe IPR. Patent ofices possessconserabe tecnca kno-o (.e., t respect to patentng proceures)an kno-o n ega matters, an tey are perceve by customers to berater nepenent an objectve. On te oter an, tey are reatvey nen te or of support offerng nsttutons for SMEs. Tecnoogy/eveopmentagences, by contrast, ave a sgnicant track recor t regar to nnovatonan R&d support offere to SMEs, ave a er knoege of te busnesscontext an are aso better knon by SMEs. Ter IPR kno-o, s, oever,mte. Tere are some qute convncng cases of a e-baance co-operaton

beteen tese to (arcetypca) nsttutons.13. Patent ofices and nnovaton agences: To paths seem pausbe.

Te irst one s to scae on te scope of te patent ofices on ter corecompetence of patent ings (an possby atabase searces) an to enrcte tecnoogy/nnovaton agences t IPR servces. Or to enrc te patentofices t atona busness an nteectua asset management kno-o,tus creatng “nsttutes of nteectua property”26. In eter case, treeaspects seem to be gy mportant: () nkages beteen te patent ofices

2 Pocy co-operaton can be a ficut ssue as co-operaton at te pocy eve s often mssng aequate ncentves.Ts s n turn ue to te fact tat outcomes of pocy co-operaton may be ficut to ajuge ceary to terespectve nvove partners.

26 Ts approac s favoure by Goers (see Goers 2006).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 107 17-01-2008 11:10:29



108


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



an te eveopment agences sou be strengtene n eter case, an ()g permeabty for te excange of staff beteen te to organsatonssou be a goa. () Because ter servces are better knon by SMEs, an,more mportanty, because tey may key ave a more neutra stance toars

te usage of fferent IP protecton nstruments (gven te patent traton of te patent ofices), t ou be probaby avsabe tat tecnoogy agencesact as entry ponts for customers, not te patent ofices.

14. Endoment as an ndcaton of prorty settng. Many of te servcesare sma n voume an n some cases aso restrctve n terms of uraton(partcuary n tose cases, ere tey are fune an tus connecte toEuropean funng, many from te European Structura Funs). To te extenttat aocaton of resources can be consere an ncaton of prortes,proper enoment t resources (scope, buget, staff, erarcca poston,uraton) s crtca an pre-etermnes to a g egree te performance of te servces, partcuary troug te attracton of quaie staff. In tose cases,ere, for exampe, te ESF s funng a tree-year pero, te natonansttutons sou ave an agree pocy on funng an operatng te servceafter te pero of European funng.

15. Natona vs. regona approach. Tere s actuay no sgnicant evencefor fosterng a strong regona approac. On te contrary, tere are severaarguments for a genuney natona coverage: () g vsbty of te servcecan be more easy aceve f te servce s knon trougout te countryrater tan ony n a specic regon, () scarce expert kno-o can be pooeat a centra unt an oes not nee to be prove n every regon.Nottstanng ts, tere s partcuary one case, ere a regona mensoncan be avantageous, ts s, ere regona outets co-operate t natonansttutons n te promoton an every of te servce, many trougreferra to oter nsttutons an servce provers.

16. Out-reach / spata dstance. Out-reac to oca SMEs s mportant, not teeast for marketng reasons. Te case stuy user survey as son tat, ngenera, spata stance s not consere to be a crtca success factor for IPR

support servces. Regona outets can be estabse t te task to promotete servce an refer potenta customers to te centra unt. Ts oes not,oever, mean tat regona IPR servces are of no use. If tey compement tenatona offerngs, f tey ave ceary eine an mte goas n te contextof te regon an are esgne accorngy, an f tey are netorke enougt oter servces, tey can prove ae vaue.

17. Grong pocy cuture. we most nustrase countres ave eveopea comparatvey g eve of pocy cuture n te core ies of tecnoogy annnovaton pocy, te ie of IPR reate servces s st someat sufferngfrom a rater poor pocy cuture, coverng te oe pocy cyce (neeassessment, justicaton, an esgn; goa orentaton n te performancepase, quaty assurance an earnng troug montorng an evauaton).hoever, tere s evence on a grong aareness of te aopton of

eements of goo practce from te core areas of nnovaton pocy.18. The cost ssue: Te stuy set out to nvestgate at exsts an at can be

one n terms of IPR support for SMEs tn te current IPR frameork. wete resuts ave son tat a ot of tngs can be move areay n tepresent-ay context, canges of te IPR frameork tsef sou noneteessbe tacke. Ts appes especay to te cost menson: Subsy servcescannot n genera compensate for te ack of a communty patent (or tempementaton of te European Patent Ltgaton Agreement an teEuropean Patent Jucary). Tey seem to ave n many nstances more of aen aareness rasng functon tan broa cost-coverng goas. Especayfor te atter, ts type of servce s noneteess mportant. Genera taxexemptons or fee reuctons are most key not a vabe aternatve, eter –

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 108 17-01-2008 11:10:30



109


A N D A T I O N S

many because f exemptons are inance by takng funs out of oter operatona processes of te patent ofices (especay examnaton ork cs no inance by te appcaton an renea fees), one run te anger tat te quaty of te examnaton ork eterorate e at te same tme

te number of o-quaty patent appcatons (gven te oer barrers for entry) most key rse.

19. Toards an IP cuture: Fnay, te ack of avaabty of quaie staff (togeter t te ack of eucatona ntatves) sou be aso mentone onte pocy eve, as t sets constrants for te magntue of efforts possbe toboost quaie IPR usage an IP management sks of SMEs n te sort run.Many recommenatons are to a arge extent base on tese constrants (e.g.,te natona approac t a centra unt provng te pooe expertse).Gven te mportance of a irm’s IP n toay’s economy, pocy sou aresste kno-o of SMEs, traners an aso te genera pubc on IP management/protecton/usage matters. In ts ay, n te ong run, avaabty of expertstaff be ess of a probem an esrabe snoba effects, as seen n Japan, be create. Ts am sou be seen nepenenty of te current or futureIPR frameork, an t sou aso not mean tat some presposton sspaye toars patents or aganst any form of “open source” movement. Itponts to te nee tat a actors nvove sou kno about te possbtesto put IP to ts best use.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 109 17-01-2008 11:10:30



111

R E F E R E N C E S7. References

Abbot, A. (2006): Patent oficers crack uner pressure. BoE-Onne. May 2006

(cte June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.boeonne.org)Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP) (2003): Report on a reve of te

Patentng of Busness Strateges, September 2003, Austraa (cte 11 June 2007,avaabe at: ttp://.acp.gov.au/brary/bsreport.pf)

Aiginger, K.; Tichy, G. & Walterskirchen, E. (2006): wIFO-weßbuc: Mer Bescäftgung urc wacstum auf Bass von Innovaton un Quaikaton.Testue 8: Forscung un Innovaton as Motor es wacstums („wIFOte book: more empoyment troug grot base on nnovaton anquaicaton; part stuy Nr. 8: Researc an eveopment as rver of grot”),p. 28ff. Venna: Austran Insttute of Economc Researc

Arundel, A. (2000): Patents – te Vagra of Innovaton Pocy? Interna report to teExpert Group n te Project “Innovaton Pocy n a Knoege-BaseEconomy”, MERIT, Maastrct

Blackburn, R.A. (2003): Sma irms, nnovaton an nteectua propertymanagement, n: Backburn, R. A. (2003): Inteectua Property an InnovatonManagement n Sma Frms. Lonon, Ne York: Routege; p. 4-1

Cannon, S. (2003): Acevng te Beneits of a Centraze Communty PatentSystem at Mnma Cost. Case western Reserve Journa of Internatona La,

Voume 3.3, pp 41-44.

CIPO (2007): Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice (ttp://.cpo.gc.ca; cte22. Juy 2007)

Cohen, M.; March, J.; Olsen, J. (1972): A Garbage Can Moe of OrganzatonaCoce; In: Amnstratve Scence Quartery 17, p. 1-2.

De Marinis, M.M. (2002): Protectng nnovaton n Europe. IPR-hepesk Nesetter (cte 11. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.pr-epesk.org/nesetter/1/

tm/dE/ nesetter.tm)Ebersole, J.L. (2003): Patent nformaton ssemnaton by patent ofices: strkng te

baance, in: wor Patent Informaton 2(1), Marc 2003, p. –10

Eleveld, J. (2007): Companes IP Strategy; Presentaton at te PATINNOVA 2007Conference, Munc, Apr 14, 2007 (cte 14. Juy 2007; Presentaton avaabeat: ttp://.european-nventor.org/pf/patnova/ Te_Marcant_Report_Eeve.pf)

European Commission (2001): SEC 1937 of 28.11.2001: Commsson Staff workngPaper: Creatng Top-Cass Busness Support Servces (cte 6 June 2007,avaabe at: ttp://ec.europa.eu/ enterprse/entrepreneursp/support_measures/support-servces/staff_orkng-paper_2002_en.pf)

European Commission (2003a): hggts from te 2003 Observatory. Observatoryof European SMEs, Luxembourg: European Commsson

European Commission (2003b): COM 1422: Commsson Recommenaton of 6May 2003 concernng te einton of sma an meum-sze enterprses,avaabe at ttp://eur-ex.europa.eu/ LexUrServ/LexUrServ.o?ur=OJ:L:2003:124:0036:0041:EN:PdF

European Commission (200): Te Ne SME deinton: User Gue an Moedecaraton, Ofice for Ofica Pubcatons of te European Communtes(cte 08. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprse/enterprse_pocy/ sme_einton/sme_user_gue.pf

European Commission (2007): COM 16 ina of 03.04.2007: Enancng te patentsystem n Europe (cte 12 June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://eur-ex.europa.eu/LexUrServ/ste/en/com/2007/ com2007_016en01.pf)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 111 17-01-2008 11:10:30



112


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



European Patent Office (EPO) (1994): Utsaton of Patent Protecton n Europe,EPOscrpt Vo.3

European Patent Office (EPO) (200): Annua Report 200 (cte 1. June 2007,avaabe at: ttp://annua-report.european-patent-ofice.org)

European Patent Office (EPO) (2006): Te Lonon Agreement: European patentsan te cost of transatons (cte 14. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.epo.org/about-us/pubcatons/genera-nformaton/onon-agreement.tm)

European Patent Office (EPO) (2007): workng Party on Ltgaton, draft: “Assessmentof te mpact of te European patent tgaton agreement (EPLA) on tgatonof European patents” (cte 14. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.european-patent-ofice.org/epo/epa/pf/ mpact_assessment_2006_02_v1.pf

Eurostat (2004): Innovaton Europe–Resuts from te Tr Communty InnovatonSurvey (CIS III) for te EU, Icean an Noray. European Communtes (cte11. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://cors.europa.eu)

Friedewald, M., Kimpeler, S., Hawkins, R. et al. (2004): Bencmarkng natona anregona poces n support of te compettveness of te ICT sector n te EU.Fna Report prepare for European Commsson, drectorate-Genera

Enterprses, ISI Fraunofer (cte 16. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprse/ct/pocy/oc/ct-po-inrep.pf)

Gowers, A. (2006): Goers Reve of Inteectua Property. Lonon. hM Treasury

Granstrand, O. (2006): Patents an Innovatons for Grot an wefare. CamersUnversty of Tecnoogy, Inustra Management an Economcs; CIM Report2006: 01.

Hall, M.; Oppenheim, C. & Sheen, M. (2003): Barrers to te use of patent nformatonn SMEs, n: Backburn, Robert A. [e.] (2003): Inteectua Property anInnovaton Management n Sma Frms. Lonon, Ne York: Routege, p.144-160

Harhoff, D.; Engel, C. & Möschel , w. (2007): Gutacten zum Tema Patentscutzun Innovaton („Report on patent protecton an nnovaton“), report by te

scentic avsory boy for te German Feera Mnstry of Economcs anTecnoogy, avaabe at ttp://.bm.e/BMw/Reakton/PdF/G/gutacten-es-ssenscaftcen-berats-patentscutz-un-nnovaton,proper ty=pf,berec=bm,sprace=e,rb=true.pf

Innobarometer (2004): Fas Europarameter Survey 164: Innobarometer 2004.Rease by EOS Gaup Europe upon te request of te European Commsson.(cte 12. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://trencart.cors.u)

Japan Patent Office (JPO) (2006): Annua Report 2006 (cte 18. June 2007,avaabe at: ttp://.jpo.go.jp)

Kamiyama, S.; Sheehan, J., & Martinez, C. (2006): Vauaton an Expotaton of Inteectua Property – STI workng Paper 2006/ Statstca Anayss of Scence,Tecnoogy an Inustry. Pars: Organsaton for Economc Cooperaton andeveopment (OECd)

Kingston, W. (2000): Enforcng sma irms’ patent rgts. European Commsson(cte 6. June 2007, avaabe at: ftp://ftp.cors.europa.eu/pub/nnovaton-pocy/stues/ stues_enforcng_irms_patent_rgts.pf)

Kitching, J. & Blackburn, R. (2003): Innovaton, nteectua property an nformaty:evence from a stuy of sma enterprses an some mpcatons for pocy, n:Backburn, R. A. (2003): Inteectua Property an Innovaton Management nSma Frms. Lonon, Ne York: Routege; p. 16-34

Kneller, R. (2007): Japanese TLOs 8 years on; Presentaton at te IPLS 2007 n Tokyo,January 23, 2007 (cte 14. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.ryutu.npt.go.jp/semnar_a/ 2007/pf/23/A4/a4-2.pf)

Kuusisto, J. (2007): Informa IP Protecton an Management – Te Servce Sector,presentaton at te PATINNOVA 07 conference, Apr 19, 2007, avaabe at

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 112 17-01-2008 11:10:31



113

R E F E R E N C E S

ttp://.european-nventor.org/pf/patnova/Te_Marcant_Report_Kuussto_Jar.pf

Lagemaat, G. & Frackenpohl, W.G. (200): Patentnformatonen m Umfe er Patentämter, geerbcen Anbeter un er Inustre („Patent nformaton n

te envronment of patent ofices, nustry an prvate servce provers“);Presentaton at te PATINFO 200 Conference n Imenau/Germany, June 3,200

Lahner, J. (2004): Innovatonsprozesse m hanerk („nnovaton processes n tecrafts“). Göttnger anerksrtscaftce Stuen; 69. Zug.: Göttngen,Unv., dss., 2004

LIIP (2003): LIIP (Lnkng Innovaton an Inustra Property) Project. A GooPractce Gue on Inteectua Property. CVT, Centre e Recerce Pubc henrTuor (cte 7. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.tuor.u)

Matthews, D.; Pickering, J. & Kirkland, J. (2003): A strategc approac to managngnteectua property; n: Backburn, R. A. (2003): Inteectua Property anInnovaton Management n Sma Frms. Lonon, Ne York: Routege; p. 3-4

Moulin, A. & Thue Lie, H. (200): Inteectua Property Rgts an Norc SMEs: Astuy of IPR practce n te IT an Botec sectors. Leogrff AS an NorskInnovatonsCenter, Oso (cte 17. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.eogrff.no)

NIPLECC (2006): 2006 Report to te Present an Congress on Coornaton of Inteectua Property Enforcement an Protecton, wasngton: NatonaInteectua Property La Enforcement Coornaton Counc, press reeaseereto avaabe at ttp://.commerce.gov/opa/press/Secretary_Guterrez/2006_Reeases/September/28_IPReport_JontReease.tm

Nishizawa, A. (2007): Unversty start-up ventures an custerng strategy n Japan,n: Tapn, R. (2007): Innovaton an Busness Partnerng n Japan, Europe ante Unte States. Lonon, Ne York: Routege

OHIM (2007): Ofice for harmonzaton n te Interna Market. Overve: SSC009–Statstcs of Communty Trae Marks 2006 (cte 11. June 2007; avaabe at:ttp://oam.europa.eu/PdF/ofice/SSC009-Statstcs_of_Communty_Trae_Marks_2006.pf)

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2002):Unerstanng te aves of agencicaton an te governance probems teyave rase n centra an Eastern European Countres. in: OECd Journa onBugetng, Vo. 2, No. 1, Juy, 2002, p. 14–170 (26)

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2006): GovernmentR&d Funng an Company Beavour: Measurng Beavoura Atonaty

Parvan, S.V. (2007): Communty Innovaton Statstcs 72/2007: More tan af of te nnovatve enterprses n te EU o n-ouse R&d. Statstcs n Focus:Scence an Tecnoogy. (cte 11 June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu)

Peham, A. (2006): Patente as Instrumente es gobaen wettbeerbs (“patents asnstruments of goba competton”), Presentaton at te 13t Innovaton poomeetng on IPR strateges n wes/Austra, September 6, 2006

Pitkethly, R. (2007): Inteectua Property Aareness. paper presente at te RaMA2007 conference: Te R&d Management Conference 2007, Rsk anUncertanty n R&d Management, Bremen, Germany, 4-6 Juy 2007, ISBN 0-949916-9-9

Radauer, A. & Zinöcker, K. (2006): Te Usage of PART (Programme AssessmentRatng Too) n te European Context – Possbtes an Caveats. Proceengsfrom UKES/EES 2006 Conference: Evauaton n Socety – Crtca Connectons.Lonon, October 6, 2006.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 113 17-01-2008 11:10:31



114


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Rissanen, J. & Viitanen, J. (2001): Report on Japanese Tecnoogy Lcensng Oficesan R&d Inteectua Property Rgt Issues. Te Fnns Insttute n Japan (cte12 June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.insttute.gr.jp)

Roland Berger Market Research (2004): Stuy on te Cost of Patentng. Stuy carre

out for te European Patent Ofice (EPO). (cte 6 June 2007, avaabe at:ttp://.european-patent-ofice.org/ epo/ne/cost_anayss_200_stuy_en.pf)

Sathirakul, K. (2006): A Stuy on te Patent Expotaton an Management BestPractce Moe for Japanese Sma an Meum Enterprses. Fna Report. JapanPatent Ofice Long-term Researc Feosp Program 200 (cte 7 June 2007,avaabe at: ttp://.jpo.go.jp/torkum_e/kokusa_e/pf/pcoop_asa-pacic_e/200jpo_taan.pf)

Schmiemann, Manfred (2006): Communty Innovaton 24/2006: SMEs anentrepreneursp n te EU. Statstcs n Focus: Inustry, Trae an Servces(cte 12 June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu)

Sheikh, S; Oberholzner, T. (2001): Innovatve Sma an Meum Sze Enterprsesan te Creaton of Empoyment, Luxembourg: European Commsson

Suzuki, S.I. (200): Tokyo IP Report. Japan’s Utty Moe System Ceebrates tsCentenna. Asa-Pacic Inustra Property Center (APIC) Nesetter (cte6 June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.apc.j.or.jp/n_c/pnes/200082906.tm)

Thomas, S. (2003): Inteectua property n botecnoogy irms, n: Backburn, R. A.(2003): Inteectua Property an Innovaton Management n Sma Frms.Lonon, Ne York: Routege; p. 69-84

Thumm, N. (2006): Te Importance an Use of Patents by Bomeca SMEs.Presentaton at te “Te Stockom Netork” Conference n Geneva, October 2, 2006

Trilateral Statistical Report (2004; 200): Tratera Statstca Report 2004 an 200.European Patent Ofice, Japan Patent Ofice, Unte States Patent an Traemark Ofice: Munc, Tokyo, Aexanra (cte 13. June 2007, avaabe at:ttp://.tratera.net)

Ullrich, H. (2006): Natona, European an Communty Patent Protecton: Tme for Reconseraton. EUI orkng papers, LAw 06/41

United States General Accounting Office (US-GAO) (2003): Internatona Trae:Experts’ Avce for Sma Busnesses Seekng Foregn Patents. GAO-03-910(cte 06 May 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.gao.gov)

Walter, L; Brusch, M. & Hartung, K. (2007): Präferenzen bezügc denstestungenvon Patentverertungsagenturen – Ene exporatve Anayse („Preferences

regarding services from patent utilisation agencies – an explorative analysis). In:GRUR /2007, pp. 39–401.

water, L. & Moere, M.G. (2007): dynamcs of Innovaton Processes n Patent-Socke Inustres; paper presente at te RaMA 2007 conference: Te R&d

Management Conference 2007, Rsk an Uncertanty n R&d Management,Bremen, Germany, 4-6 Juy 2007, ISBN 0-949916-9-9

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (2003a): Inteectua Property (IP)Rgts an Innovaton n Sma an Meum-Sze Enterprses. Secon OECdMnstera Conference for Sma an Meum-sze Enterprses, Geneva (cte11. June 2007, avaabe at: ttp://.po.nt)

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (2003b): wIPO Survey of InteectuaProperty Servces of European Tecnoogy Incubators. document prepare byte Internatona Bureau of wIPO, avaabe at: ttp://.po.nt

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (2004): wIPO Inteectua Propertyhanbook: Pocy, La an Use. wIPO Pubcaton No. 489, Geneva

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 114 17-01-2008 11:10:31



ANNEx I – CASE STUDIESThe case studes are presented n oseorder. The numberng used does notrepresent a rankng of any type and s

used ony for referencng purposes.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 115 17-01-2008 11:10:31



117

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S1. INSTI SME Patent Action

Country: GermanyOrgna tte: INSTI KMU PatentaktonTarget group: SMEsCoverage: Natona

Category*:

(Pro-actve) aareness rasng measures/Pubc ReatonsInformaton Provson ServcesTranng

x Customze n-ept consutng an avsory servces/ponts

x Fnance (& Lega Frameork)*cassicaton system eine by te Austran Insttute for SME Researc

1.1 The INSTI SME Patent in a nutshellTe German servce “INSTI SME Patent Acton” s a subsy-base IPR programme(t te subsy beng pa out to cover part of patentng costs for irst-tme SMEpatentees) an as cosen as a case stuy for exbtng qute a range of eementsof goo practce: Amongst oters, t as carefuy panne an set up, s offerenatone t regona outets, as a g egree of customer-specic avcebut-n an s ntegrate nto a er range of oter IPR-reate INSTI servces. User survey an evauaton resuts ncate a very favourabe rato of nveste resourcest respect to aceve output. Te case stuy aso ustrates a postve nteractonbeteen patent attorneys an te servce provers c seems to be an mportantsuccess factor for te servce. Caenges arse many n terms of marketngnees.

Te INSTI (INnovaton STImuaton) SME Patent Acton ams at supportng SMEsan enterprse starters o nten to protect ter R&d resuts for te irst tme byIPRs (patents an utty moes ony) or ose ast IPR-reate appcaton as ie

more tan ive years ago. Te servce as te foong specic goas:• To reuce barrers n SMEs t respect to te use of patents an to optmse

SMEs' nnovaton management;• To ncrease te number of quaie patent appcatons by SMEs;• To make SMEs aare of te economc aspects an te expotabty of an

nventon;• To mprove te use of patent nformaton by SMEs an• To mprove te contons n SMEs for te commercasaton of patents.

Te man nstrument use by ts servce s a subsy: Egbe costs for tasks reateto patent-appcaton may be remburse by up to 0 %. Te subsy s pa out nsevera nstaments an nke to ive fferent servce packages. Te servce soperate by a regonay organse netork of INSTI partners (c count 3 ntota), ereby te INSTI partners may be contracte pubc an/or prvate

organsatons.Te regona INSTI-partner asssts te supporte SME or start-up by eveopng atmetabe for te take-up of te agree servces an accompanes te user urngte tota support pero (max. 18 monts). Tus, te regona INSTI-partner takesover te functon of a coac. depenng on te ecson mae by te supporteSME or start-up, te agree servces are prove by te regona INSTI partner msef or by externa consutants or servce provers. A n a, te INSTI SMEPatent Acton ntens to contrbute to te strategc unerstanng of te patentsystem an te beneits of usng IPRs by SMEs.

Background and resources empoyed

Te INSTI project as ntate n 199 by te Feera Mnstry of Eucaton anResearc t te prmary objectve to ncrease te aareness an capabty of

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 117 17-01-2008 11:10:31



118


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



SMEs an founers of ne busnesses (starters) to use patent an scentic-tecnca atabases n te nnovaton process.

In te run-up to te campagn, te Coogne Insttute for Busness Researc (IwCoogne) a conucte a researc project fune by te mnstry n orer to map

te support system n te ie of nnovaton an to entfy te users’ nees. Tus,at an eary stage of te campagn, t became cear tat te project a to provefurter servces n orer to ncrease te use of patent nformaton by SMEs anstart-ups an enabe tem to transfer ter nventons nto marketabe proucts.Te INSTI SME Patent Acton–estabse n 1996–an ts ive moues ere teresut of tese inngs an te ntense communcaton beteen te mnstry, teproject partners an oter stakeoers. Orgnay, te project as esgne ta mte tme-frame of ive years, but as been extene t no einte tmemt. durng te irst years of te project, te man empass as a on pubcreaton efforts n orer to famarse SMEs an starters t te patent system ant te use an beneits of patent nformaton. Noaays, questons reate tote commercasaton of patents an te nfrngement of patents ave become of major mportance.

Te tota buget for te servce for te reference year [200] amounts to EUR 1.83mo, of c EUR 1.64 mo are earmarke for rect servce actvtes, EUR 0.19mo for te operatona management (“overeas”), an EUR 3,000 for teprntng of brocures an pubcatons.

Tere are 2.4 FTEs operatng te staff at Iw Coogne – 2 economsts an 2controers, o a ork excusvey for INSTI but not soey for te SME Patent

Acton. Te servce tsef s evere an operate by te regona INSTI partners;as suc te number of INSTI representatves n te ie s muc ger. Competenceof te staff as e as ans-on experence n busness matters s consere to bean essenta asset. Te INSTI netork s te argest netork for nventons anpatentng n Germany. Its 3 members comprse pubc, sem-pubc an prvateorgansatons.

Modes of operaton

Te INSTI SME Patent Acton s ntegrate nto a er scope of servces, for can annua buget of € 2.84 mo s earmarke. In aton to te INSTI SME Patent

Acton t aso ncues te INSTI Innovaton Campagn, te INSTI Commercasaton Acton (ncung InnovatonMarket), te INSTI Informaton for Inventors, an teINSTI Inventors’ Cubs.

Te man nstrument offere by te SME Patent Acton s a inanca subsy ereegbe costs for tasks reate to patent-appcaton can be remburse. Te subsys nke to te foong ive so-cae servce packages (n brackets te maxmumamount of non-repayabe grants s gven):

• Searces for "te state of te art" t respect to current eveopments ntecnca ies (€ 800);

• Cost/beneit anayss t regar to patentng a prouct or process (€ 800);• Assstance by a patent attorney for te appcaton of patents or utty moes

at te German Patent an Trae Mark Ofice (deutsces Patent- unMarkenamt) (€ 2,100);

• Support for preparatons for te commercasaton of an nventon (€ 1,600);• Assstance by a patent attorney an provson of grants t respect to te

appcaton of patents abroa (€ 2,700).

Enterprses tat use a ive servce packages may terefore receve a grant of up to€ 8,000.

Evauaton and performance

wt regar to te output of te servce, te foong igures ere communcateby te servce provers for te reference year of 200:

• 73 appcatons ere receve, 00 oer ones ere pa out;

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 118 17-01-2008 11:10:32



119

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

• Te average amount of subsy amounte to € 4,000;• 8 to 9 out of 10 supporte patent ings ea to actua patents;• Amost to trs of te supporte irms ere mcro-enterprses t ess tan

ive empoyees;•

About one tr of te users ere ney foune companes;• Te servce usng SMEs came from manufacturng nustres, often from

eectrca engneerng, macne bung an meta proucton;• Most users ere ocate n te feera state of Baen-württemberg, fooe

by Saxona.

Te INSTI SME Patent Acton s subjecte to a range of quaty assurancemecansms, ncung reguar montorng exercses (user statstcs), mantenanceof feeback cannes t customers (feeback forms for SMEs an regonapartners), reguar auts (rankngs on te actv-tes an performance of teregona partners) an fu-scae evauatons (carre out by externa evauators).

Te ast evauaton took pace n 2003. It reporte a g performng servce,ereby te output as aceve t comparaby tte resources (t as to beremne tat te amount of subsy gven covers ony about 10 % of te costs of

a typca patent (see aso Roan Berger Market Researc 200) – ts s aso yte servce s seen as an aareness rasng measure rater tan a fuy-legesubsy servce). Success can aso be evence by te g approva rate of tesupporte unertakngs, as ncate above.

1.2 The user’s viewIn orer to get an ea on o te servce s perceve by ts users an customers,a user survey as carre out n te scope of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy,te resuts of c are presente beo.

Characterstcs of the user group

As part of te bencmarkng stuy, 3 SMEs ere subjecte to a user survey ta stanarze questonnare c cecke for user satsfacton an te mpactte servce a on te utsng companes.

Te strbuton of te user sampe (see Grap 26) t respect to company szerelects te fact tat te servce targets mosty mcro-enterprses: 78 % of te SMEsn te sampe ave at most 9 empoyees, 14 % ave 10 to 49 empoyees an ony8 % are arger companes (t a maxmum of 249 empoyees, as ony SMEs areaoe to take avantage of te servce offerngs).

Graph 26 INSTI SME Patent Acton–Company sze dstrbuton n ntervesampe, 2005, percentage of respondents

78 %

1 4%

8 %

0 to 9 employees 10 to 49 employees 50 to 249 employees


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 119 17-01-2008 11:10:32



120


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



As can be suspecte, servce users are very nnovatve: 4 out of users of te INSTI SMEPatent Acton ntrouce prouct nnovatons (ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts)onto te market beteen 2003 an 200 onto te market. 48 % ntrouce processnnovatons n te same tme frame. As concerns R&d, 87 % of te SMEs conuct

ntramura R&d, an, on average, about af of te staff orks n R&d. Tese far-abovecountry average igures concernng te eve of nnovatve actvtes can aso beobserve t te users of te oter servces anayse n te scope of ts stuy.

INSTI SME Patent Acton users most frequenty take avantage of te servceofferngs of patent attorneys (see Grap 27). Ts may be to a pont expane byte fact tat te patentng process s of utter mportance for te companes n ter specic pase of eveopment (bearng te g sare of enterprse starters nmn), but t s st nterestng to note tat eveopment agences (t natonaagences beng amost on par t te patent ofice n terms of usage frequency)an, even more so, prvate consutants pay a muc esser roe for te companesas servce provers n te ie of nnovaton tan one cou ave antcpate.

As regars factors amperng nnovaton actvtes, te companes mosty mentoneg nnovaton costs (for 49 % of g an for furter 40 % of meum reevance),

ficutes concernng access to inance (for 40 % of g an 32 % of meumreevance) an economc rsks assocate t nnovaton projects (for a tota of 76 % of reevance) (see Grap 28).

Graph 27 INSTI SME Patent Acton–Usage of dfferent servce provders,percentage of respondents *)

1912 11 5 4 3 3 3

49

3632

36

2231

2617

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

P a t e n t o f f i c e

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

O t h e r

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

E x t e r n a l

c o n s u l t a n t s

E U

f requently occasionally

*) multiple answers allowed. Source: User Survey, n = 53

Graph 28 INSTI SME Patent Acton–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents *)

4940 36

11 11 8 60 0

40

32 40

2634

21 26

11

26

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s

F i n a n c e

E c o n o m i c r i s k s

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

R e g u l a t i o n s &

s t a n d a r d s

L a c k o f m a r k e t

i n f o

C l i e n t

r e s p o n s i v e n e s s


i s s u e s

L a c k o f

t e c h n o l o g y i n f o


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 120 17-01-2008 11:10:33



121

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

By contrast, ack of quaie personne, reguatons an stanars, centresponsveness or organsatona ssues pay muc ess of a roe. Tese igures canbe consere as mportant nts for te sgnicance of subses for patentngcosts.

An mportant queston n te context of te stuy s to at extent SME usersempoy fferent IP protecton metos. As can be seen from Grap 29, an notsurprsng for users of a subsy servce for patent costs, most companes (77 %)ie for a patent beteen 2003 an 200, or a a patent grante or va n tattme pero (37 %).

But t can aso be observe tat 4 to 6 out of 10 companes aso empoy nformaprotecton mecansms (trae secrets, mantenance of ea tme avantage an/or reance on te compexty of te esgn of ter nventons), an 47 % utse traemarks.

Te man nterna barrers perceve for usng IPRs are, by far, te costs of IPprotecton (for 64 % of g an for anoter 23 % of meum reevance) an tetme to make IP protecton ork (for 4 % of g, an for 28 % of meumreevance) (see Grap 30). Noneteess, cost/ beneit conseratons (.e. te queston

Graph 29 INSTI SME Patent Acton–IP protecton methods empoyed, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents

77

37

25

47

11 11

60

43

57

11

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

P a t e n t s f i l e d

P a t e n t s v a l i d

a n d / o r g r a n t e d

D e s i g n p a t t e r n s

a n d / o r u t i l i t y

m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e

s e c r e t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e

N o d e l i b e r a t e

I P R s t r a t e g y

%

*) mutpe ansers aoe. Source: User Survey, n = 53

Graph 30 INSTI SME Patent Acton–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protectonmechansms, percentage of respondents *)

64

45

26

9 9 6 4 2

23

42

23 2521 25

15

28

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

L a c

k o

f i n f o o n

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s

I P R i r r e l e v a n

t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

h igh relevance medium re levance

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 121 17-01-2008 11:10:34



122


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



on y to patent) pay an mportant roe, too. Ts s agan an ncaton tat IPmanagement, evauatng te rgt IP strategy an ntegratng t nto te busnessmoe (c sou anser te beneit queston: creatng or securng revenue) aremost key ies c nee to be aresse by IPR servce provers.

Interestngy, company nterna resources (n terms of personne), genera aarenessssues, knoege eicts t respect to IP protecton metos an organsatonassues are not perceve to be an obstace.

Externa, servce-reate barrers are not consere to be sgnicant barrers for teusage of IPRs (see Grap 31). But tey are, on average, of ger reevance tante o-rankng nterna factors escrbe above.

User out-reach and satsfacton eves

Users of te INSTI servce got to kno about te servce many troug personarecommenatons (see Grap 32). A tte ess tan a tr earne about te INSTISME Patent Acton from INSTI tsef (.e. INSTI partners an/or project managementat Iw Coogne), aroun 29 % from oter cannes an 1 % from te nternet.

Avertsements n cassca mea are not sgnicant carrers of nformaton onINSTI. Tese resuts may pont to a centra roe of nforma netorks for marketng

purposes (see aso beo), but may aso gve groun for a ypotess tat tegenera knoege of SMEs about INSTI servces s an area for mprovement –

Graph 31 INSTI SME Patent Acton–(Eterna) barrers to usng IP protectonmechansms, percentage of respondents *)

1913 11

3840

32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Lack of info on available support

services

Lack of accessibility of support

services

Lack of quality of available support

services


%


Graph 32 INSTI SME Patent Acton–Informaton channes, by hch users gotto kno about the servce, percentage of respondents*)

15

26

2 2

38

40

8

31 29

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

I n t e r n e t

N e w s l e t t e r

I n f o r m a t i o n

d a y s / c o n f e r e n c e s

G e n e r a l

n e w s p a p e r

P r o f e s s i o n a l

j o u r n a l

P e r s o n a l

r e c o m m e n d a t i o n

C o n s u l t a n t s

C o m m e r c i a l

b a n k s

A g e n c y

I N S T I i t s s e l f

O t h e r

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 122 17-01-2008 11:10:34



123

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

sometng c s aso corroborate by statements gven n some of te expertnterves carre out.

INSTI users are, on average, very satsie t te Patent Acton servce. A aspects(every tme, te competence of staff, te reevance of te prove nformaton,

etc.) are grae t “2” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie) to 4(unsatsie; see Grap 33). 90 % of te users gauge te extent of te servceofferngs to be aequate – ony 8 % tnk t s too narro. Spata stance (for 0 % a very o-eve barrer an for anoter 40 % a factor consere to be ateast acceptabe) oes not seem to be too muc of a probem, ncatng tat tenetork approac (a centra coornatng unt t regona brances) actuayorks as esre. For 72 % of te users, te beneits of usng ts servce cearyouteg te efforts.

An mportant concuson may be ran from te anayss of te user’s perceptonof amnstratve burens. we ony 16 % beeve tat te amnstratve burensof usng te servce are too g, te sare of users makng some negatve remarksn te more open questons about ts ssue s st conserabe. Ts s acontracton at irst sgt, but may be expane by te actve roe netorkng

partners pay en “seng” te servce: As te servce ras on a muttue of regona servce provers t fferent backgrouns (prvate companes,consutants, sem-pubc boes), an te Patent Acton servce forms ony a part of ter servce portfoo (yet an mportant one), tese regona provers temsevesseem to ep as muc as tey can an carry te SME troug a amnstratvesteps. Te same seems to o true for patent attorneys, espte of te fact tattey are not aoe to be INSTI partners temseves. As one SME put t: “If it

wouldn´t have been for our patent attorney, we wouldn´t have carried out the project

at all.” Ts can, togeter t te g usage eves of patent attorneys sonabove, be nterprete as evence tat te actve marketng of te measure bypatent attorneys s a cruca factor for te success of te INSTI SME Patent Acton.

One can teorze tat te strong netorkng t patent attorneys (an to anextent aso t te oter regona provers) accounts aso for te arge sare of personne recommenatons, by c te users got to kno about te servce.

Gven te fact tat patent attorneys are te prmary servce provers for tequestone companes, t mgt be suspecte tat patent attorneys are aso teprmary entry pont for te users to te servce.

Addtonaty of the servce

In orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou aso nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – .e., at ou ave

Graph 33 INSTI SME Patent Acton–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servce provson, arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,7

2,0

1,6

1,7

1,4

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff

Relevance of provided

information

Quality of providedmaterial

Delivery time

verall: Service met needs

and demands

unsatisfiedvery satisfied


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 123 17-01-2008 11:10:35



124


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



appene n case te servce ere absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “neteffect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espte of teservce. Smary, aso oter type of canges ncurre tn te enterprse, as aresut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese canges are referre to as

“beavoura atonaty”). Atonaty of te INSTI SME Patent Acton effects seem to be qute g, gvente rater o amount of subsy (see Grap 34); oever, pure eaegteffects are arger tan pure atonaty effects. 10 % of te unertakngs ounot ave been carre out at a n te absence of support from te SME Patent

Acton. For a tota of 4 %, te servce a a cataysng effect: It speee up teprocess, aoe for arger scopes or repace te probabe usage of anoter IPprotecton nstrument. 20 % ou ave use oter sources of inance. 2 %ou ave carre out ter patentng project regaress of te servce offerngs nte same manner.

Furter to tat, an t respect to te “beavoura atonaty” approac, tas aso anayse o te support use cange te utsaton eve of fferent IPprotecton metos (of fferent egrees of ega formaty) an at genera

effects te servce a on IPR-reate beavours of te companes. As a ecreasen usage eve of a certan IP nstrument oes not necessary ave to be a negatveeffect, no jugement can be gven eter te cange beavours are actuaymprove or better n nature f compare to te stuaton before usng ts servce.Nottstanng ts, some nterestng concusons can be ran.

Recang from te goas tat te INSTI SME Patent Acton – espte of te fact of beng esgne aroun a subsy n nature – ams prmary at creatng a better unerstanng of IPR, an aso tackes te ssue of mprovng nnovatonmanagement, one may rater safey say tat te INSTI servce succeee n tsgoa (see Grap 3). Te most promnent canges n busness atttues concerngenera knoege on management kno-o, patent knoege n te busnessenvronment an genera IPR aareness, c ncrease for %, 38 % an34 % of te users, respectvey.

Interestng, an rankng fort, s not an ncrease usage of patents but rater ager usage eve of trae secrets n te corporate IPR strategy (toug te geve of areay present patentng actvtes as to be kept n mn en nterpretngte resuts). Not ony s te sare of SME users c pace more empass onpatents n te IPR strategy oer tan tat of irms o focus more on trae secrets(17 % as oppose to 2 %) – SMEs aso move aay from ter patentng pansmore frequenty tan from usng trae secrets (-8 % compare to -2 % for trae

Graph 34 INSTI SME Patent Acton–Addtonaty of the inanca subsdy,percentage of respondents

25%

11%

23%

20%

11%

10%

Undertaking carried out without anychange/modification


Undertaking carried out to a smaller scope (e.g. less geographical coverag




“pure” deadweight lossespure additionality


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 124 17-01-2008 11:10:35



12

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

secret users). Togeter t te fact tat usng te INSTI SME Patent Actonbooste aso te usage of oter non-patent IP protecton metos, one canconcue tat te servce operators may ave one a rater goo job at consutngte SMEs about te rgt IP strategy (.e., tey seeme to ave avse tose users

ere patents ou ave been too rsky/costy etc. to use anoter protectonmeto). Experts attrbute ts to te fact tat te regona partners often ave abusness-orente backgroun; tey ere aso rater sceptca, eter a natonapatent ofice ou ave one/aceve te same, f t (or some yet-to be founeregona outets of te ofices) ere to operate te servce.

Interestngy, esgn pattern an utty moe usage, e ncrease, not reayskyrocket. Ts comes someat as a surprse, gven tat especay utty moesare avertse as o-cost aternatves to patents, t ess amnstratve burens.

Aso nterestng s te fact, tat censng actvtes ave not ncrease a ot. Tsmay eter be ue to te fact tat most patents grante t support from teservce are too young n orer to be turne nto money by means of censng. Or t may aso be tat te protecton goas preva over oter beneits of usng IPRs.

Users ere aso aske at tey eeme to be te most mportant eements of a

servce suc as te INSTI SME Patent Acton. Te resuts are son n Grap 36.Tey unerne te mportance of te factors competence of staff (for a (!) users afactor of g or meum reevance), tmey every,27 ease of access anenticaton, o amnstratve efforts an matters of costs. Informaton onfferent metos of protectng IP, .e. on y an y not to patent – e nota prmary factor contrbutng to te success of te servce, accorng to te users– s st of conserabe reevance an of more mportance tan nformaton on“o” to patent.

Lo referra rates mgt be reate to te ntegrate approac taken, ere INSTIfuis many functons of a one-stop sop. In ts context, oever, one sou

27 Tmey every may become an ssue, toug, for te future, as te tota support pero as been sortene to 18monts – c may be too tte, gven te processng tmes of patents at te patent ofice an te fact tat te iveservce packages offere are cosey nke t a tmetabe to fferent mestones n te patentng process. Someusers compane areay about too sort an/or too rg tme tabes n te nterves.

Graph 35 Behavoura addtonaty of the INSTI SME Patent Acton,percentage of respondents

4

6

6

8

8

9

9

11

13

17

25

34

38

55

-8

-2

-4

-9

-8

-6

-9

-8

-8

-8

-2

-4

-6

-2

-10,0 0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 60,0

In-licensing


IPR training


Out-licensing







General awareness



increased dec reased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 125 17-01-2008 11:10:36



126


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



reca tat te INSTI SME Patent Acton st focuses on patents an attracts SMEs na very specic pase of eveopment (en tey try to protect an nventon for teirst tme). Tus, te scope of te servce seems to be ess of an ssue t tereace user group. It stans to jugement, toug, eter tere s st a nee

for a compementary servce, aressng Inteectua Property Management n amore genera ay, especay t respect to ater pases of IPR utzaton (e.g.,tgaton support) an/or n-ept IPR tranng.

1.3 Elements of good practiceTe servce exbts te foong success factors (resp. goo practce eements):

• Integraton of te INSTI SME Patent Acton nto te overa INSTI Acton cproves SMEs t assstance an support for a pases of te nnovatonprocess–from te eveopment of eas unt te commercasaton of patentsan oter IPRs;

• An actve Germany-e netork of consutants an servce provers (INSTIpartners) t fferent nsttutona backgroun, an goo cooperaton tpatent attorneys (te netorke approac t fferent nsttutons asoaos to some extent for non-patent centrc avce, f patents are not te rgtcoce for partcuar SMEs t respect to ter IP protecton nees);

• For eac user, te regona INSTI partner eveops an nvua tmetabe for te take-up of te agree servces. he/se aso coaces te SME or starter urng te tota support pero;

• Operaton by expert staff;

Graph 36 Key quaty factors for a servce such as the INSTI SME PatentActon, percentage of respondents

8

17

26

32

36

42

47

59

66

68

70

83

51

43

43

53

51

38

32

36

17

23

21

17

0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0

Spatial distance



Scope of service

Technical information (”how to patent”)

Individual contact

on different IP strategies (”why/why not to patent”)

Costs



Timely delivery

Competence of Staff


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 126 17-01-2008 11:10:36



127

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

• Te INSTI SME Patent Acton as te irst an contnues to be te onymeasure (at east on natona eve) tat supports SMEs' eveopment an useof patents (unqueness);

• Referra actvtes: An nterna competence atabank as been eveope to

prove INSTI-partners t an overve of te compreensve knoegegatere n te netork an to factate co-operaton among te partners;

• Quck approva of appcatons an unbureaucratc anng of te measure.

Te INSTI SME Patent Acton may experence te foong caenges:

• Issues arsng from sortenng te tme frame irms can use te servce: Ts sbecause te nstament pans are nke to mestones n te patentng process,an f te atter takes onger tan antcpate (not unusua gven te currentbackog at te patent ofices) a syncronous every of support may not bepossbe any more;

• Vsbty t SMEs/marketng;

• Maybe a nee for a compementary servce focusng on ater pases of IPRutsaton (tgaton ssues, etc.) an/or tranng on IP management.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 127 17-01-2008 11:10:36



BENChMARKING NATIONAL ANd REGIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SMES IN ThE FIELd OF INTE



129

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S2. Patent information centres

(PIC)

Country: GermanyOrgna tte: Patentnformatonszentren (PIZ)Target group: A companesCoverage: Natona

(Pro-actve) aareness rasng measures/Pubc Reatonsx Informaton Provson Servces

Category*: Tranng

xCustomze n-ept consutng an avsory servces/pontsFnance & Lega Frameork

*cassicaton system eine by te Austran Insttute for SME Researc

2.1 The patent information centres in a nutshellTe German netork of Patent Informaton Centres (PICs), an most notaby tePIC n te cty of Stuttgart, as cosen as a case stuy to spay eements of goopractce as t sos o an o support structure (PICs ere ntay reang roomsfor patent terature an ere set up n te ate 19t century) can evove to offer vaue-ae servces for SMEs. Toug prmary focusse on patent nformatonsearc servces, te portfoo ncues nterestng aspects suc as tranngspossbtes for stuents of tecnca unverstes an an SME orkng group. Keygoo practce eements comprse a natona coverage t regona outets, greputaton an te competence of te staff. Caenges can be seen t respectto te estabsment of an evauaton cuture, t broaenng te scope of tecentres to furter ncue nformaton aso on ess forma IP protecton metosan n te area of marketng actvtes.

The PIC netork

Germany´s Patent Informaton Centres enote a naton-e netork of nformatoncentres c prove nformaton on patents. Te Patent Informaton Centres area very o support structure (atng back to te 19 t century), an ter nta (anaso toay’s) task as to offer reang rooms for patent ocuments. Te scope of te servces as been extene ever snce, but one of te prmary actvtes s streate to patent ocuments: To prove te means to conuct patent searces.

Eac Patent Informaton Centre s a member of te Assocaton of German PatentInformaton Centres (Arbetsgemenscaft deutscer Patentnformatonszentren e.

V. – ARGE PIZ). Te actvtes of te assocaton are recte toars te excangeof experence beteen te varous centres. A PICs act competey nepenentytn te frameork of exstng egsaton. Co-operaton contracts ave beenconcue beteen eac PIC an te German PO (deutsces Patent- un

Markenamt–dPMA), an mportant partner for ts servce.Te ARGE PIZ represents te common nterests of ts members vs-à-vs tr partesan offers tem nformaton about te atest IPR reate eveopments n Germanyan abroa. In partcuar, ARGE PIZ s nvove n te eveopment of measuressafeguarng te exstence an eveopment of te PICs as e as tat of oter factes nke t IPR reate ssues. It avses te governments at feera anstate eve an supports te eucaton an tranng of PICs’ empoyees. Furtermore,t backs te pubc reatons efforts of ts members amng to promote pubcaareness an nformaton about IPRs.

Patent Informaton Centres ere estabse n amost every German feera state;te naton-e netork conssts of 24 Patent Informaton Centres. hoever, te

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 129 17-01-2008 11:10:37



130


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



moes of organsaton ffer t respect to te amnstraton, ocaton anoffere servces. Some Centres are operate by regona eveopment agences,some by cambers of commerce; some are attace to brares of (tecnca)unverstes. In orer to offer a better nsgt nto te mecansm of te servces

offere, te German Patent Informaton Centres n seecte parts be escrbemore specicay by usng te exampe of te Patent Centre n Stuttgart c spart of te Regerungspräsum Stuttgart (te oca government of te cty of Stuttgart).

The PIC Stuttgart

Te objectves of te PIC Stuttgart are n partcuar:• Creatng aareness for te mportance of IPRs;• Provng patent nformaton sources (atabanks, Cds/dVds) n a

sutabe manner to economc actors, especay prvate nventors,enterprse starters an SMEs;

• Provng assstance an avce to start-ups, SMEs, prvatenventors t regar to researc of IPRs an oter types of patent nformaton;

• Executng of patent searces on beaf of cents for a fee;• Provng suppementary nformaton servces, suc as tecnca

ocuments tecnca reguatons an norms.Te man goa of te PIC Stuttgart s to famarse enterprses, especaySMEs t IPR reate ssues, suc as patents, trae marks, utty moesan regstere esgns. If an ntereste party seeks nformaton outse tescope of forma IPR, nformaton on nforma protecton metos or reatessues are aso offere to SMEs, but ess often. In aton, te PIC Stuttgartpromotes te unerstanng an use of te patent system aso by offerngfree nta consutaton for nventors an SMEs, organse n co-operatont oca patent attorneys. Atoug SMEs are assste n inng aysoter tan patents to protect ter IP, knoege management kno-oncung nformaton on IPR management strateges are not tn tescope of PIC Stuttgart.German PICs target especay SMEs, but are generay open to a kns of enterprses. No restrctons are n pace for certan nustres or tecnoogyies. A regona focus s gven by te fact tat PICs ave been set up namost every feera state, tus guaranteeng Germany-e accessbty of te servces. Furtermore, as a PICs co-operate t te German PO, t san mportant opportunty for te PO to be present at te regona eve.Te servces offere by PIC Stuttgart target ony te irst pases of te patentngprocess, suc as pror state of te art researc (or researc nto exstng IPRs ngenera) an te appcaton/ regstraton process (but not te utsaton pase or te subject of IPR acquston). Oter German PICs may offer some kn of supportan avce n oter pases of IPR usage. Overa, te support scope s expanng:11 PICs ave concue speca agreements t te Patent Ofice tat ao tem

to accept patent an utty moe appcatons c are transferre to te Ger-man PO.

One of te reasons for te specic focus on patents s, accorng to te servceprovers, te rapy avancng nustrasaton of Asan countres (.e. Cna).Many (German) SMEs, especay n te manufacturng sector, c use toprotect ter IP by nforma protecton mecansms suc as trae secrets, are sato noaays recognse te necessty to protect ter IP by forma protectonmecansms suc as patents. Tese eveopments aso contrbute to te renamngof te nsttutons from “Patent dspay Centre” (Patentausegestee) to “PatentInformaton Centre”. Te PIC Stuttgart noneteess aso unernes te mportanceof oter IP protecton means, but seems most of tese toos outse te scope of te centres.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 130 17-01-2008 11:10:37



131

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Background and Resources

In 200, te buget of te PIC Stuttgart amounte to € 70,000; t s operate bya staff of 8 persons (7. FTEs). Natone, te sze of PICs (n terms of te staff operatng te centres) vares beteen 2 an 10 empoyees. In genera terms te

quaicaton structure of te PICs a over Germany can bee seen as qute smar;te staff empoye at PIC Stuttgart conssts for exampe of mecanca engneers,pubc amnstraton managers an brarans. As te offere servce spectrum asbeen extene an upgrae urng te ast years, experts beeve tat tequaicaton of te staff nees to be constanty upate n te future, too, n orer to ea t ney-arsng IPR ssues.

In te past, target igures (.e. quanttatve number of users) ave not been set for te varous PICs. Accorng to experts, einng target igures s eter mpossbeor even counterprouctve. As te man objectves of te PICs are to proveenterprses t access to patent atabases an to famarse tem t IPR reatessues as e as t te use of atabases, a strong ncrease n te number of usersoes not necessary conce t te mantenance (or even rse) of te quatystanar of te nventons. Accorng to expert opnons, te pubc status of te

PICs n Germany can be seen as bot a savantage an an avantage. Te PICStuttgart, for exampe, as to observe pubc amnstratve a an s terefore notaoe to act proit-orente on te market an/or to offer servces tat mgtstan n competton t oter prvate servce provers. Terefore, potentayproitabe busness eas cannot be rease troug PIC Stuttgart. On te oter an, PIC Stuttgart’s pubc status an ts mpe neutraty can aso be consereas an asset. Te g quaty but not proit rven servces are offere n a trust-bung envronment amng to support users c are often unsure about teeconomc prospects of ter nnovatons.

Regarng future actvtes, furter efforts seem to be neee n orer to ncreasete aareness eve of SMEs an nventors about te servces of te PIC Stuttgart.

Atoug te PIC Stuttgart states to ssemnate nformaton on offere servcestroug a ot of avaabe cannes (.e. Internet, pro-actve contactng, usng of mutpers an exstng netorks an oters), experts state tat tere s room for

mprovement regarng marketng an avertsng actvtes. In orer to tacke tsssue, te expentures for pubc reatons an avertsng of te PIC Stuttgart avebeen ncrease n 2007. In co-operaton t a professona avertsng agency tePIC Stuttgart ntens to promote especay ts semnars an tranngs. Terefore,te PIC Stuttgart expects to sgnicanty ncrease te number of partcpants atsemnars an tranngs n te future.

Modes of operaton

Te netork of te Germany-e PICs acts many as irst contact ponts offerngvarous types of support; te man task s to prove access to orgna IPRocuments an to assst enterprses n researcng IPR protecte nnovatons.Furtermore, a Patent Informaton Centres prove potocopes of patentocuments an carry out patent searces. More specicay, te PIC Stuttgart, for exampe, offers te foong servces:

• Patent searc servces n atabases: performe by te customer for a sma feeor – aganst a ger fee – by te staff of te PIC, on a contnuous bass(contnuous openng ours etc.), n te premses of te PIC. Enterprses makeaso ncreasng use of te freey accessbe atabases concernng IPRs on teInternet offere by PIC Stuttgart.

• Inta free ega avce by externa patent attorneys for SMEs an prvatenventors (eeky at PIC Stuttgart); non-ega avce on IPR matters from tePIC staff.

• Organsaton of tranngs an semnars (max. number of partcpants 22, fee:210 Euro per partcpant). Accorng to experts, te mportance of tranngcourses an semnars regarng IPRs as ncrease urng te ast years. Ts

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 131 17-01-2008 11:10:37



132


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



s aso ue to recent goba economc eveopments requrng a stronger useof forma IP protecton mecansms. SMEs face speca savantages n tsrespect as tey are often neter famar t te patent system nor o teypossess te necessary experence n atabase researc. Ts makes tranng

offere to SMEs more reevant.• Organsaton of te “IPR day” (a conference t IPR speeces; every secon

year an nventor’s prze s aare by te state of Baen-württemberg).

• On ts ebste, te PIC Stuttgart makes avaabe an extensve coecton of FAQs an te corresponng ansers t regar to varous IPRs an teservces of te patent nformaton ofice tsef.

• Furtermore, papers by experence patent attorneys on varous aspects of IPRs are avaabe for onoa on PIC Stuttgart's ebste togeter tterature recommenatons an a st of reevant as an reguatons, oficaocuments an brocures etc.

• Oter servces, ke te organsaton of nformaton events, ong ectures atunverstes, teacng stuents (one ay course; one begnner, one avancecourse) te provson of brocures, nformaton matera etc., create by te

German PO, copyng servces an a teepone otne.Te German Patent Informaton Centres are orkng n cose reatonsp t teGerman PO. Base on a contract, te German PO passes on patent ocuments onpaper an on Cd-ROM to a PICs an proves avance Internet servces (.e. tedEPATISnet-Premum too) excusvey for a German PICs. Furtermore, te POoffers free tranng courses for te PIC staff. In m 2006, te co-operaton beteente PO an a German PICs as strengtene troug an agreement, specfyngte tasks tat te PICs take over on beaf of te PO (many: regona provson of nformaton on IPRs an creatng aareness for te mportance of IPRs). In return,te Patent Informaton Centres are supporte by te dPMA by ay of jontmarketng actvtes, brocures, tranngs etc.

After a moicaton of te patent a n 2001, 11 out of 24 Patent InformatonCentres ave use te opportunty to accept patent an utty moe appcatons

an forar tem to te German PO. Snce October 2004, tese 11 PICs areentte to accept appcatons for trae marks an nustra esgns as e.hoever, te atter servce eement s not n g eman ue to a number of reasons: Frst, te ntroucton of te servce as not accompane by a PRcampagn smar n scope to te campagn aunce n 2001 for patentappcatons. Secon, te ocumentaton requre for a patent appcaton s mucmore voumnous tan tat neee for a trae mark appcaton. Tus, te costs of packng an postage are ger. SMEs an patent attorneys can save/reuce moreof tese costs by ing te patent appcaton t te regona PIC tan tey coun te case of trae marks.

An nterestng eement of goo practce s PIC Stuttgart's nformaton an tranngactvtes n co-operaton t tecnca unverstes an coeges. Ter am s tomake future tecnca engneers an tus future (potenta) nventors aare of te

IPR system an to prove tem t IPR-researc sks. Professors an ter stuentgroups vst te PIC Stuttgart sten to nformaton speeces on IPRs an are asssten carryng out IPR-researces on ter on. Later on n ter unversty career,stuents can use tese sks for ter practce-orente semnar papers or ter poma teses. After enterng (sef-) empoyment, unversty grauates areassume to transfer an ntrouce ter IPR-reate knoege an sks for tebeneit of ter empoyers or ter on companes. For areay more tan ten yearste PIC Stuttgart carres out tese aareness-rasng actvtes among tecncaunverstes an coeges an one can assume tat tey ave areay eveope abroa effect n te meantme. In 200 aone, 24 stuent groups from tecncaunverstes or coeges t 431 partcpants ere nforme an trane by te PICStuttgart.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 132 17-01-2008 11:10:37



133

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S


Reguar montorng exercses an smar efforts are carre out to examne teperformance an success of te servce. For exampe, te PIC Stuttgart s requesteto report tce a year on ts actvtes an on te take-up of te servce to ts parent

organsaton (“Regerungspräsum Stuttgart”). Reporte ata ncue number of users, type an number of actvtes, number of partcpants n nformaton eventsan tranng courses, number of patent appcatons transferre to te German POetc.

In aton, te PIC Stuttgart s operatng oter quaty assurance mecansms: annterestng exampe s te “workng Group Patents” (Arbetskres Patente),estabse n November 2001. Te orkng group s accompane an e by tePIC Stuttgart an ams at scussng present eveopments n te ie of commerca IPRs tat are of partcuar nterest to enterprses. Te orkng groupaso comments on te nature an quaty of te prove servces an s cruca for te eveopment of te annua caenar of nformaton an tranng events. Tsprocess safeguars tat te servce spectrum offere by te PIC an ts nformatonan tranng actvtes pay attenton to te practca nees of (sma an meum-

sze) enterprses. Feeback from vstors an partcpants of nformaton antranng events s aso coecte. hoever, forma evauaton exercses by externaevauators ave not been carre out to ate.

Te PIC Stuttgart states tat t paces muc empass on a ecate customer-orente approac. Accorng to experts, te reputaton of te PIC Stuttgart canbe consere to be g (as ncate by anecota evence from users).

Regarng quanttatve output ata, one can revert, for exampe, to te number of patent an utty moe appcatons referre to te German PO va patentnformaton. Tey rose to 3,926 n 2004, an ncrease of about 43 %. Te PatentInformaton Centre of Stuttgart as ceary n te ea, avng receve 2,70appcatons. Te great mportance of te PIC Stuttgart s aso unerne by tearge number of users tat utse ts servces every year. In 200, te PIC as vsteby 6,000 users (n person) an receve 8.000 nformaton queres by teepone(astng beteen 30 secons an 30 mnutes). Its nesetter reaces 4.000subscrbers (approx. 7 % SMEs), ts nformaton events an tranng courses ereuse by 1.43 partcpants. Furtermore, 614 prvate nventors an SMEs obtanenta ega consutancy prove by patent attorneys.

In te future, a Patent Informaton Centres are to become specicay autorseco-operaton partners of te German PO at te regona eve. Te GPO an tePatent Informaton Centres concue a ne co-operaton agreement for tspurpose. Te centres sa act, n ter respectve regons, as quaie contacts na IPR matters, rasng te aareness for IPR among SMEs, unverstes an researcnsttutons, n partcuar.

2.2 The user’s viewIn orer to get an ea on o te servce s perceve by ts users an customers,

a user survey as carre out n te scope of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy,te resuts of c are presente beo.


3 companes ere surveye about ter experences t te PIC Stuttgart. AsGerman PICs state to target many SMEs, t seems surprsng at irst sgt tat aarge sare of te ntervee users comprse arger companes: 3 % ave moretan 249 empoyees. One tr ave 0 to 249 empoyees, 23 % empoy not moretan 49 persons (see Grap 37). Ts can be expane by te fact tat te PICStuttgart oes not ask ts users to prove etae persona an/or enterprse-reate contact ata en regsterng for te take-up of ts servces. Tus, te PICStuttgart oes not possess a arge customer ata poo tat relects te actua

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 133 17-01-2008 11:10:37



134


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



structure of ts user groups. Te exstng ata poo features mosty enterprses tatave ong-term reatons t te PIC Stuttgart c are many, accorng to teservce provers, rater arger-sze enterprses. It oes not relect te actuacomposton of users.

Inee, an anayss of user groups conucte n 200 by te Centre soe tat43 % of users are prvate nventors, 2 % SMEs, 1 % enterprse starters an 17 %sef-empoye/bera professons. due to te sma sampe sze an te conserabeg sare of arger companes, resuts sou be nterprete t great care ent comes to makng concusons for SMEs.

Beteen 2003 an 200, servce users ere very nnovatve: Aroun 91 % usersntrouce prouct nnovatons (ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts), e7 % ere abe to ntrouce process nnovatons. 94 % conucte ntramuraR&d, 76 % ere engage n nnovaton actvtes reate to esgn, an 68 % nte market ntroucton of nnovatons (see Grap 38).

Te ntervee PIC Stuttgart users most frequenty take avantage of te servceofferngs of patent attorneys (see Grap 39), fooe by te patent ofice(oever, t muc ess frequent use). Te mportance of patent attorneys n IPR

servce provson n Germany s tus once agan unerne (see aso te case stuyon te SME Patent Acton servce).

Graph 37 PIC Stuttgart–Company sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe, 2005,percentage of respondents

23%

32%

35%

0 to 9 employees 10 to 49 employees 50 to 249 employees 250 and more employees


Graph 38 PIC Stuttgart–Innovaton actvtes n nterve sampe, 2005,percentage of respondents*)

41

59 56

76

38

68

94

0

20

40

60

80

100

I n t r a m u r a l r e s e a r c h

&

e x p e r i m e n t a l

d e v e l o p m e n t ( R & D )

A c q u i s i t i o n o f R & D

( e x t r a m u r a l R & D )

A c q u i s i t i o n o f

m a c h i n e r y a n d

e q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g

M a r k e t i n t r o d u c t i o n

o f i n n o v a t i o n s

D e s i g n

O t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n s f o r

p r o d u c t i o n / d e l i v e r i e s

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 134 17-01-2008 11:10:38



13

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

A g number of companes experence amperng factors for nnovaton urng2003 to 200, most compane about economc rsks (for 31 % of g an for furter 34 % of meum reevance), g nnovaton costs (for 26 % of g an40% of meum reevance) an inance ssues (g reevance for 26 , meum for

17 %) (see Grap 40). It can be sa tat neary a ste amperng factors aresomeo of mportance.

Regarng te metos of IPR-protecton, most users (77 %) regstere esgnpatterns an/or utty moes beteen 2003 an 200, ie for a patent or a apatent grante or va n tat tme pero (bot sares amounte to 74 %, seeGrap 41). A reatvey g number of users empoye aso nforma protectonmetos, .e. 71 % ree on trae secrets, 63 % tre to mantan a ea tmeavantage over compettors. Te mportance of usng te fu spectrum of IPprotecton metos, epenng on te company context, s tus aganunerne.

Te costs stemmng from mpementng IP protecton strateges (for 43 % of gan meum reevance), cost/beneit conseratons (g reevance for 40 %,meum for 20 %) an te tme to make IP protecton ork (for 34 % of g, an

for 29 % of meum reevance) are perceve to be te man barrers for usng IPR(see Grap 42). Genera aareness an organsatona ssues ere consere essreevant. Externa barrers toars te avaabty of support servces are perceve

Graph 39 PIC Stuttgart–Usage of dfferent servce provders by users,percentage of respondents*)

8 4 4 4

25

21

42 48

28 1910 14

39

0

20

40

60

80

100

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

E x t e r n a l


N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

E U

O t h e r


%


Graph 40 PIC Stuttgart–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents*)

31 26 2617 11 9 6 6 6

34 40

17 29 34

14

37 34 31

0

20

40

60

80

100


I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s

F i n a n c e


s t a n d a r d s

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

C l i e n t


L a c k o f



i s s u e s


i n f o


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 135 17-01-2008 11:10:39



136


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Graph 41 PIC Stuttgart–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users,2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents

74 74 77

60

17 14

71

26

63

60

20

40

60

80

100






m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



%


Graph 42 PIC Stuttgart–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

4334 40

17 173

113

43

29 20

34 29

37 26

11

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s

A w a r e n e s s


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t


%


to be an mportant obstace, too: te ack of accessbty (for 9 % of g an 34 %of meum reevance), te ack of nformaton (g reevance for 6, meum for 31 %) an te ack of quaty of avaabe externa support servces (for 3 % of gan 26 % of meum reevance).

User out-reach and satsfacton evesUsers state tat tey receve nformaton regarng PIC Stuttgart mosty trougte servce provng organsaton tsef; 46 % foun nformaton on te nternet,43 % ear about te servce on nformaton ays, conferences or smar. Personarecommenatons ere prmary sources for aroun 30 %; oter sources manyreferre to nformaton receve from patent attorneys an te German PO.

Overa speakng, te surveye users ere gy satsie t te servces offereby PIC Stuttgart. A te fferent aspects of servce provson are rate t “1.”or better (on a scae from 1= very satsie to 4= unsatsie); te gest grae asreceve for te competence of staff (“1.1”; see Grap 43). In aton, amost ausers (97 %) rate te extent of te servce offerngs to be aequate. Spata stanceseems not to be a probem (for 6 % a very o-eve barrer an for anoter 41 %a factor consere to be acceptabe). 8 % tnk tat te beneits of usng ts

servce ceary outeg te efforts; 36 % state tat te beneits are aequate tote efforts of usng ts servce.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 136 17-01-2008 11:10:40



137

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S


In orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – . e., at ou aveappene n case te servce ere absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “net

postve effect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espteof te servce. Smary, aso oter types of canges ncurre tn te enterprse,as a resut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese types of canges arereferre to as “beavoura atonaty”).

Te PIC Stuttgart seems to ave reace ts man goas t a rater arge sare of te ntervee users: genera aareness for te mportance of IPR ncrease for 7 % of te usng irms as patent knoege n te busness envronment(ncrease for 63 %) (see Grap 44), te PIC Stuttgart succeee n provokngpostve atttue canges toars te genera knoege management kno-o;an nterestng outcome c, keepng te overa objectves n mn, can beconsere someat as a surprse.

Graph 43 PIC Stuttgart–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servceprovson, arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,1

1,3

1,5

1,4

1,4

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information

uality of provided material

Delivery time

Overall: Service met needs

and demands

very satisfied unsatisfied


Graph 44 Behavoura addtonaty of the PIC Stuttgart, percentage of respondents *)

3

3

3

17

17

20

26

26

29

34

37

57

63

77

-20

-3

-3

-3

-6

-3

-3

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80


Out-licensing

In-licensing








IPR training

General awareness



increased decreased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 137 17-01-2008 11:10:40



138


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Interestngy, te sare of users c pace ger empass on IPR tranng asrater g (37 %). Atoug nforma IPR protecton measures may not pay anessenta roe tn te servce offerngs, some canges n atttues regarngtese protectons metos cou be foun ere as e; te reance on trae

secrets an ea-tme avantage n te corporate IPR strateges ncrease for 34 %an 29 % of te users, respectvey. Te gest ecrease (attenton eve: -20 %)took pace t respect to te reance on esgn compexty (atoug t ncreasefor 17 % of te users as e).

Some of tese inngs, especay te g mpact on te genera aareness evean patent knoege n busness envronment can be corroborate by te resutsof smar servces song a patent centrc approac an offerng patent searcfactes.

wt respect to key quaty factors, a users consere te competence of te staff nvove n a servce smar to te one offere by PIC Stuttgart as most mportant(for 94 % of g, for 6 % of meum reevance). A sgnicant reevance eve asaso note for te aspects “ease of access an enticaton” (86 % vee ts asa factor of g reevance) an tmey every (for 74 % of g sgnicance) (see

Grap 4). Tese tree entie key quaty eements are aso conseremportant quaty factors by oter measures offerng a smar range of servces (te Austran servce serv.p or te dutc servce IOI, for exampe). Notabe s aso tefact tat nformaton on “y” to patent as consere more mportant tannformaton on “o to” patent. Costs, nvua contacts an spata stanceere consere to be factors of secon orer ony.

Graph 45 Key quaty factors for a servce such as PIC Stuttgart, percentage of respondents

14

17

20

23

37

46

51

54

57

74

86

94

66

40

74

49

43

40

40

43

31

23

11

6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance

Individual contact

Costs





Scope of service

Information on different IP strategies

("why/why notto patent")

Timely delivery


Comptence of Staff



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 138 17-01-2008 11:10:41



141

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S3. IK2 – Innovation and

Knowledge

Country: SeenOrgna tte: IK2 (Innovaton an Knoege), kunskapsbronTarget group: SMEsCoverage: Regona (provnce of Scana (Skåne))

(Pro-actve) aareness rasng measures/Pubc Reatonsx Informaton Provson Servces

Category*: TranngCustomze n-ept consutng an avsory servces/ponts

x Fnance & Lega Frameork*cassicaton system eine by te Austran Insttute for SME Researc

3.1 IK2 (Innovation and Knowledge)in a nutshell

IK2 (Innovaton an Knoege) s an nnovaton support programme offere nte Ses provnce of Scana (Skåne) esgne to entfy an support nnovatveprojects an to prove reevant IPR support for nvuas an companes toprotect ter eas an/or nventons. In terms of marketng actvtes, te ams arestmuatng an supportng ne eas c sou ea to te eveopment of nnovaton an proucton processes n exstng companes an companes care eary stage. It as ncue as a case stuy n te scope of te uneryngbencmarkng stuy n orer to ustrate o te topc of IPR can be covere ason te frame of genera nnovaton support.

Overa, te objectves of te IK2 servce are to prove assstance n nnovatonprojects, n te course of c t aso famarses SMEs t IPR-reate ssues. IK2eps to entfy te nnovaton potenta of a project an/or concept by offerngspecic nnovaton guance; ts guance covers aso reevant IPR nformatont a ve on patents, trae marks, copyrgts an regstere esgn. Aroun4 %–0 % of te servces prove by IK2 are so-cae pre-study meetings , cconsst to aroun 0 % of avce concernng IPR ssues. In aton, oans angrants are avaabe for varous purposes an stages of eveopment of te nno-vaton projects tn IK2 – ncung IPR: te so-cae “nnovaton oan” can beuse to ep coverng te costs arsng urng te eveopment process. Inaton, te oan may aso be use to inance te regstraton of fferent types of IPR.

Atoug IK2 offers support regarng forma means of IPR protecton, te eve of IPR competence s more of a genera, basc nature; IK2’s avce toars IPR ssuesconssts many of strategc conseratons: expanng te fferent IPR nstruments

(but aso ess forma IP protecton nstruments), o tey ork an c strategymay be best for te SME. For more compex IPR topcs, suc as ega avce, IK2refers to externa nvuas an organsatons, e.g. consutants, patent attorneysor te natona patent ofice. Tese referra actvtes are part of a genera matc-makng functon emboe n te servce, suc as projects t researc nsttutesan/or unverstes. Nottstanng te referra actvtes to te open marketpace,IK2 users can st use inanca support for IPR-reate actons taken (.e., pre-stuesfor patent appcatons).

IK2 as an expct focus on SMEs; te IPR servces offere cover te processes of eveopment, regstraton an utsaton of IPRs. No restrctons are n pace for certan nustres or tecnoogy ies. Te programme offers ts servces unt a

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 141 17-01-2008 11:10:41



143

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

• Innovaton Loans: Ts specic type of oan s offere to cover te eveopmentprocess of a nnovaton project t up to 0 % of te tota costs. Te oan sgrante t a contona repayment cause: f te project s successfu teentrepreneur s obgate to pay te oan back. If ts s not te case, te

entrepreneur may pay back ony a reuce amount of te oan, or n somecases even notng. Te oan can aso be use to inance te regstraton of fferent types of IPR.

Te ecson process, eter funng s grante or not, s reguary mae byte so-cae nnovaton counc. Fnanca grants, c excee € 1.300,ave to be accepte by at east to persons n te counc.

Furter to te core servce of IK2, an n assocaton t NUTEK, te Ses Agency for Economc an Regona Grot, IK2 runs aso a programme cae“Prouct deveopment for Sma Enterprses n Skåne” (Prouktutveckng skånskasmåföretag, PUSS). Areay estabse companes can appy for funng f teycarry out prouct eveopment n oter areas tan te ones tey areay operaten. Te contrbuton can at most amount up to 0 % of te company’s proucteveopment costs. Potenta IPR ssues can be aso fune troug ts

programme.Evauaton and Performance

Reguar montorng exercses are n pace to ensure sustanabe eveopmentstn IK2 an ts servce offerngs. On te oter an, IK2 s not subject to reguar externa forma performance assessments an/or evauatons. hoever, ntate byRegon Skåne, an externa evauaton as carre out recenty by an externaconsutant (focusng bot on te servce’s performance an te organsatonastructure).

Te take up of te servce trougout te regon as been very promsng. Tefoong overve summarzes some performance ncators of IK2:

• IK2 serves aroun 600 cents per year. Out of tese, aroun 10 can beestmate to use te servces to aress IPR ssues.

• In 2006, 40 commercasatons (ne proucts) ere ntrouce by areay

estabse companes t support from te servce. In aton, 4 censeagreements ere ssue n 2006 t te ep from IK2.

In 2006, aroun € 1.4 mo ere use for inanca support. In aton, IK2 receventerests on ter oans c can be use for oter funng purposes. Parts of tese funng an revenues ere use for te above mentone inancapackages:

• Number of grante pre-stuy means: 170 projects; te average sum per project as approxmatey € 1.200. In tota, aroun € 21 TSd erenveste.

• Number of grante knoege means: 34 projects; te average sum per project as approxmatey € 3.800. In tota, aroun € 21 TSd erenveste.

• Number of grante nnovaton oans: 17 projects; te average sum per projectas approxmatey € 29.000. In tota, aroun € 64 TSd ere nveste.

• Number of grante prouct eveopment contrbutons: 28 projects, teaverage sum per project as approxmatey € 22.000. In tota, aroun € 70TSd ere nveste.

Oter performance ncators, ke number of patents ie t support from tsare not use. Te number of IPR ttes, .e. patents or oter IPR, nuce by tsservce s rater o. Terefore, no ata s coecte on tese aspects. It s mportantto note tat n te context of an nnovaton support programme ke IK2, IPR oesnot nee to pay (an sou not pay) a centra roe– t s just a sma, yetmportant, eement, use an utse te rgt ay. Basc kno-o transfer onIPR n a strategc context an te abty to refer to IPR specasts are key assets.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 143 17-01-2008 11:10:42



144


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d





0 companes ere surveye about ter experence t IK2. From te surveysampe t seems tat IK2 targest mosty mcro-enterprses: aroun to trs of tecompanes c gave nformaton on ts topc empoy not more tan nnepersons, 32 % ave 10 to 49 empoyees; ony 4 % are arger companes t up to249 empoyees (see Grap 46).

Beteen 2003 an 200, 64 % of te IK2 users ntrouce prouct nnovatons(ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts) onto te market; aroun 4 % ere abeto ntrouce process nnovatons n te same tme (see Grap 47). Regarngnnovaton actvtes, amost a partcpatng companes conucte ntramuraR&d. Equay, amost a empoyees n te surveye companes are nvove nR&d.

wt regar to te type of servce provers use for nnovaton an R&d projects, IK2users ra mosty on te servces of regona agences (see Grap 48). Nottstanng

Graph 46 IK2–Company Sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe, percentage of respondents, 2005

64%

32%

4%



Graph 47 IK2–Innovaton actvtes n nterve sampe, 2005, percentage of respondents*)

96

19

4

71

4850

31

0

20

40

60

80

100


&







e q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g



D e s i g n



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 144 17-01-2008 11:10:42



14

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

ts, IK2 users refer aso to a range of oter nsttutons suc as patent attorneys, tepatent ofice, externa consutants an varous oter organsatons. Ts may be ue toIK2’s referra actvtes an te eavy use matcmakng functons.

durng 2003 an 200, a conserabe sare of IK2 servce users experence

amperng factors for nnovatons. In ne t te inngs of oter supportservces, companes compane mosty about g nnovaton costs (for 46% of g an 26 % of meum reevance), economc rsks (for 42 % of g an for furter 30 % of meum reevance) an te ack of approprate sources of inance(of g reevance for 38 %, meum for 18 %) (see Grap 49). Insuficentnformaton about te market, cent responsveness an organsatona ssues arereporte to be of ess crtca nature.

Beteen 2003 an 200, 46 % of te IK2 users state tat tey use trae marksto protect ter IP, makng ts te most IP protecton meto utse. Ts maypont to te nnovaton projects beng more ncrementa tan raca n nature; tennovatons may often ack te nventve step necessary for gettng a patentgrante. Incrementa nnovatons are typca for Lo- an Meum Tec (LMT)nustres, c are usuay assocate t mature markets (see Grap 0). In

suc nustres t s sa tat companes nee to foo a fferentaton strategyan foster, for exampe, branng actvtes. As trae marks are n ter very natureuse for branng, te g sare of trae mark users prove furter evence tat

Graph 48 IK2–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of respondents*)

8 12 13 11 14

25

88

4767

33

38

43

0

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


Graph 49 IK2–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005 percentage of respondents*)

46 42 38

6 10 102

26 30

18

16 10 614 4 2

0

20

40

60

80

100

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s


F i n a n c e

L a c k o f


L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l


s t a n d a r d s


i n f o

C l i e n t



i s s u e s


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 145 17-01-2008 11:10:43



146


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



SMEs supporte by te IK2 sceme may stem to a sgnicant proporton from LMTnustres.

One of te man mportant nterna barrers for usng IPR s te fact tat IK2 usersconser forma IPR as not very reevant n te overa busness concept (for 18 %

of g, an for 8 % of meum reevance) (see Grap 1). – agan a supportveargument for a sgnicant sare of LMT companes. Te costs of IP protecton (for 10 % of g, for 26 % of o reevance) pay an mportant roe, too. Morenterestngy, as te resuts aso so tat genera aareness s st consere tobe of a partcuar reevance as barrer, te eman for a broaer IPR managementcounseng an avce cou be an ssue for te furter eveopment of IK2. Tscontrasts t te o sare of ansers seeng uncear cost/beneit conseratonregarng IP protecton.


Te man source of nformaton about IK2 an ts servces ere consutants (37 %)an oter nformaton provers; a arge part of te users ere referre troug“Am”, one of te major inancers of IK2. In at east one of te tree oficebungs ere IK2 s ocate, Am s represente, too. Compare to oter

nformaton cannes, ony fe companes (10 %) receve nformaton from teservce provng organsaton tsef (see Grap 2).

Regarng user satsfacton, IK2 sos one of te gest satsfacton rates amonga te IPR support servces anayse n te scope of te uneryng stuy. Amost

Graph 50 IK2–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents *)

28

814

4634

212 12 8 40

20

40

60

80

P a

t e n

t s f i l e d

P a

t e n

t s v a

l i d

a n

d / o r g r a n

t e d

D e s i g n p a

t t e r n s

a n

d / o r u

t i l i t y

m o

d e

l s

T r a

d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g

h t s

D e

f e n s i v e

P u

b l i s h i n g

T r a

d e

s e c r e

t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n

t s

D e s i g n

c o m p

l e x

i t y

L e a

d - t i m

e

a d v a n

t a g e

N o

d e

l i b e r a

t e

I P R s t r a

t e g y

%


Graph 51 IK2–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents *)

6 102

18

22

34 2630

8

106

22

0

20

40

60

80

A w a r e n e s s

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s

high re levance medium relevance

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 146 17-01-2008 11:10:44



147

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

a users consere te extent of te servce offerngs to be aequate. Aroun0 % conser te amnstratve burens as qute o; for 4 % t s at eastacceptabe. Spata stance s consere not to be a probem. As a resut,practcay a IK2 users tnk tat te beneits ceary outeg te efforts. Ts can

be attrbute to te ong-term coacng functon of te servce provers cseemngy creates strong nks.


In orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – . e., at ou aveappene n case te servce ere absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “netpostve effect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espteof te servce. Smary, aso oter types of canges ncurre tn te enterprse,as a resut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese types of canges arereferre to as “beavoura atonaty”).

Atonaty effects are presente n Grap 3. Base on te survey resuts, 7 % of te unertakngs ou not ave been carre out at a n te absence of supportfrom te servce. For aroun 36 %, te inanca support speee up te process,

22 % ou ave use oter sources of inance. On te oter an, 13 % ouave carre out te unertakngs tout any cange or moicaton.

It seems tat IK2 a goo job regarng IPR aareness. Qute conserabecanges n terms of genera aareness (ncrease for 42 %) an management

Graph 52 IK2–Informaton channes, by hch users got to kno about theservce, percentage of respondents*)

128

2

24

37

2

10

27

0

10

20

30

40

I n t e r n e t

N e w s l e t t e r



G e n e r a l

n e w s p a p e r


j o u r n a l

P e r s o n a l



C o m m e r c i a l

b a n k s

A g e n c y

I K 2 i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


Graph 53 IK2–Addtonaty of the inanca subsdy, percentage of respondents*)

13%

36%

20%

22%

2%

7%

Undertaking carried out without any

change/modification


Undertaking carried to a smaller scope (e.g. less geographicalcoverage)Undertaking carried out with other sources of finance



"pure" deadweight lossespure additionality


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 147 17-01-2008 11:10:44



148


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



knoege n IPR ssues (40 %, see Grap 4) ere recore. Te usage of patentsn te busness IPR strategy ncrease n 20 % of te companes, tat of traesecrets for 16 %. Reatvey tte effects ere aceve t respect to IP tranngnees, an te – areay g – trae mark usage. Unsurprsngy, te measure

effects are ess n magntue tan t ecate IPR support measures; oever,as IPR s ony part of an nnovaton programme, IK2 may ave succeee n makngts users IPR aare exacty at te rgt tme, en actuay te topc of usng IPRa arsen for te company.

Amost a users beeve tat nvua contacts are one of te most mportant keyfactors of a servce comparabe to tat of IK2 (see Grap ). Ts unernes tecoacng functon. In aton, te competence of staff, matters of costs, tmeyevery an te ease of access ere aso consere as key factors. Interestngy,spata stance receve g attenton eves compare to oter IPR supportservces. Ts mgt be expane by te fact tat IK2 eavy rees on ong-termcose-te reatonsp (coacng) from IK2, c nees some form of geograpcaproxmty.

Questons on y to patent an o to patent ere ess mportant, probaby as

IPR s not te prmary trust of te programme. hoever, te tte sgnicancegven to referra actvtes s surprsng; t cou be expane by te nformacaracter of te servce an te coacng caracter: specay te atter mayoversao many of te servce actvtes tat te user base oes not actuayrecognse referra actvtes as a stnctve servce eement but rater takes t as partof te persona kno-o of s/ers IK2 contact.

3.3 Elements of good practiceTe servce exbts te foong success factors (resp. goo practce eements):

• IPR embee nto broaer nnovaton management an nnovaton support;

• Customer-taore an aso nforma coacng amng to offer avce for fferent pases of nnovaton eveopment;

• Invua contact;

• Long supportve pero (trougout te nnovaton cyce);

Graph 54 Behavoura addtonaty of IK2, percentage of respondents*)

2

2

2

6

8

8

12

14

16

18

20

40

42

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

In-licensing



Out-licensing


IPR training








General awareness

increased decreased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 148 17-01-2008 11:10:45



149

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Graph 55 Key quaty factors for a servce such as IK2, percentage of respondents*)

14

30

40

50

54

66

70

80

82

94

96

98

30

16

24

16

22

20

22

14

10

2

2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100



to patent")




Spatial distance

Scope of service


Timely delivery

Costs

Comptence of Staff

Individual contact


%

14

30

40

50

54

66

70

80

82

94

96

98

30

16

24

16

22

20

22

14

10

2

2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


("why/why not to patent")




Spatial distance

Scope of service


Timely delivery

Costs

Comptence of Staff

Individual contact


%


• Context-epene anng of IPR an IP protecton metos (.e., offerngscome at a tme en respectve avce s neee) tout preference gven toa specic IP protecton meto;

• Competence n nnovaton management;

• referra actvtes an/or netorkng t externa experts en t comes ton-ept IPR ssues;

• Goo reputaton among Ses SMEs;

• Regona outreac.

Probabe caenges arse n te foong ies.

• te ack of reguar (externa) evauatons;

• Accorng to experts, a ess structure ecson makng process concernng teamnstraton an operaton of te servce c s probaby party ue to terange of stakeoers (inancers) nvove;

• Probaby too tte IPR scope c cou be expane an c s aso yte genera mpact regarng IPR s rater o;

• Sma sze of te servce team e at te same tme broa coverage of

fferent subjects paces genera constrants on te ept certan subjects canbe treate (IPR beng one exampe).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 149 17-01-2008 11:10:46



11

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S4. Innovation by patent

Information (IOI)

Country: Te NeteransOrgna tte: Innovate oor Octroo-nformate (IOI)Target group: SMEsCoverage: Natona

(Pro-actve) aareness rasng measures/Pubc Reatons(x) Informaton Provson Servces

Category*: (x) Tranng

xCustomze n-ept consutng an avsory servces/pontsFnance & Lega Frameork


4.1 Innovation by patent Information (IOI)in a nutshell

Te servce “Innovate oor Octroo-nformate (IOI)” (Innovaton by patentInformaton (IOI)) as a servce run by a eveopment agency (Syntens) an tedutc patent ofice. Ts nsttutona set up as te man reason for ncung teservce as a case stuy n te scope of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy – tsos o eveopment agences an patent ofices can cooperate for te better of SMEs. Furtermore, te servce aso sos o potenta conlcts t teprvate sector of IPR servce provson may arse an o tey can be sove.Toug te programme as suc oes not exst any more, ts actvtes contnue aspart of ay-to-ay ork of bot organsatons. Te objectves of IOI ere gven asfoos:

• To stmuate patent aareness among nnovatve, nustra SMEs an promotete use of patents as a source of tecnoogca an market nformaton.

• To eucate SMEs an transferrng knoege sks enabng SMEs to innformaton on patents, .e. troug patent atabase researc (patent scans).

• To ncrease te aareness about te vaue of patent nformaton of te staff atSyntens.

In essence, IOI s an exampe of a servce tat tres to foster te IPR system trougpatent atabase searces. One of te most mportant tngs tat set ts servcease from oter suc servces s tat t s offere an operate jonty by atecnoogy/eveopment agency an te natona patent ofice. It tus as toovercome te separaton beteen te PO/IPR support servce or an te orof nnovaton support of te eveopment/tecnoogy agences c s otersevsbe rater often across Europe.

In terms of marketng actvtes, te goas of te servce are expresse n a mucmore operatona manner:

• to nform an acqure ne cent companes;

• to assess te nee proies for eac acqure company n te ie of patentnformaton;

• to carry out patent scans perocay; ookng at specic nees for free28 (t2004);

• to refer to oter partes (patent agents, patent ofice) to carry out patentsscans n a ater stage to be pa for an eepenng researc (from 2004 on).

28 Ts objectve as been cange afterars ue to compants by a patent attorney.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 151 17-01-2008 11:10:46



12


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Tese actvtes ere focuse on mprovng te knoege among SMEs aboutpatent nformaton as a source of tecnoogca an market ntegence. Companesere to become aare of te mportance of patent nformaton, especay n teeary stage of an nnovaton process, an to get ne eas for aaptng/mprovng

nnovaton processes.Te IOI-programme as offere soey to SMEs. One mportant aspect to note stat IOI focuse on (nformaton on) patents ony an targete prmary te irstpase of IPR usage an not, for exampe, matters of utsaton. Accorng toexperts, ts s party ue to te fact tat te utsaton of IP s not yet very commonamongst dutc SMEs, an tat fosterng te irst pases of IPR usage s moremportant n te current context an a pretext for next steps to be taken.

Te servce as offere naton-e. A sgt regona bas as gven by te facttat te partner organsaton Syntens as, accorng to ts ebste, aroun 16ofices across te Neterans, most of tem ocate n major ctes.


deveope by te dutc Patent Ofice c s offerng tecnca knoege annformaton on patentng, IOI as jonty operate t te Syntens organsaton.

Fune by te dutc Mnstry of Economc Affars, te Syntens organsaton s anon-proit tecnoogy eveopment agency amng at provng avce ansupport to nnovatve SMEs n varous ies. Te agency as a partner to te dutcPO from te begnnng of te programme.

After a preparaton tme of aroun 12 monts, ere stakeoers ere actveynvove n te esgn of te servce, user nees ere assesse an a eveopmentpan esgne, te programme as enacte on Juy 1, 2001 t a forma runnngtme t Juy 30, 2004. Foong postve evauaton resuts, te servce runnngtme as extene t June 30, 2006. Te tota buget aocate for te tme frameJuy 1, 2001 t June 30, 2006 amounte to € 6.7 mo, of c about € 100,000p.a. (€ 40,000 n tota) ere use as overeas for atabase costs, ousng anPubc Reaton. Te staff operatng IOI amounte to 80: 7 part-tme from Syntens, futme from te patent ofice statone at Syntens ofices. Te avsors orkng

n te programme are/ere gy ske; most oft te staff (dutc PTO anSyntens) possesses a tecnca backgroun.

A oe set of toos as use to ssemnate nformaton on te sceme: Avertsements n speca journas ere esgne, a ebste as set up, foersere prouce an roa sos organse. Furtermore, SMEs ere contacte pro-actvey; mutpers/exstng netorks came nto use. we IOI ene oficay n2006, actvtes of te programme contnue as ntegra parts of te ongongcooperaton actvtes beteen te dutc PTO an Syntens; PTO-avsors are stbase at regona Syntens ofices but inance by te dutc PTO.

Modes of operaton

Te servce package conssts prmary of te foong components:

• Informaton servces an tranng programmes (tranngs courses offernggenera nformaton on patent an patent atabases are e by te PTO

consutants at Syntens ofices).• Taor-mae avce servces regarng te use of patent nformaton, an

subsequent referrng of SMEs to specase commerca partes,

In aton, Syntens offers co-funng to re externa experts c support SMEsn questons of IPR an reate ssues. It as to be note, toug, tat ts co-funng sceme s offere by Syntens ony an as not part of te IOI-project.

Te moe of operaton as/s as foos: Frst enqures are eat t at Syntensofices. Syntens offere nformaton on IOI an referre partes to te core IOI staff (te ive empoyees form te dutc PTO). Te core staff prove te necessarynformaton on patents an on te beneits of usng patent atabases. A neeproie t respect to patent nformaton as set up for eac company.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 152 17-01-2008 11:10:46



13

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Before 2004, peroca patent scans t bref nformaton on ne patents ereprove proactvey an free of carge to member companes. After a compantof a prvate party (patent attorney), ts servce eement as termnate. After 2004, te accent of te measure cange nto enancng te searc sks of te

companes an offerng, beses genera avce on patents, more n-eptconsutng on o to use patent atabases (base on te company nee proie).To ts en, PTO avsors an Syntens avsors offer a orksop, namey “searcngn gta patent atabases” c conssts of a bref ntroucton to te patentsystem to enabe nvua companes to searc n te patent system for temseves. On request, a irst patent scan emonstratng o searces areperforme s st carre out – for furter scans, SMEs are referre to commercapartes suc as patent attorneys. Tus, a n-n stuaton s create: Teprogramme fuis ts goas (creatng IPR aareness), an at te same tme te pr-vate sector beneits form an enargement of te market.

Regarng oter IPR toos suc as trae marks etc. users are referre to nsttutonsoutse Syntens. As IPR management n SMEs noaays cas for a more ntegrateapproac c as to tacke a avaabe IP protecton metos, experts state tatte ssue of brngng te kno-o on fferent IP protecton metos togeter may be an area ort ookng at for Syntens.

Evauaton and Performance

Reguar montorng exercses, nterm an one ex-post evauaton epe tomanage te quaty of te programme. Te nterm evauaton resuts of 2004report some postve mpact on turnover of te assste companes. Ase fromtat, te evauaton aso measure user satsfacton, c can be consere toave been qute g. Te overa postve concuson of te evauaton as onereason tat te IOI project as extene from 2004 to 2006.

Te user base of IOI s many compose of companes n manufacturng nustres,an to a esser extent of companes actve n tecnoogcay-orente oesaenustres or busness servces. In 2004, 481 SMEs use te servce. 207 of toseere referre to te patent ofice for tecnoogca an ega matters, 136 to patentattorneys for patent scans. In tota, about 2,000 SMEs ere avse on te use of patent atabases n te pero of 2002 to 2006.



0 companes o use IOI ere questonne about ter experence n te courseof te user survey of ts stuy. Te strbuton of te user sampe sos tat teIOI targete mosty mcro-enterprses: To trs of te companes empoy notmore tan 9 persons, 26 % ave 10 to 49 empoyees; ony 6 % are arger companes t up to 249 empoyees.

Beteen 2003 an 200, to tr of te servce users ntrouce prouctnnovatons (ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts) onto te market, more tan0 % came up t process nnovatons. Amost 90 % of te servce usersconucte ntramura R&d, 71 % ere engage n te market ntroucton of nnovatons. Once agan t can be seen tat te users of IPR support servces aregy nnovatve an very muc actve n R&d.

Surprsngy IOI users mae no frequent use of support an/or funng from pubcor prvate nnovaton support provers (see Grap 6), but rater refer to servceprovers ony occasonay. Servce users took at most occasona avantage of teservce offerngs of natona agences, fooe by oter support provers anexterna consutants. Ts ponts to te fact tat most users may be ong-term

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 153 17-01-2008 11:10:46



14


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



customers of Syntens o are no offere an atona servce. Te nnovatonagency tus seemngy acts as an entry pont to te IPR system. Anoter ncatonfor tat s te o usage eves of patent attorneys (n oter countres patent agentspay a muc arger roe as entry ponts or for marketng/ssemnatng nformaton

on IPR support servces).Regarng amperng factors for nnovaton actvtes, companes companemosty about te ack of approprate sources of inance (of reevance for 6 %),organsatona ssues (mportant for 28 %) an ack of quaie personne annformaton on markets (mportant for 10 %, respectvey) (see Grap 7).Interestngy, nnovaton costs an economc rsks are reporte to be of ess crtcanature – as are reguatons an stanars, cent responsveness an ack of tecnoogy nformaton. Tese resuts ave to be nterprete t care, toug, ast cou rongy mpy tat a amperng factors are mosty of an externa nature.

Beteen 2003 an 200, 60 % of te servce users state tat tey use traesecrets an/or secrecy agreements as most mportant IP protecton meto (seeGrap 8). Patents ere ie by 40 %, an 26 % a a patent grante or va.Usage eves regarng nforma IP protecton metos ere qute g, too, an

even ger tan tat of forma IPR. Ts resut s n ne t oter emprcainngs.

Te man nterna barrer for usng IPR metos s tat IP s not consere of partcuar reevance n te anayse enterprses (for 24 % of g reevance) cosey

Graph 56 IOI–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs,percentage of respondents*)

76

2918

8 6 4 4 40

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

O t h e r

E x t e r n a l


C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E U

occasionally

%


Graph 57 IOI–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*)

56

28

10 10 84 2 2 20

20

40

60

F i n a n c e


i s s u e s


i n f o

L a c k o f q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l


I n n o v a t i o n c o s t s

C l i e n t


L a c k o f



s t a n d a r d s

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 154 17-01-2008 11:10:47



1

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

fooe by te costs of IP protecton (for 22 % of meum reevance; see Grap9). Te irst resut maybe ue to te approace Syntens user base, c mayto a sgnicant extent smpy not be prone to IPR usage (e.g., because tey are notIPR-afine nustres). Te on average o barrer eves for a aspects ste are n

contrast to emprca inngs from oter sources – to expanatons are possbe:Eter te companes are truy e aare an professona n te anng of IPR(an tat IOI a pretty goo job) – c cou be backe up by te g usageeves of fferent IP protecton mecansms. Or aareness eves of te ficutesencountere are o because very fe companes actuay engage n IPRprotecton n a serous manner, tus tey ave no experence n eang t IPR nrea fe.


Amost 80 % of te users of Innovaton by patent Informaton got to kno aboutte servce troug te servce provng organsaton tsef (agan ncatng tatSyntens s te entry pont for ts type of IPR servce, an tat “cassca” Syntenscustomers may be te irst an prmary target group); aroun 20 % recevenformaton about IOI from oter sources. Oter cannes (.e. cassca mea

avertsng, nternet or agences) ave not paye a roe at a as a source of nformaton.

Graph 58 IOI–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users,2003 to 2005 *)

4026 28 26

1812

60

3024

0

20

40

60

80






m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y



%


Graph 59 IOI–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

22

104

24

0

20

40

60


i n b u s i n e s s

c o n t e x t

C o s t s o f I P

p r o t e c t i o n


i s s u e s

L a c k o f i n f o

o n I P

p r o t e c t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

T i m e t o m a k e

I P p r o t e c t i o n

w o r k

u n c l e a r

c o s t / b e n e f i t o f



%

*) multiple answers allowed .Source: User Survey, n = 50

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 155 17-01-2008 11:10:48



16


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



Overa speakng, users ere, on average, very satsie t key aspects of teoffere servces by IOI. As can be seen from Grap 60, a aspects (every tme,te competence of staff, te reevance of te prove nformaton, etc.) aregrae t “1.8” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie) to 4 (unsatsie).

60 % of te users rate te extent of te servce offerngs to be aequate. On teoter an, a rater arge sare of users (40 %) tnks t s too narro/superica.

Neary a users conser spata stance (for 0 % a very o-eve barrer an for anoter 46 % a factor consere to be at east acceptabe) not to be a probem.64 % tnk tat te beneits of usng ts servce ceary outeg te efforts. Onte oter an, 22 % state tat te beneits are ceary beo efforts.


A coser ook at te canges n atttues toar IPR protecton among users reveastat IOI as abe to aceve ts ams rater e (see Grap 61). Keepng n mnte strong overa focus of te IOI-programme on patents an not so muc onoter IPR toos suc as trae marks an aso te fact tat trae secrets an/or

Graph 60 IOI–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servce provson,arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,8

1,6

1,5

1,5

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


*) mutpe ansers aoe,. Source: User Survey, n = 0

Graph 61 Behavoura addtonaty of IOI, percentage of respondents*)

6

8

16

18

36

74

78

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80







Copyright usage in IPR strategyIn-licensing

Out-licensing


IPR training


General awareness


increased decreased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 156 17-01-2008 11:10:49



17

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

secrecy agreements are (or at east ere) te most mportant IP protecton metosfor te users of IOI, t seems not surprsng tat te most sgnicant canges tookpace t respect to patent knoege n te busness envronment (ncrease for 78 %) an genera IPR aareness (74 %). Compare to tese inngs, te atttue

toars oter forma IPR protectons metos, .e., trae marks, esgn or copyrgts, as not cange. Interestngy, aso, te usage of trae secrets etc. not mns. It seems tat most users use te patent nformaton scans not somuc for patentng purposes, but rater to nform temseves about te possbtesof suc toos an about te patentng envronment of ter busnesses.

Beteen tese nterestng nsgts, te rse n patent aareness an te pre-exstng goo knoege about oter forma IPR protecton, no cange asetecte n atttues concernng genera knoege management kno-o. Tsoutcome seems pausbe: te IOI programme s smpy not meant to offer consutng on IPR-strateges an IP management an as a narro patent focus. Incase customers are not ntereste n patents, tey are most key referre to oter servces an epartments tn Syntens c means tat tey never actuayuse IOI.

In ts gt, externa experts state tat te irst screenng of SME requests bySyntens s often one tout te necessary focus on te current stuaton an teactua nees of te company toars IPR protecton. Ts ou ncate a bnspot toars te subject of IP management an te usage of oter IP protectonnstruments.

For te users of IOI, te most mportant eements of a servce comparabe to IOIare te ease of access an enticaton an matters of costs (see Grap 62).Competence of staff an tmey every ere aso consere as key factors. Te

Graph 62 Key quaty factors for a servce such as IOI, percentage of respondents*)

2

2

2

22

2

16

16

44

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Information on different IP strategies("why/why not to patent")

Individual contact




Costs

Spatial distance

Scope of service

Timely delivery

Comptence of Staff



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 157 17-01-2008 11:10:49



18


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



scope of te servce, nvua contact an te referra to externa servces seemnot to be suc mportant parts of ts kn of measure, accorng to te IOIusers.

Agan, ts as to be seen n te gt of te fact tat probaby some more genera

IPR reate request oes not reac te IPR peope. Te IOI seems to be so mucfocusse tat ony a mte number of factors are mportant for te actua user group. hoever, tere seems to be a cear eman for oter IPR servces n atonto IOI, as ncate by te ansers gven above tat te scope of te servce may,at ast for a arger sare of users, be too narro.


The service exhibits the following success factors (resp.good practice elements):

• Cooperaton beteen patent ofice an tecnoogy eveopment agency:

· ...aos for ntransttutona earnng;

· …ou ao for ntegratng IPR n genera nnovaton support;• Natona offerng t referng regona outets;

• Toroug esgn an set up process;

• Exstng postve evauaton cuture;

• Accorng to experts, aequate funng of te programme;

• Interna referra actvtes;

• Goo orkng reatonsps t prvate sector IPR offerngs n a “n-n”stuaton (IOI aceves ts goa e t aso serves as an entry pont for teprvate sector, enargeng ter market);

• Rater g user take-up an g satsfacton eves;

• Contnuaton of IOI actvtes after termnaton of te programme as part of ay-to-ay actvtes.

Te servce experence te foong caenges:

• Patent centrcty: Informa IP protecton mecansms an ess forma IPR – tusIP management – are not covere;

• User base segmentaton: hg sare of users for c IPR s not a subject. Ints context, te evauaton resuts report aso a stncton beteen e-experence IPR users (c ave etae questons about IP protectonmetos) an IPR begnners (c seemngy ant to use patent nfromatonas source of nspraton) It as recommene to pace a focus on te atter group.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 158 17-01-2008 11:10:49



160


N A T I O

N A L A N d



I N

T h E F I E L d



as set up by te Natona Inustra Property Insttute (Insttut natona e aproprété nustree (INPI)) togeter t te Mnstry of Inustry an a prvateconsutant company specaze n IPRs (Cabnet Agoe). Te sceme operate onan expermenta/pot bass for approx. 6 monts n orer to promote te servce

an make sure t ou be mpemente te same ay n every regon. At te sametme, a guebook on o to manage suc a servce as eaborate anpubse.

Toay, te servce s prove by INPI (0 % of a pre-agnoses are one by INPI)n coaboraton t externa experts. INPI can be consere as te centransttuton concernng IPR n France; t offers a e range of IPR servces for companes (consutng, patent atabase searc servces, etc), operates as teofica regstraton ofice for IPR for companes an as an mportant obbyngfuncton regarng IPR pocy. INPI orks n cose coaboraton t te foongnsttutons, as regars aso te operaton of te IP Préagnoss servce:

• Oséo nnovaton (Frenc natona nnovaton agency formery cae ANVAR),

• dRIRE (nustry, researc an envronment regona recton),

• Cambers of commerce an ARIST (regona strategc an tecnoogy

nformaton agences),• CRITT (nnovaton an tecnoogy transfer regona centres).

Tese co-operatons revea one mportant success factor for ts servce: A tensttutons are part of te so-cae RdT tecnoogy eveopment netork(Réseaux e éveopment tecnoogque) c ams to promote nteectuaproperty n France. Eac regona INPI branc (ofices/centres; 11 n France) s nrect contact t ts regona tecnoogy eveopment netork (RdT) ofice. Tenetork s use mosty to nform oca enterprses about IP Préagnoss an oter reate IPR servces. Te promoton of te servce troug ts netork s, accorngto ntervee experts, a very eficent approac to reac a seecte target group.

IP Préagnoss s prove by aroun 130 experts; 0 % orkng at INPI, 0 % areexterna experts. Regarng professona quaicatons, te staff at INPI ncue IPexperts t verse backgrouns (e.g., engneers, ayers or consutants) an

tranng n reevant IPR ssues. Tese experts are usuay sprea over te varousepartments at INPI an contrbute to servce quaty by suppyng fferentexperences, knoege an veponts.

Eac pre-agnoss sesson costs aroun 1,00; te sum s fuy covere by INPI.Noneteess, supporte SMEs are beng mae aare of te monetary vaue of tepre-agnoss consutancy ork an te fact tat te costs are fuy subsse. Atota buget of aroun € 400,000 p.a. s aocate to te servce n orer to aofor at east 20 IP assessments eac year.

Beses promoton on te nternet, te servce prover makes especay eavy useof persona/ pro-actve contactng an te usage of mutpers/exstng netorks(.e. te RdT netork) to reac out for te customer group (an aso for tsmarketng an pubc reatons actvtes). As a matter of fact, pro-actve contactngcan be consere te prmary “strbuton” canne.

Modes of operaton

Atoug IP Préagnoss s offere by INPI, pre-agnoss actvtes are not carreout by INPI staff aone; aroun 0 % of te pre-agnoses are execute by externaexperts orkng uner a contractua agreement t INPI.

A pre-agnoss s carre out n te foong ay: An IPR expert, eter from INPIor propose by INPI, unertakes a irst assessment of te company’s IP base onfferent anaytca metos. A stanarse guebook as been specicayesgne an teste for ts purpose. Moreover, te expert anayses te state of teart of te IP management an/or strategy n te enterprse, evauates tesgnicance of IPR n te present stuaton an formuates ssues tat can probabynluence te future ambtons of te company. Nees, prortes an expectatons

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 160 17-01-2008 11:10:50



162

B E N C H M A R K I N G

N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D

O F I N T E L L E C T U A L A N D

I N D U S T R I A L P R O P E R T Y

Graph 63 IP Prédagnoss–Company Sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe,

2005, percentage of respondents

82%

11%

7%



Graph 64 IP Prédagnoss–Innovaton actvtes n nterve sampe, 2005,percentage of respondents*)

83

24 21

3

5252

69

0

20

40

60

80

100

I n t r a m u r a

l r e s e a r c

h

&

e x p e r i m e n

t a l

d e v e

l o p m e n

t ( R & D )

A c q u

i s i t i o n o

f R & D

( e x

t r a m u r a

l R & D )

A c q u

i s i t i o n o

f

m a c

h i n e r y a n

d

e q u

i p m e n

t

T r a

i n i n g

M a r k e

t i n t r o d u c

t i o n

o f i n n o v a

t i o n s

D e s i g n

O t h e r p r e p a r a

t i o n s

f o r

p r o

d u c

t i o n

/ d e

l i v e r i e s

%

*) mutipe answers aowed. Source: User Survey, n = 30

than haf of them made at east occasiona use of support from INPI. A possibeexpanation coud be that the service team reverts to existing INPI interna recordswhen contacting irms an tat tese companes most key ave a story of ateast enqurng nformaton from te patent ofice.

Regarng amperng factors for nnovaton actvtes, companes companemosty about g nnovaton costs (for 7 % of g an for a furter 27 % of meum reevance), economc rsks (for 47 % of g, for 17 % of meumreevance) an te ack of approprate sources of inance (of g reevance for 40 %, of meum reevance for 23 %; see Grap 66). Reguatons an stanars,ack of market an tecnoogy nfo an organsatona ssues are reporte to be of a ess crtca nature. Tese resuts are n ne t inngs form oter case stues

IP Préagnoss users empoye a range of IP protecton metos n te pero of 2003 to 200, not te east to a g egree aso forma IPR nstruments foongte avce gven n te pre-agnoss (see Grap 67). 40 % of te users state tattey use trae marks to protect ter IP; 37 % ie for a patent n tat tme pero

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 162 17-01-2008 11:10:51



163

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E SGraph 65 IP Prédagnoss–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs,

percentage of respondents*)

2733

1727 20 20

3

13

17

30

30

1723

70

20

40

60

80

100

N a

t i o n a

l

a g e n c y

R e g

i o n a

l

a g e n c y

C h a m

b e r o

f

c o m m e r c e

P a

t e n

t

o f f i c e

P a

t e n

t

a t t o r n e y

E x

t e r n a

l

c o n s u

l t a n

t s E U

O t h e r


%


Graph 66 IP Prédagnoss–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents*)

5747

4027

20 2313 17

3

27

1723

3030 23

207

70

20

40

60

80

100

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s

E c o n o m

i c r i s k s

F i n a n

c e

C l i e

n t


L a c k

o f

q u a l i f

i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

R e g u

l a t i o n s

&

s t a n

d a r d s

L a c

k o

f m a r

k e

t

i n

f o

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u

e s

L a c k

o f

t e c

h n o

l o g y i n

f o


%


Graph 67 IP Prédagnoss–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users,2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*)

37

17

3740

7

2327

23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

P a

t e n

t s f i l e d

P a

t e n

t s v a

l i d

a n

d / o r g r a n

t e d

D e s i g n p a

t t e r n s

a n

d / o r u

t i l i t y

m o

d e

l s

T r a

d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g

h t s

D e

f e n s i v e

P u

b l i s h i n g

T r a

d e

s e c r e

t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n

t s

D e s i g n

c o m p

l e x

i t y

L e a

d - t i m

e

a d v a n

t a g e

N o

d e

l i b e r a

t e

I P R s t r a

t e g y

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 163 17-01-2008 11:10:52



164


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



or had a patent granted or vaid. The usage eve of informa IP protection methodswas aso rather high: 27 % reied on the compexity of design, 23 % used tradesecrets and/or secrecy agreements. Unsurprisingy for a service pro-activeycontacting non-IPR users, there was aso a sgnicant number of users (23 %)

c ecare to ave no eberate strategy t respect to IPR.For IP Préagnoss users, te costs of IP protecton (for 60 % of g an for anoter 20 % of meum reevance), te tme to make IP protecton ork (for 0 % of g an 30 % of meum reevance) an an uncear cost/beneit rato of IP (for 30 % of g an 33 % of meum reevance) ere ranke as te mannterna barrers perceve for usng IPR (see Grap 68) – tese inngs are n net tose from oter servces; te atter aspect (uncear cost/beneit of IPR) sostat sgnicant eman exsts t respect to expanng te beneits of proper IPmanagement (c s aresse by te servce). Noteorty s aso te reatveyg sare of SMEs c state tat IPR s rreevant n ter busness context.

Te ack of nformaton (g reevance for 23, meum for 37 %), te ack of accessbty (for 20 % of g an 33 % of meum reevance), an te ack of quaty of avaabe externa support servces (for 3 % of g an 27 % of meum

reevance) are aso notabe barrers (see Grap 69). Te rater arge sare of

Graph 68 IP Prédagnoss–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protectonmechansms, percentage of respondents*)

6050

3023

10 177 7

2030

3333

47 2733

13

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


%


Graph 69 IP Prédagnoss–(Eterna) barrers to usng IP protectonmechansms, percentage of respondents*)

2320

3

37

33

27

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


services


services

Lack of quality of available

support services


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 164 17-01-2008 11:10:52



16

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

companies which compained about ack of information may point to the fact thatmarketing efforts coud be increased.


Information channes, by which users got to know about IP Prédiagnosis, were on

the one hand dominated by “other” channes (43 %), which consisted mainy of information from the Chamber of Commerce and some INPI co-operation partners(RTD network) and, on the other hand, by INPI itsef (27 %) (see Graph 70). Thisrelects to an extent the pro-active nature of the service. Surprising, however, is thefact that nobody got to know about the service from an agency, given the tiesbetween, for exampe, Oseo Innovation and INPI. This may be expained by thepro-active contacting approach and the fact that the usage of the pre-diagnosisprecedes the usage of other IPR (and probaby aso non-IPR) services. It is thus ikeythat many of the companies addressed have never been in contact with pubicbusiness support services before.

Overa speaking, users are, on average, very satsie t IP Préagnoss: Aaspects (every tme, te competence of staff, te reevance of te provenformaton, etc.) are grae t “1.7” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie)

to 4 (unsatsie) (see Grap 71). Aroun 71 % of te users rate te extent of teservce offerngs to be aequate. On te oter an, 21 % tnk t s too narro/superica c s, of course, n te very nature of te servce – 2 ays of con-

Graph 70 IP Prédagnoss–Informaton channes, by hch users got to knoabout the servce, percentage of respondents*)

7 10 713

7

27

43

0

10

20

30

40

50

I n t e r n e

t

N e w s l e

t t e r

I n f o r m a

t i o n

d a y s / c o n

f e r e n c e s

G e n e r a

l

n e w s p a p e r

P r o

f e s s i o n a

l

j o u r n a

l

P e r s o n a

l

r e c o m m e n

d a

t i o n

C o n s u

l t a n

t s

C o m m e r c

i a l

b a n

k s

A g e n c y

I P P r e

d .

i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


Graph 71 IP Prédagnoss–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servceprovson, arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,5

1,7

1,7

1,6

1,6

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 165 17-01-2008 11:10:53



166


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



suting may rise awareness and put some topics on the tabe but it may not beenough for the deveopment of a fuy ledged IP management strategy.

Spatia distance is seen to be ess of a probem (for 32 % a very ow-eve barrier and for another 60 % a factor considered to be at east acceptabe); administrative

efforts (for 24 % a quite ow barrier, for another 66 % considered to be acceptabe)are not considered to be an obstace either. Overa, 0 % think that the beneits of usng ts servce are aequate to te efforts; 30 % state tat te beneits cearyouteg te efforts.



It as been note tat te servce makes ts customers aare of te fact tat te

consutng process s fuy subsse. Aganst ts backgroun t makes sense toenqure about atonaty effects, even f te servce s not a “cassca” subsytoars patentng costs.

IP Préagnoss as aceve aganst ts backrop rater g atonay effects(see Grap 72). Accorng to te survey resuts, 4 % of te unertakngs (e.g., IPassessments) ou not ave been carre out tout support from te servce.Ts rater strong atonaty sares can be expane by te pro-actve caracter of te servce: In contrast to oter servces, te Préagnoss offerngs o notnecessary aress e.g. projects tat te company as panne to o (or as n teprocess of ong).

Lookng at te canges n atttues toar IPR protecton among users reveas tatIP Préagnoss as abe to aceve ts ams rater e (see Grap 73). Te mostsgnicant beavoura canges took pace t respect to genera aareness on

IPR (ncrease for 7 %, ecrease for 3 % of te SMEs), forma IPR responsbtestn te company (ncrease for 3 %), knoege management kno-o(ncrease for 47 %) an patent knoege n busness envronment (ncrease for 43 %). Te atttue toars forma IPR protectons metos, .e. trae marks,esgn or copyrgts, as cange, too, as te usage of nforma protectonmecansms. It seems tat companes use a types of IP protecton toos moreconscousy tan before.

Graph 72 IP Prédagnoss–Addtonaty of the inanca subsdy, percentage of respondents*)

9%

18%

9%

14%5%

45%








01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 166 17-01-2008 11:10:54



167

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

The competence of the staff invoved in a service simiar to IP Prédiagnosis was seenas the most important quaity factor (for 73 % of high, for 17 % of mediumreevance) (see Graph 74). The fact that the scope of such a service and informationon different IP strategies are given such high reevance is not surprising as these

eements relect the very core eements of the service design. Administrative effortsand individua contact are considered to be of ower reevance. In addition, spatiadistance seems not to be an important part for a service ike IP Prédiagnosis.

5.3 Elements of good practiceThe service exhibits the foowing success factors (resp. good practice eements):

• Integration into a portfoio of IPR services;

• Operation by highy quaie an specay trane expert staff;

• Strong reputaton of te servce provng organsaton;

• Referra possbtes (tn INPI or to partner organsaton);

• Natona every t regona promotng outets;

• Cose co-operaton t varous partner organsatons c operate aso ona regona bass;

• we orkng coaboraton patterns beteen eveopment/tecnoogyagences an INPI;

• Servce s free of carge for enterprses;

• Exstence of a foo-up servce (1er brevet);

Nottstanng te postve eements, te servce as been face t somecaenges:

• Lack of quaie staff. Accorng to experts, te 120 to 130 experts o areactuay provng ts servce are probaby not enoug for a country te szeof France.

• Rater o promotona actvtes. Te regona netork s orkng qute ebut t seems more an more ficut to entfy egbe enterprses for c

te servce cou be epfu. Ts s cosey reate to te ack of staff (ere t

Graph 73 Behavoura addtonaty of IP Prédagnoss, percentage of respondents*)

7

10

10

10

13

17

17

23

23

27

43

47

53

57-3

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

Out-licensing


IPR training

In-licensing





esign pattern/utility model usage in IPR strategy





General awareness

increased decreased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 167 17-01-2008 11:10:54



169

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S6 “What is the key?”

Campaign

Country: United KingdomOrgna tte: “What is the key?”Target group: A companiesCoverage: Nationa

x (Pro-active) awareness raising measures/Pubic ReationsInformation Provision Services

Category*: TrainingCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/pointsFinance & Lega Framework


6.1 The “What is the key? (WITK) Campaign”in a nutshell

Te “wat’s te key campagn?” of te UK patent ofice as cosen as a case stuyfor spayng eements of goo practce t regar to campagns an eventsorganse amng at ncreasng IPR aareness of SMEs. Its success arses from tefact tat a number of measures ave been taken to best meet emans of tecustomers, .e. te possbty to pose questons onne n avance of te event(s)an ts proper quaty assurance mecansms (user satsfacton surveys anevauatons c ere use to gauge te mpact of te campagn on te IPRperceptons of te vstng companes). Ts, togeter t te regona focus annvovement of externa servce-provng nsttutons, as utmatey e to a gnumber of satsie SMEs partcpatng n te campagn.

“wat s te key?”, abbrevate wITK n te foong, s an IPR aareness rasngcampagn organse an run by te UK Inteectua Property Ofice (UKIPO) npartnersp t natona an oca autortes. Its objectve s to offer an overveof te a reatng to IPRs, to so ter mportance to busnesses an o teyare reevant to companes of any sze. Te purpose of te campagn s to makebusnesses, especay SMEs, more aare of ter nteectua assets an ter potenta an to offer nformaton an support on o to protect tem.

wITK can be seen as an “nformaton ay”, set up as a to part IPR event: urngte irst part, a sort ntroucton to nteectua property rgts coverng patents,trae marks, esgns an copyrgt s gven to nform te ntereste auenceabout recent eveopments an avaabe pubc support servces. depenng onere ts event s presente, oca servce provers are aso nvte to tak aboutter support servces concernng ega protecton of IPRs. Te secon part of sucan event s focusng on case stues c escrbe an ustrate o (oca) entre-

preneurs beneite from usng IPRs as means of protecton of ter nteectuaassets. Pane scussons an open queston/anser sessons are offere at te enof eac event.

Te programme s manage n coaboraton t te Cartere Insttute of Patent Agents (CIPA) an te Insttute of Trae Mark Attorneys (ITMA), tus ncung asoreevant servce provers from te prvate sector. Events to promote te programmeave been e a over te UK n co-operaton t oca partners suc as BusnessLnk Ofices an regona eveopment agences, c unernes te regonacaracter an menson of wITK. Te campagn s recte to busnesses of anysze, but t puts partcuar empass on SMEs an ter knoege of InteectuaProperty Rgts. Te topcs presente cover a pases of IPR usage. No restrcttonsare n pace for certan nustres or tecnoogy ies.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 169 17-01-2008 11:10:55



170


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Background and resources

IPR awareness among SMEs in the British system of innovation has been set as keypriority for the UK Department for Innovation, Universities and Skis (DIUS). As partof nationa poicy, the UKIPO was instructed to deveop an entry-eve information

scheme addressing the issue of IP management to SMEs. WITK has been preparedover a period of 12 months; inputs for the set up have been derived from varioussources and activities, i.e. an exporation of user needs and invovement of stake-hoders and externa consutants. Moreover, a survey has been undertaken to assessthe SMEs’ perception of the importance of IP, and its reevance to their business.

The campaign has been managed by a speciaised team of 4 staff [FTE], within the Awareness, Information & Media team in the UKIPO. The team is composed of peope with extensive experience in discussions with SMEs about InteectuaProperty rights and other critica issues for business growth. However, there are(strategic) partnerships and informa networks with other actors (nationa/regionaauthorities) which had the opportunity to present their business support services atthese events. Between 200/2006, the budget earmarked for WITK amounted to€ 37,000, whereas the costs of the operationa management (overheads) covered

a share of about € 70,000, around € 6,00 were spent for two pubications. Therest has been aocated to customer surveys, press activities, radio days, e-newsetters and supporting PR.

Modes of operaton

Each event of the campaign offers advice on business support regionay avaiabefrom regiona deveopment agencies and regiona Business Links, an overview of the possibiities of the Inteectua Property System from the UK Inteectua PropertyOfice, te experence of oca entrepreneurs o use te IP system, an anexpanaton of patent an trae mark a from te Carte Insttute of Patent

Attorneys (CIPA) an te Insttute of Trae Mark Attorneys (ITMA). At te en,some events offer te possbty to n a free Inteectua Property Aut.

wt te am to reac an attract a arger auence (of SMEs), te overapresentaton on protectng an managng nteectua assets serve as a patform

for te regona eveopment agences an regona Busness Lnks, c a teopportunty to present ter busness support servces. Lkese, te CarteInsttute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) an te Insttute of Trae Mark Attorneys(ITMA) presente ter servces.

As te sceme as esgne many for SMEs, te organsers of wITK came up tte ea of song reastc exampes of o a company can beneit from securngter IPR. Terefore, te experences of oca entrepreneurs ere presente usngcase stues, .e. “How developing their IP strategy helped company ABC to increase

the value of their company and ease the sale of one business area” or “…Helped

protect their idea internationally allowing the product to be marketed internationally,

especially in the large American market.” Beteen 200 an 2006, aroun 20entrepreneurs ere nvte to ustrate ter experence t managng ter nteectua assets.

In aton, te campagn offere ts on ecate ebste (no cose). weonne, companes smpy a to regster an ere abe to receve free consutatont a patent or traemark specast, a pack of free nformaton regarng IPRssues, upate etas of semnars an events n ter areas, an nes, ves, ancase stues about nteectua assets. Regarng marketng actvtes, te campagnas been promote by usng severa toos an approaces.


Te wITK campagn as been te object of severa quaty assurance mecansms.Partcuary, reguar montorng exercses ave been carre out at te en of eacevent by te core team of te sceme. At te en of eac event SMEs ere nvteto i n a feeback form. Tese forms ere anayse ater an use to mprove teservce. Te ansers suggeste tat te events ere very e organse an

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 170 17-01-2008 11:10:55



171

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

beneica for te attenees. Te amnstraton of te events as seen verypostvey, party because of te core team c as perceve to be veryecate to te subject matter.

An ex-post evauaton as unertaken at te en of te campagn n orer to

unerstan f te events ave been abe to enance te unerstanng of IP bycompanes. Ts evauaton as carre out by an externa evauator. An ncatonon te ae vaue of te sceme can be ran from te foong resuts: at tebegnnng of te campagn, 36 % of SMEs state tat IP s not an ssue; anatona 28 % sa tat IP s an ssue, but tey o not kno o ea t t. Tepost-campagn survey reveas tat 2 % of SMEs sa tat tey a areay takenacton to mprove te management of ter IP; anoter % panne to takeacton. In genera terms, te survey reveae tat te events ere beneica for teSMEs an tat attenees ou be reveng ter IP practces base on te avcetey a receve.

Regarng auts, 20 nvtatons ere sent to SMEs to nform tem tat arepresentatve from CIPA or ITMA ou be offerng tem a free IP aut. 26 autsere compete. In oter cases, SMEs ecne to procee t ter aut because

tey ecare to ave a basc unerstanng of IP after attenng te campagn.Between 200 and 2006, 19 events were organsed whch took place n dfferent

regons n the UK. Almost 1,700 people, mostly representatves of SMEs, beneited

from ths servce. The wde spread of vstors between 0 .e. n Yorkshre up to 200 n

Scotland should be consdered. The webste of the servce acheved a ht rate of

180,473 between 200 and 2006 (an average of over 1,000 hts per month). 1,0

SMEs regstered ther detals on the webste; 110 questons were receved and

answered.

6.2 The user’s viewIn orer to get an ea on o te servce s perceve by ts users an customers,a user survey as carre out n te scope of te uneryng stuy, te resuts of c are presente beo.


In te UK an Irean, te anng an scosure of persona ata s governe byte so-cae data Protecton Act. due to ts reguaton, t as ficut to assembea compreensve st of wITK partcpants; exceptons cou ony be mae for certan cases. As a resut, ony 13 wITK users cou be entie ng to sareter experences by competng te survey. Conserng te sma sampe sze,great care as to be taken en nterpretng te resuts.

Out of te 13 wITK users, 9 sare nformaton about te actua company sze.Base on te receve nformaton, ony 2 enterprses a empoye more tan 9empoyees beteen 2003 an 200. 4 out of 13 irms ntrouce ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts onto te market urng te respectve tmeframe.Te same appes to process nnovatons: 4 out of 13 ere abe to come up tprocess nnovaton actvtes. 6 wITK users conucte ntramura R&d, 6 ere

engage n tranng actvtes an n te acquston of macnery an equpmentbeteen 2003 an 200 (see Grap 7).

Beteen 2003 an 200, 9 out of 13 wITK users state tat tey never use anysupport an/or funng from pubc or prvate nnovaton support provers; onyone makes frequent use of servces offere by natona agences. Ts resutunernes tat, at east n te case of te surveye companes, te aarenessrasng functon of wITK foun ts target auence of “unexperence” irms (as far as te usage of support servces s concerne). Regarng te metos of IPR-protecton, 6 out of 13 IP servce users state tat tey use traemarks as mostmportant forma means of IPR protecton. On te oter an, use trae secretsan/or secrecy agreements an 4 use regstere copyrgts an ree on ea-tme avantage. 3 users ie for a patent beteen 2003 an 200. Even toug

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 171 17-01-2008 11:10:55



172


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 75 wITK–Innovaton actvtes of nterveed irms, 2003 to 2005,number of respondents *)

0

5

4

55

66

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

I n t r a m u r a

l r e s e a r c

h

&

e x p e r i m e n

t a l

d e v e

l o p m e n

t ( R & D )

A c q u

i s i t i o n o

f R & D

( e x

t r a m u r a

l R & D )

A c q u

i s i t i o n o

f

m a c

h i n e r y a n

d

e q u

i p m e n

t

T r a

i n i n g

M a r k e

t i n t r o d u c

t i o n

o f i n n o v a

t i o n s

D e s i g n

O t h e r p r e p a r a

t i o n s

f o r

p r o

d u c

t i o n

/ d e

l i v e r i e s

N


Graph 76 wITK–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, by SMEs,number of respondents*)

65

3 3

1

32

1

1

2

21

13

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s

F i n a n c e


s t a n d a r d s

C l i e n t



i n f o

L a c k o f

q u a l i fi e d

p e r s o n n e l

i s s u e s

L a c k o f




the sampe size is sma, it emerges that the users used a variety of IP protectioninstruments and did not restrict themseves to patents.

As regards factors hampering innovation activities, the WITK users/attendantsconsidered economic risks (for 6 out of 13 of high and for 1 of medium reevance)

and high costs of innovations (for out of 13 of high and further 2 of mediumreevance) as important factors (see Graph 76). 3 out of 13 stated that the ack of inanca resources an market nformaton as e as reguatons an stanarssoe on company-e nnovaton actvtes.

For many of te questone users, te costs of IP protecton an te actua tme tomake te protecton ork ere ranke among te man nterna barrers percevefor usng IPR. despte te sma sampe sze, tese resuts are n ne t tat of oter anayse servces. In aton, te ack of nformaton on metos to protectIP an mssng quaie personne ere aso consere to be mportant obstaces.Externa barrers ere aso seen to exst; out of 13 consere te ack of nformaton on avaabe externa support servces as gy reevant.


Amost a wITK users receve nformaton about te servce troug te nternet

an persona recommenatons. Interestngy, but ue to te sma sampe sze notconcusve, ony 1 user ear about te servce by te UKIPO tsef.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 172 17-01-2008 11:10:56



173

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Overa speaking, the users were very satsie t wITK; a surveye usersconsere te extent of te servce offerngs to be aequate an ecare tat tebeneits of usng ts servce ceary outege te efforts of usng t.


In orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou aso nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – .e., at ou aveappene n case te servce as absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “neteffect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espte of teservce. Smary, aso oter type of canges ncurre tn te enterprse, as aresut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese canges are referre to as“beavoura atonaty”).

Te overa am of te campagn, to present IPR kno-o on a genera, aarenessrasng eve, seems to be ceary reace t te ntervee users (see Grap 77).

Accorng to te user survey, te most promnent canges concern genera IPRaareness, c ncrease for 11 out of 13 users, an patent knoege n tebusness envronment (ncrease for 11 users). wat can be seen at a gance s tatte atttues toars rater nforma protecton metos ave cange, too, but

to a muc esser extent. A surveye users consere te competence of te staff nvove n a servcesmar to wITK as very mportant. In aton, te ease of access an enticatonan tmey every ere aso fet to be key factors. Interestngy, referra possbtesan nvua contacts ere not seen to be mportant for suc a servce.

6.3 Elements of good practiceTe wITK campagn acts as an entry pont to te or of IPR by aressng tessue of IP management for SMEs, rasng aareness n ts ie an presentngans-on practca exampes of o companes may beneit from protectng anmanagng ter nteectua assets. In ts gt, wITK exbts te foong successfactors (resp. goo practce eements):

• Competence of staff: experence experts n a, management ancommercasaton, o presentatons about reevant topcs concernng egaprotecton nstruments;

Graph 77 Behavoura addtonaty of wITK offerngs, number of respondents*)

2

3

3

4

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

8

11

11

-2

-1

-1

-1

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

In-licensing

Reliance on design complexity in IPR st rategy

Out-licensing


(Trade) secrecy usage in IPR st rategy





IPR training



General awareness


increased decreased

N


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 173 17-01-2008 11:10:57



174


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



• Regiona context: presentation of case studies about oca entrepreneurs(“How I beneite from IPR protecton”);

• Regona focus an outreac, cosey connecte;

• Integraton nto an exstng IPR ecate nsttuton t a e range of

reate servces;• Foo-ups: opportunty to n an IP aut c as use as an ncentve;

• Possbty to ask questons onne use as a preparaton for events;

• Usage of evauatons an user surveys as toos to assess te performance of te servce.

Accorng to te expert nterves, te man strengt of te sceme s to focus teevents regonay. Ts as been possbe because of te eveopment of netorkst regona actors (many regona eveopment agences an Busness Lnks)c aoe wITK to reac a arge regona auence. Furtermore, as expertsstate, te servce as aceve a g reputaton natonay an regonay. In fact,te number of requests to organse ne events n te regons s very g. On teoter an, te man eakness of te servces s te o buget, c as,

accorng to experts, not aoe a compete use of te core teams expertse.If te campagn s gong to be re-aunce n te future, oter ssues sou beconsere too. Accorng to experts, te co-operaton beteen te UKIPO ante (regona) eveopment agences an professona organsatons sou be evenmore fostere to better unerstan ter ncentves, experences, an essonsearne. In ts gt, te evauaton areay carre out n te course of tempementaton of te sceme sou be expote more torougy to ensure tecontnuaton of a g quaty IPR aareness campagn.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 174 17-01-2008 11:10:57



17

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S7. IA Centre Scotland (Scottish

Intellectual Assets Centre)

Country: Scotand, United KingdomOrgna tte: Scottish Inteectua Asset Management LimitedTarget group: A companiesCoverage: Regiona (Scotand)


Category*: Training

xCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/pointsFinance & Lega Framework


7.1 IA Centre Scotland in a nutshellTe Scotts IA Centre as cosen as a case stuy because of ts rater unquecaracter as a servce nsttuton eberatey offerng IP an IPR support covernga forms of IP protecton metos an avng te ea of vaue-rven IP an IPRmanagement at te eart of ts offerngs (rater tan a soe ncrease of patentactvtes). Te g eman for ts servce, extensve referra actvtes, gsatsfacton eves of te users an te conserabe mpact on te IP usage anprotecton strateges of te usng irms unerne te success of te servce anave e to g reputaton eves. Caenges reman t regar to mteresources.

Te Scotts Inteectua Assets Centre ams to emonstrate o nteectua assetsan/or property mpacts upon te vaue of varous busness segments of anenterprse an affects terefore .e. te eveopment of strateges, proucts,

processes, servce markets an suppy, an strbuton cannes. Te prme mssons focusse on aressng exstng an potenta market faures nbtng te abtyof Scotts busnesses to manage an expot ter nteectua assets (IA).

Te IA Centre focuses on tree funamenta objectves tat support ts msson:

• to ncrease aareness an unerstanng of nteectua assets ssues amongScotts busnesses an oter organsatons;

• to enabe Scotts busnesses to manage an expot te untappe potenta of ter nteectua assets for compettve avantage;

• to encourage te eveopment of a strong, prvate sector-e suppy of IPR/nteectua asset management servces;

In a more operatona manner, te IA Centre’s ntenton s to entfy tosenteectua assets of a organsaton c rve vaue. Once entie, te servce

assst te organsaton n suggestng optons for safeguarng an expotngte nteectua assets. In many cases, te mpementaton of tose suggestonsrequres te nterventon of nteectua property rgts specasts. At ts stage, teservces gue, rect, an sgnpost te organsaton to te most appropratesupper of IA management.

Te servce conssts of tranng an avce sessons t organsatons n orer toep tem to entfy IA management ssues, approprate toos an servceprovers. Ts sesson can be one-to-one or t a group of companes.Interventons t nvua organsatons ten to be fary sort, about one trare ess tan 4 ours an te rest beteen 4 ours an 2 ays.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 175 17-01-2008 11:10:57



177

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Vita parts of the service portfoio from the IA Centre are deivered by events andtoos. The IA-Toos are used to identify and manage inteectua assets. A number of these toos are avaiabe.on the IA Centre website. They incude informationbookets, business simuations and games designed to understand issues more fuy;

and enticaton an agnostc toos suc as questonnares, gossares, anexcons. Te brary toos are constanty uner eveopment base on feebackfrom companes an ntermeares.

On te oter an, IA events are beng e across Scotan an cover a range of IA management topcs rarey restrcte by sector, sape or sze of busness. Teyncue ntrouctory sessons accessbe to te IA novce troug to tose ame atextenng knoege eeper by ookng at specic IA management ssues, suc asbranng or trang nteectua assets.

From an operatona pont of ve, te IA Centre s engage t externa partesn orer to a vaue to ts servces an maxmse te beneits for te companes.

A prncpa partner s te UKIPO. In te case of ts servce, some nterventons avebeen run jonty. Oter pubc sector ntermeares aso ork cosey t te IACentre to ensure tat te specast servce can be accesse as ey as possbe.

Fnay, prvate sector ntermeares (.e. ayers, busness consutants),entrepreneurs, an acaemcs ave been nvove as contrbutors n everng teservce. Te nvovement of prvate sector ntermeares aso ams to encouragete eveopment of a prvate sector suppy of IA servces n te future.


Te man nstrument use to measure te outcome an performance of te servceas been te “Customer Satsfacton Survey” carre out beteen October 2004an February 2006. 112 teepone nterves ere compete. Te ssues scusseby te survey ere: ays of engagng t te servce, outcomes of te servce,mpacts of te servce, atonates of te servce, future of te servce. Te surveyas conucte by an externa evauator.

Te foong resuts ere note:

• A g percentage came tat te effectveness of te IA Centre staff as very

g an aso te stanar of te servce as very g.• 63 % ave taken ntatves n IP management as resut of te avce receve

urng te servce.

• 44 % of te responents beeve tat contact t te IA Centre as epetem to better expot ter nteectua assets.

• 33 % of te responents beeve tat te reatonsp t te centre as beencruca n unerstanng te vaue of IP for te company. It ou ave notappene at a tout IA Centre engagement.

• 96 % of te companes ntervee ou recommen te servce to oter organsatons.

In 200, te number of sessons/events e by te IA Centre reace 30, an ereprmary attene by SMEs. In aton, 360 organsatons receve one-to-onesupport an referra to oter nsttutons.



4 companes ere surveye about ter experences t te IA Centre. Testrbuton of te user sampe ncates tat te servce may target mosty mcro-enterprses: 81 % of te SMEs n te sampe ave at most 9 empoyees, 10 % ave

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 177 17-01-2008 11:10:57



179

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

As regards factors hampering innovation activities, the users compained mostyabout high innovation costs (for 3 % of high and for further 24 % of mediumreevance), economic risks (for 49 % of high and 18 % of medium reevance) andinanca sources assocate t nnovaton projects (for 47 % of g an 20 % of

meum reevance) (see Grap 81). By contrast, te ack of quaie personne,reguatons an stanars, cent responsveness or organsatona ssues areconsere to be ess mportant. Ts pcture s n ne t inngs from oter servces.

Regarng te metos of IPR-protecton, a arge mx of fferent forma annforma metos ere use beteen 2003 an 200. 60 % of te users statetat tey use traemarks to protect ter IP, te man forma IPR nstrumentutse by IA Centre users; users aso empoye nforma metos to a rater argeextent, especay trae secrets (8 %). Copyrgts ere utse by more tan af of te users (1 %). Tese inngs (.e. g sare of nforma metos use;moerate number of users ie for a patent (29 %) or a a patent grante or va(11 %) agan emonstrate te roe of te IA Centre to foster te oe range of IA/IP protecton nstruments (see Grap 82).

For te IA Centre users, te costs of IP protecton (for 8 % of g an for anoter 9 % of meum reevance), genera aareness ssues (for 20 % of g an 31 %

Graph 80 Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of respondents*)

20

38

3 10 10

20

23

17

27 1927

3 40

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r

frequently occas ional ly

%


Graph 81 IA Centre–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents*)

53 49 47

29

1118

9 13 11

24

1820

22

22 1120 9 9

0

20

40

60

80

100

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s


F i n a n c e


i n f o

L a c k o f



s t a n d a r d s

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l


i s s u e s

C l i e n t




01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 179 17-01-2008 11:10:59



180


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



of medium reevance) and an uncear cost/beneit rato of IP (for 20 % of g an16 % of meum reevance) ere ranke as te man nterna barrers perceve for usng IPR (see Grap 83). Externa barrers are not consere to be a sgnicantprobem for te usage of IPR, atoug a notceabe sare referre to a ack of

nformaton on avaabe support servces (for 20 % of g, for 16 % of a meumreevance). Te rankng of barrers perceve matces tat of oter servces scrut-nse.

User reach-out and satsfacton eves

Servce users got to kno about te IA Centre troug a arge number of nformaton cannes (see Grap 84). Aroun 42 % got to kno about te servcefrom agences, 23 % troug persona recommenatons. Toug avertsementsn cassca mea (genera nespaper, journas) are not sgnicant carrers of nformaton on te IA Centre, te IA Centre st seems to get promote fary e;at east, an n contrast to oter servces n Europe, nformaton on te servceactvtes seems to be rater e strbute from ajacent servce provngnsttutons, tus ncatng tat te system of mutua referrng orks reasonabye.

IA Centre users are, on average, very satsie t te offere servce. A tefferent aspects of servce provson are rate t “1.” or better on a scae from1 (very satsie) to 4 (unsatsie). Competence of staff an every tme receve

Graph 82 IA Centre–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents*)

11 16

6051

11

58

3322

11

29

0

20

40

60

80

P a

t e n

t s f i l e d

P a

t e n

t s v a

l i d

a n

d / o r g r a n

t e d

D e s i g n p a

t t e r n s

a n

d / o r u

t i l i t y

m o

d e

l s

T r a

d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g

h t s

D e

f e n s i v e

P u

b l i s h i n g

T r a

d e

s e c r e

t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n

t s

D e s i g n

c o m p

l e x

i t y

L e a

d - t i m

e

a d v a n

t a g e

N o

d e

l i b e r a

t e

I P R s t r a

t e g y

%


Graph 83 IA Centre–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

58

20 20 16 164

134

9

3116 20

1320

916

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 180 17-01-2008 11:11:00



181

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

the highest grades (both “1.3”, see Graph 8). In addition, around 74 % consider the extent of the service offerings to be adequate, 17 % think it’s too narrow/super ica, toug. Aroun 62 % of te users state tat te beneits cearyouteg te efforts; 18 % tnk tat te beneits are aequate to efforts.

Addtonaty of the servceIn orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou aso nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – .e., at ou aveappene n case te servce ere absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “neteffect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espte of teservce. Smary, aso oter type of canges ncurre tn te enterprse, as aresut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese canges are referre to as“beavoura atonaty”).

By takng avantage of te servces offere by te IA Centre, rater sgnicantcanges n te atttues of te enterprses toar te usage of IP protectonnstruments (.e., beavoura atonaty aspects) ere reporte (see Grap 86).Te most sgnicant canges took pace n genera aareness (c ncrease for 84 % of te irms) an knoege management kno-o (ncrease for 67 %).

Attenton to te egree of patent knoege n te busness envronment anforma IPR responsbtes ave ncrease for 67 % an 3 % of te users,respectvey.

Graph 84 IA Centre–Informaton channes, by hch users got to kno aboutthe servce, percentage of respondents*)

19

5

0

12

21

23

21

16

42

12

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

I n t e r n e

t

N e w s l e

t t e r

I n f o r m a

t i o n

d a y s / c o n

f e r e n c e s

G e n e r a

l

n e w s p a p e r

P r o

f e s s i o n a

l

j o u r n a

l

P e r s o n a

l

r e c o m m e n

d a

t i o n

C o n s u

l t a n

t s

C o m m e r c

i a l

b a n

k s

A g e n c y

I P S c o

t l a n

d i t s e l f

O t h e r


Graph 85 IA Centre–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servceprovson, arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,3

1,5

1,3

1,5

1,4

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 181 17-01-2008 11:11:01



182


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 86 Behavoura addtonaty of the IA Centre Scotand, percentage of respondents*)

7

9

11

16

16

18

24

27

27

27

42

53

67

84

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80





In-licensing

Out-licensing

IPR training







General awareness

increased decreased

%


Graph 87 Key quaty factors for a servce such as the IA Centre, percentage of respondents

9

33

38

40

42

51

56

56

58

69

76

80

36

36

20

20

18

31

29

22

11

16

4

7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance





Costs


("why/why not topatent")

Scope of service

Individual contact

Timely delivery


Competence of Staff


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 182 17-01-2008 11:11:03



183

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Two things are noteworthy: Firsty, that patent usage in the IPR strategy was argeyunaffected. This indicates that the IPR needs of IA Centre users were in mostinstances better served by other means of IP usage/protection. Secondy, and thisis in contrast to a other services anaysed, no IP protection instrument/strategy or

any aspect reated to it saw a decrease in attention eves given by the irms. Tscou be rea as evence tat te IA Centre succeee to a arge extent n makngts users use te oe spectrum of IP protecton metos more conscousy, rater tan scouragng or encouragng te usage of certan IP protecton nstrumentsbeforean.

In ne t te resuts from smar IPR support servces, te IA Centre users stresste mportance of te competence of staff (for 80 % of g, for 7 % of meumreevance), te ease of access an enticaton (g reevance for 76 %, meumfor 4 %) an tmey every (for 69 % of g, an for 16 % of meum reevance)as man key success factors for a servce smar to te IA Centre (see Grap 87).hoever, t seems tat most of te oter factors are aso of reevance (te onyexcepton beng, agan smar to oter servces, spata stance). Ts resut mgtbe ue to te broa approac empoye by te IA Centre an te nee to offer nformaton to ts customers n very irm-specic fason.

7.3 Elements of good practiceTe IA Centre offers an ntegrate set of servces n te ie of nteectua property,t eps organsatons, especay SMEs, to entfy ter nteectua assets anavses tem n IPR management actvty base on compementary approaces.Te most mportant key factor of te servce as been focussng on mprovng teunerstanng of IP an to prove a strategc pcture of nteectua assets an tsvaue to Scotts organsatons.

Gven te resuts of te user survey an te expert nterves, te servce exbtste foong success factors (resp. goo practce eements):

• hgy ske staff t a broa approac to IP protecton an usage;

• Ceary state, specic goas of te servce offerngs;

• Servces are evere on a regona bass t a eep unerstanng of teoca busnesses

• Integraton nto a er range of IPR-reate servces;

• Co-operaton t Scotts stakeoers an oters engage t IPR ssues;referra possbtes an respectve actua actvtes to externa organsatons;

• Strong reputaton of te servce offerngs n Scotan;

• Executon of quaty assurance mecansms n te form of user surveys carreout by externa evauators an e a on preparatory actvtes nvovngex-ante assessments

hoever, some caenges for te servce reman c are many reate to teavaabe resources. Ts mpes tat te suppy of te IA Centre servces fas sortof te (ncreasng) eman.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 183 17-01-2008 11:11:03



BENCHMARKING NATIONAL AND REGIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SMES IN THE FIELD O F INTE



18

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S8. Case Study: serv.ip

Country: Austria

Orgna tte: serv.ipTarget group: A companiesCoverage: Nationa

x (Pro-active) awareness raising measures/Pubic Reationsx Information Provision Services

Category*: x TrainingCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/pointsFinance & Lega Framework


8.1 Serv.ip in a nutshellTe Austran servce serv.p as cosen as a case stuy n te scope of teuneryng bencmarkng exercse especay because of ts organsatona set-up:havng ts roots n te Austran patent ofice, te servce s actuay an outsourcesubsary (a “parta ega entty”) of te patent ofice, operatng on a non-proit– but sef-suficent cost-coverng – bass, an s structure ke a prvate company.By takng ts step, serv.p can operate n muc more customer-orente manner (t as, for exampe, to pay ess attenton to bureaucratc proceures).

Servce actvtes temseves focus on te provson of taor-mae patent atabasesearc servces an pro-actve aareness rasng actvtes (roasos, semnars/tranngs). Te objectves of serv.p are n partcuar:

• to offer nformaton on IPR an respectve support to companes, especaySMEs, c are ntereste n IPR ssues,

• to prove tecnca nformaton regarng IPR (patent, traemark an utty

moe searces),• to organse orksops an (pro-actve) aareness rasng campagns,

especay te roaso "geanken.gut.gescützt" (eas.e.protecte) ncooperaton t te Austran PO,

• to make patent nformaton, pubcatons, nformaton foers an oter resources avaabe on te nternet,

• to offer atona servces, .e. montorng of patents an/or traemarks,referrng to oter partes (.e. te Austran PO), copyng an transatonservces.

Te purpose of te roaso “eas.e.protecte” s prmary to prove generanformaton about IPRs an to gve an overve of te servces offere by serv.p,te Austran patent ofice an oter mportant stakeoers or servce provers nte ie of IPR.

wtn te scope of serv.p, speca orksops on reevant IPR subjects can aso bebooke. Some of te offere orksops ncue nformaton about te "egaprotecton of computer-mpemente nventons", "protecton of traemarks"(natona, te communty traemark, nternatona), "nternatona protecton of nventons" an "patent searces". Fees are requre for a of tese servces.

Serv.p focuses on SMEs but s open to enterprses of any sze. Accorng to teservce provers, te nees of SMEs an tose of arge enterprses ffer conseraby. As SMEs are often overoae t ay ork cruca to ter busnessan o not ave te necessary resources an/or extra tme for searcng n patentatabases, for exampe, conserabe eman exsts t regar to servces ereserv.p acts ke an agent on beaf of te SMEs. Te prouct “Expressrecercen”

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 185 17-01-2008 11:11:04



186


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



(fast track/express patent database search services with coverage, however, aso of non-patent iterature) was especiay deveoped against this background and is thusa too particuary usefu for SMEs.

Serv.ip provides its services aso to interested parties on an internationa basis. The

service seems to pay more attention to forma IPR protection methods, demonstratedby the patent and trademark search as core of the service offerings and throughthe inkages of serv.ip to the Austrian PO. No expicit provisions are made for particuar business sectors, though many cients seem to come from certaintechnoogy ies suc as parmacy, cemstry, computer scences aneectroncs.


Foune n 1994, te core servce of serv.p, personase patent an trae marksearces, s operate by aroun 40 empoyees consstng of experts from versebackgrouns trane n IPR t partcuar empass on patents, traemarks,esgns, an ega aspects reate to ts nstruments; four empoyees are part-tmenvove n te organsaton of te “eas.e. protecte” campagn. If necessary,serv.p can ra on about 60 freeance staff. Te tota buget aocate for serv.p

amounts to aroun € 3. mo p.a. Atoug serv.p s manage nepenenty, te servce s sa to ork n cosecoaboraton t te Austran PO an oter nsttutons t a certan responsbtyfor IPR, .e. regona cambers of commerce, nustra assocatons, an tecnoogycentres as e as t te Patent Attorneys Assocaton. Noteorty s aso tecose geograpca proxmty to te Patent Ofice (bot organsatons rese n tesame bung) c s seen as an asset ue to acevabe synergy effects.

wtn te scope of te roaso eas.e.protecte, serv.p coaborates t anumber of stakeoers n te Austran nnovaton system. Among oters, partnersare natona funng agences (e.g., te Austra wrtscafts Servce Gesmbh (as)),mnstres or regona funng agences. Representatves of tese organsatons,most of tem experence experts n a, management an commercasaton, areto o presentatons at te roaso regarng te mportance of IPR an o

ter offerngs can e.g. nternk t tose of serv.p.Modes of operaton

Patent database searches

serv.p s esgne to be an entry pont for enterprses, nvua nventors or oter partes ntereste to earn about te novety an state of art of appcatons for regsterng subjects, to evauate te current market stuaton an to estmate futuremarket eveopments. Te ratonae to focus on patent atabase searces sprmary seen n avoance of oube researc costs: Accorng to serv.p estmates,€ 10 mo. are save eac year n terms of reunant R&d.

Te patent searc offere by serv.p s avaabe n to versons:

• tailor-made searches (norma searces); an

• a stanarse prouct cae “express searches” (“Expressrecherchen”).

Taor-mae searces are especay esgne for a partcuar user. Te user canece on a specic searc strategy conucte n seecte patent atabases an/or brares (.e., te scope of te searc). Snce September 2004, serv.p offers aso afaster an muc more targete searc meto: te “express searc”. Usng tsstanarse prouct, te researc focuses on te state of te art n te specieie or area provng an overve of te current (tecnca) stuaton, a marketoutook an future potenta n a compreensve manner. Te output of teprouct s a stanarse report ncatng te inngs aong te topcs mentonebefore. Usng te express searc prouct, te resuts are mae avaabe tn four eeks at te atest an cost eter € 1,320.- (smpe express searc resuts toutocumente expert opnon) or € 1,716 (t ocumente expert opnon)(Austran VAT ncue).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 186 17-01-2008 11:11:04



187

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

The search for trademark simiarities is conducted in a simiar way; a databasesearch of word and/or picture trademarks is offered, providing an overview of thecurrent situation. The costs for trademark searches vary with respect to the deiverytime needed. If the resuts are needed within three hours, the appicabe fee

amounts to € 179; if it sufices to ave te resuts tn 3 to orkng ays, € 134are carge. If te searc s to ncue aso ata from te company regstry(“Frmenbuc”), atona fees appy.

Access to nternet servces offerng specase atabase researc for patents antraemarks are prove as e, as s aso a montorng servce for traemarksere companes get an aert once a partcuar traemark as been regstere/atere.

Roadshows

wtn te scope of te campagn eas.e.protecte, serv.p an te Austran POorganse roasos trougout Austra. Tese roasos can be seen as“nformaton ays”, ere fferent speakers nform te ntereste auence aboutreevant topcs concernng ega protecton nstruments for researc aneveopment, recent eveopments n IPR, avaabe pubc support servces (.e.

serv.p) an reate subjects. Ts campagn s e n a Austran feera states.SMEs are one of te man target groups of te campagn.


In terms of performance, ata erve from te montorng nstruments empoyean from annua reports can be ran upon n orer to gve an asserton of teperformance of te servce – no forma evauaton as been carre out on te serv.p servces to ate.

As concerns te user group te avaabe ata suggests tat, beses enterprses,patent attorneys represent a conserabe user sare of te patentan traemarksearces. In contrast, te roasos are attene mosty by SMEs an sngeentrepreneurs.

In 200, te number of searces an reports compete by serv.p reace 2,26. Accorng to ofica ocuments, te servce team carre out 333 searces tout

ocumente expert opnons, 1,218 searces t ocumente expert opnons,an 70 rtten expert opnons aone (tout searc reports). Approx. 20 of asearces ere suppe troug te use of te “express searc” prouct.

Beteen August 200 an Marc 2006, te irst roaso “eas.e.protecte”took pace n Austra. 8 events ere e n tota. Aroun 700 peope, mosty fromSMEs, beneite from tese nformaton sessons. Serv.p partcpate aso n eventsorganse by oter nsttutons (.e. “Lange Nact er Forscung/Long Ngt of R&d”).

In terms of marketng actvtes, up-to-ate nformaton about serv.p an tssupport servces s avaabe troug a number of strbuton cannes ncungavertsng n cassca mea, te nternet, te usage of mutpers an exstngnetorks an, of course, te roaso “eas. e.protecte”. Informaton on teroaso s sprea troug pro-actve contactng of ntereste partes (e.g.,

cambers of commerce at regona an natona eve).



Te survey as carre out on to stnct user groups. On te one se, 12 expresssearc users ere ntervee to sare ter experence t te serv.p expresssearc servces (te avaabe aress poo aoe for an enticaton of aroun

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 187 17-01-2008 11:11:04



188


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



3 users, a of which were contacted); and, on the other hand, 44 users/attendantsof the roadshow “ideas.we.protected” were questioned on their experiences.Considering the sma sampe size of the express search users, great care has to betaken when interpreting resuts regarding this service.

As with respect to roadshow attendants, 44 % had ess than 9 empoyees. A further 22 % had 10 to 49 empoyees and 0 to 249 empoyees, respectivey (see Graph88). The company size distribution of the express search users showed the foowingpicture: 7 out of 12 express search users have not more than 9 empoyees, 3 have10 to 49 empoyees whie 3 empoy more than 0 persons.

Looking at the deveopment activities, the underying benchmarking study reveasa sgnicant amount of nnovatve companes among te users of bot servces.Beteen 2003 an 200, 64 % of te roaso users/attenants ntrouce neor sgnicanty mprove proucts onto te market; aroun 40 % ntrouceprocess nnovatons. durng te same tme, 9 out of 12 express searc usersevere prouct nnovatons to customers, 6 came up t process nnovatons.

As concerns R&d, aroun 90 % of te roaso users/attenants conuctentramura R&d, on average 0% of te staff ork n R&d. Regarng express

searc users, 10 out of 12 users ere engage n ntramura R&d, amost 40 % of te staff orks n R&d.

Graph 88 serv.p–Company sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe, 2005,percentage of respondents, roadsho users

44%

22%

22%

12%



Graph 89 serv.p–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of respondents, roadsho users*)

1710 10 10

24

7 5 6

10 22

4033

36

3121 14

0

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 188 17-01-2008 11:11:05



189

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Roadshow users/attendants most frequenty took advantage of the service offeringsof patent attorneys and chambers of commerce (see Graph 89). As with other services anaysed, the high usage rate of patent attorneys underines the sgnicanceof ts type of servce prover for IPR-afine SMEs; te g roe cambers of

commerce pay can be attrbute to reatvey e orkng coaboraton patternsof serv.p t te cambers – te atter epe sgnicanty n organsng teroaso events. Surprsng s te reatvey o sare of users o mae use of natona eveopment agences, espte ter g sgnicance for R&d funng nte Austran nnovaton system. Ts may pont to partcuary o cooperatoneves beteen serv.p an te agences; an assumpton c s substantatefurter n te course of te user survey an aso n statements of IPR experts.

Express searc users mae frequent use of natona an regona agences, 4 an 3users, respectvey; out of 12 users took at most occasona avantage of tepatent ofice.

As regars factors amperng nnovaton actvtes, te roaso users/attenantscompane mosty about economc rsks (for % of g an 32 % of meumreevance), g nnovaton costs (for 4 % of g an for furter 43 % of meum

reevance), an inanca sources assocate t nnovaton projects (for 34 % of g an 43 % of meum reevance) (see Grap 90). Amost te same resutpatterns ere foun for express searc users.

Beteen 2003 an 200, te majorty of te roaso users/attenants state tattey use at east some IP protecton meto an empoye a varety of metosat te same tme; ony fe ( %) a no eberate IPR strategy n pace (see Grap91). Tus, a g sare of attenants can be seen as experence IPR users cs – for an IPR aareness rasng campagn – someat of a surprse. Commentsgatere n course of te user survey suggest tat many of te attracteexperence IPR users took avantage of te event because tey ante to nformtemseves on possbe nes an upates concernng te IPR frameork.

Aso quatatve statements pont to to stnct user groups: “IPR fresmen” treatvey tte knoege on IPR an “IPR senors” t conserabe IPR kno-o. Ts eterogenety ustrates tat user segmentaton may be an mportantssue for aareness rasng campagns, gven te broaness of te topc of nteectua property rgts: we overa satsfacton eves ere not ba (see asobeo), some of te experence users o ooke for ansers to specic questonsan/or ante upates on e.g. ne ega proceures ere a bt sapponte tonot get suc nformaton. For exampe, some users state tat ““specific information

Graph 90 serv.p–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents*), roadsho users

4555

2734

16 14 14 9

4332

43 30

2720 20 25

27

20

20

40

60

80

100

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s



s t a n d a r d s

F i n a n c e


i n f o

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l


i s s u e s

C l i e n t


L a c k o f



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 189 17-01-2008 11:11:06



190


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



concerning certain [business] sectors would be very helpful.” (roadshow attendant)”.Others again found the information provided as too detaied/compex. The varietyof statements given in this context underines the importance of action taken toaddress ony certain user segments/target groups at a time (resp. event). Measures

to better taior events to specic target groups (e.g., cear statement on at eveof IPR kno-o s expecte/ame for; possbtes to coect questons fromprospectve attenants before te actua event starts, n orer to aapt presen-tatons) are possbe optons to tnk about.

wen t comes to te express searc users, te survey resuts revea tat 8 out of 12 users ie for patents beteen 2003 an 200; e va patents. Atougaf of te users (6) utse traemarks as a protecton meto, some state tattey empoy aso nforma protecton mecansms (see Grap 92). Te maninng tat patent atabase users are aso frequenty patentees may be expectean s aso n ne t inngs from smar servces (see e.g. resuts from te casestuy PIC Stuttgart) – oever, as patent nformaton may be a sgnicant sourceof tecnca nformaton aso for non-patentees te resuts suggest tat an ncreasen suc non-patent users cou be ame for.

For te roaso users/attenants, costs, tme ssues an uncear cost/beneits of IP protecton represent te man nterna barrers for usng IPR metos (see Grap

Graph 91 serv.p–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents*), roadsho users

4841 41

48

30

9

55

3943

50

20

40

60

80






m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



%


Graph 92 serv.p–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to2005, number of respondents *), epress search users

8

5

2

6

21

5

34

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9






m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



N


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 190 17-01-2008 11:11:07



191

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

93). Company-interna barriers are perceived to be ess of an obstace. The inngsfor te express searc users so a smar pcture. Overa, te inngs are n net tose from te oter servces anayse.

Externa barrers are perceve to be obstaces of rater meum reevance: te ack

of nformaton on avaabe support servces (g reevance for 14, meum for 23 %), te ack of accessbty (for 14 % of g an 18 % of meum reevance)an te ack of quaty of avaabe externa support servces (for 7 % of g an20 % of meum reevance) are not among te gest ranke barrers. As for express searc users, 6 out of 12 express searc users consere te ack of nformaton on avaabe servces reevant as an externa barrer.


Informaton cannes by c users got to kno about te campagn “eas.e.protecte” ere omnate by nvtatons from te regona camber of commercean or-of-mout recommenatons (“oter cannes”: 70 %, see Grap 94). Inaton, 20 % aso gatere nformaton troug te nternet, aroun 10 %receve nesetters. Surprsngy, ony 12 % receve nformaton from te servceprovng organsaton tsef. Even more nterestngy, very fe companes got to

kno about te campagn from agences (2 %) – as note before, ts ponts tomprovabe cooperaton patterns beteen serv.p an te tecnoogy/eveopmentagences n te respectve regons. Regarng express searc users, te nternet,serv.p tsef an oter cannes (.e. patent attorneys an netorks) ere

Graph 93 serv.p–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*), roadsho users

43 3425

9 518

9 9

2532

36

3025 9 16 16

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


%


Graph 94 serv.p–Informaton channes, by hch users got to kno about theservce, percentage of respondents*), roadsho users

9 7 511

70

2 220

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

I n t e r n e t

N e w s l e t t e r



G e n e r a l

n e w s p a p e r


j o u r n a l

P e r s o n a l



C o m m e r c i a l

b a n k s

A g e n c y

s e r v . i p i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 191 17-01-2008 11:11:08



194


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



8.3 Elements of good practiceThe service exhibits the foowing strengths (i.e. eements of good practice)

• Avaiabiity of ampe expert staff;

• Organisationa mode: separate ega entity from the patent ofice actng asservce everng unt; ts entas te foong avantages

· lat erarces an ess bureaucracy ao for better customer-orentaton;

· patent ofice can concentrate on core competence of patent ings;

• Fast executon of servces an tmey every (.e. express searc);

• Invovement of externa nsttutons en settng up roa sos, caos for g user take up.

Te foong caenges reman:

• Improvabe cooperaton t tecnoogy/eveopment agences;

• Introucton of evauatons as a too to assert performance an to ao for organsatona earnng;

• Stronger user segmentaton n aareness rasng campagns;• Broaer coverage (.e. ger coverage aso of nforma protecton

mecansms).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 194 17-01-2008 11:11:11



196


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D




IPAS was originay deveoped in the 1970s by a predecessor organisation toEnterprise Ireand and was based on simiar IPR support found at that time in theUK and Denmark. Legisation passed by the Irish pariament had aowed for the

provision of support in reation to inventions (IPAS was originay caed theInventions Assistance Scheme). Apart from its name change, the ony major changein the operation of the IPAS has been its focus on indigenous owned companies inthe manufacturing and internationay traded service sectors empoying more than10 empoyees. Enterprise Ireand may aso provide support to enterprises empoyingess than 10 empoyees if they are considered to have high growth potentia.

IPAS is the smaer of the two IPR dedicated schemes operated by Enterprise Ireand. As noted above, the Inteectua Property Unit (IPU) of Enterprise Ireand asoprovides the Higher Education Sector Patent Protection Scheme (HESPSS) whichseeks to provide advice to researchers in the higher education sector on IPRmatters, and to fund IPR for inventions that have a potentia for commerciadeveopment. The HESPPS service is of much more recent origin than the IPASservice (start date: Juy 1998).

The Inteectua Property Unit is operated by an experienced team (3 fu-timeequivaents [FTE]), a of whom have extensive experience (10+ years) in assistingSMEs in reation to patent protection. The same personne operate both the IPASand the HESPPS schemes. However, retirements have brought the workforce downto currenty one person.

The tota annua budget for the two schemes is estimated at € 1.3 mio (2006) of which the IPAS scheme accounts for € 0.3 mio. The budget for the two schemes isexcusivey for inanca assstance toars patent protecton; staff saares anovereas are not ncue n ts igure.

Modes of operaton

Te IPAS sceme as tree stnctve eements:

• Avce on IPR n genera, coverng aso copyrgt, traemark an oter IPprotecton nstruments;

• Avce on at patent agents/attorneys can o for te SME an n ccountres te SME sou ntay seek patent protecton;

• A subsy to be pa out to te patent attorney unertakng te patentprotecton servce on beaf of te SME.

Te egbty crtera for te IPAS sceme are qute strct: Enterprse Irean mustbe convnce tat te nventon s capabe of patent protecton, tecncay feasbean tat tere are pans for commerca expotaton. Accorng to oficaocuments, funng be prove not for nta ing costs but for costs ater ncurre n te patentng process c are usuay ger. Patentng costs can becovere to 100 %, ereby natona an nternatona (n reevant countres) ingsare consere.

Te subsy can amount up to € 30,000 toars te cost of preservng ter ntapatent appcaton. Ts funng can be apportone over a number of years, e.g.€ 10,000 n year 1, € 10,000 n year 2 an € 10,000 n year 3. Companes tat areconsere to ave a g grot potenta may be egbe for a ger eve of support uner IPAS as part of an ntegrate support package. Companes n tscategory may be egbe for IPAS funng of patent protecton costs of up to amaxmum of € 10,000. Te payment of te IPAS subsy s mae recty byEnterprse Irean to te egbe company’s patent attorney. Some users commentefavouraby upon ts aspect of te sceme as t assste ter cas-lo stuaton.

Uner te terms of te IPAS sceme, companes may be requre to pay EnterprseIrean a sare of te royaty ncome resutng from te successfu expotaton of te nventon. hoever, suc royaty agreements (c are usuay rafte on annvua bass t te supporte SME) are ony ntene to cover te subsy

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 196 17-01-2008 11:11:11



197

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

costs pus a sma interest (source: IPAS brochure). The IPAS measure thus does notoperate on a per-proit bass; ts s consere ficut to amnster. In case tenventon s unsuccessfu, te nvestment by Enterprse Irean s rtten off.

Anoter mportant aspect of te IPAS sceme s tat te IPU team can ep te SME

to nterpret te ega avce tat tey may ave receve from ter patent attorney(“onest broker” roe”). we, for exampe, te patent attorney may avse on temerts of patent protecton n a number of countres te IPU team may ep tecompany to unerstan te mportance of prortsng protecton n tose countresere ts nventon be ntay so. Tus, te company may not ony beneitfrom te IPAS subsy but aso from te “onest broker” avce from te IPUteam.

wt respect to marketng, te Enterprse Irean eb ste, bran creaton actvtesan nformaton prove to companes by oter Enterprse Irean executves avebeen use mosty to ssemnate nformaton about te servce. In aton, te IPUmanager as mae presentatons to County Enterprse Boars c are responsbefor te eveopment of enterprses empoyng ess tan 10 empoyees.

Experts beeve tat IPAS s perfecty pace t Enterprse Irean (as oppose to

avng t operate by te patent ofice or anoter nsttuton) c s offerngcompementary servces not ony reate to R&d an IPR but aso managementan cou not be prove n te same ay by any oter IPR payer, .e. te IrsPatent Ofice. Te Irs PO s, compare to oter European POs, a reatvey smaorgansaton t mte resources an soey focuse on patent regstraton.Compare to Enterprse Irean, te Irs PO oes not ave te same eve of connectons t SMEs. It sou be note, oever, tat te Irs PO proves arange of nformaton to SMEs on a spectrum of nteectua property rgts ssuestroug ts to nformaton centres an ts eb ste. Te Ofice aso makespresentatons to bot SMEs an mcro-enterprses (tose empoyng ess tan 10empoyees).

Experts suggeste tat f te Irs Patent Ofice ere to prove inanca assstanceto SMEs toars te cost of patent protecton, a potenta conlct of nterest mayarse (.e. te Irs Patent Ofice may not be suficenty nepenent gven tat tgenerates revenues from te regstraton of patents).


Te performance of te servce s ficut to nterpret. Frst, an most strkngy, teIPAS sceme oes not ave any quaty assurance mecansms n pace, an mostnotaby, no evauatons ere carre out urng te fetme of te servce. Ts canbe seen as a savantage, not ony n terms of performance measurement, butaso n terms of governance of te sceme. It sou be note, oever, tat teIPAS sceme s a reatvey sma sceme tn te context of te tota supportoffere by Enterprse Irean to ts cent companes n te manufacturng annternatonay trae servces sectors (n te year enng december 31, 200,Enterprse Irean prove € 130 mo n inanca supports to cent companes).

In terms of avaabe output ncators, te foong ata as gven.

•

100 appcatons for funng ere receve n 200; 90 of tose stemme fromSMEs, te rest from nvuas (prvate nventors);

• wtn ts sampe of te 100 appcatons, 1 irms (ne support cases) ereprove inanca support;

• Te average amount of subsy gven n 200 as € 9,000 to eac company.

It s mportant to note tat irms may be approve for IPAS inanca support n year 1 but te tmng of te payments may be mae over 1-3 years. It s aso mportantto note tat te IPU may reject an appcaton from a SME for IPAS funng for annta patent ing but accept a renee appcaton at a ater ate for funng tocover te ater stages of patent protecton. Tus e ony 1 % of SMEs aresuccessfu n appyng for IPAS inanca support n any one year, tose tat areunsuccessfu may re-appy n te foong years.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 197 17-01-2008 11:11:11



199

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E SGraph 98 IPAS–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of

respondents*)

33

1120

42

177 11

60

33

7

56

48

52

20

0

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


Graph 99 IPAS–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, percentageof respondents*)

61

4432

1220 22

12 7

24

37

32

39 29 24

2020 24

20

20

40

60

80

100

F i n a n c e

I n n o v a

t i o n

c

o s t s

E c o n o m i c

r i s k s

L a c

k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

L a c k o f m a

r k e t

i n f o

C l i e n t

r e s p o n s i v e

n e s s


s t a n d

a r d s


i s

s u e s

L a c

k o f

t e c h n o l o g y

i n f o


%


Graph 100 IPAS–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents*)

85

54

7

27 24

41 3729

2

0

20

40

60

80

100






m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 199 17-01-2008 11:11:14



200


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 101 IPAS–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

61

39

177 10 7 2

20

29

2427 20

17

10 120

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

A w a r e n e s s

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


%


Graph 102 IPAS–(Eterna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

17 127

32

27

24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


services


services



%


Graph 103 IPAS–Informaton channes, by hch users got to kno about theservce, percentage of respondents*)

39

1520

510

27

1520

59

20

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

I n t e r n e

t

N e w s l e

t t e r

I n f o r m a

t i o n

d a y s / c o n

f e r e n c e s

G e n e r a

l

n e w s p a p e r

P r o

f e s s i o n a

l

j o u r n a

l

P e r s o n a

l

r e c o m m e n

d a

t i o n

C o n s u

l t a n

t s

C o m m e r c

i a l

b a n

k s

A g e n c y

E n

t . I r l . i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 200 17-01-2008 11:11:15



201

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

In addition, however, a high number of users empoyed informa protectionmethods, i.e. 41 % reied on trade secrets, 37 % reied on the compexity of designand 29 % tried to maintain a ead time advantage over competitors.

The main interna barriers perceived for using IPR are, by far, the costs of IP

protection (for 61 % of high and for another 20 % of medium reevance) and thetime to make IP protection work (for 39 % of high, and for 29 % of mediumreevance) (see Graph 101). The ack of quaie personne pays an mportant roe,too. Organsatona ssues are consere ess reevant. Externa barrers toars teavaabty of support servces are perceve to be ess severe obstaces but st notunmportant n te overa context of te servce (see Grap 102).


As te survey sos, te man source of nformaton on te IPAS sceme asEnterprse Irean tsef (9 %) as e as te nternet (39 %), most probabyEnterprse Irean’s eb ste. Ts s fooe by persona recommenatons (27 %),nformaton ays an agences (bot 20 %); aroun 20 % of te companes asoreceve nformaton from oter cannes, notaby patent attorneys, unernng agoo cooperaton beteen EI an members of tat professon (see Grap 103).

IPAS users are, on average, very satsie t te offere servce. A te fferentaspects of servce provson are rate t “1.7” or better (on a scae from 1= verysatsie to 4= unsatsie); te gest graes ere receve for te competence of staff an every tme (bot “1.4”; see Grap 104). 86 % of te users gauge teextent of te servce offerngs to be aequate; 8 % tnk t s too narro/superica.

Spata stance seems not to be a probem (for 68 % a very o-eve barrer anfor anoter 30 % a factor consere to be acceptabe). % tnk tat tebeneits of usng IPAS ceary outeg te efforts; 43 % state tat te beneits areaequate to efforts.


In orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou aso nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – .e., at ou ave

appene n case te servce ere absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “neteffect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espte of teservce. Smary, aso oter type of canges ncurre tn te enterprse, as aresut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese canges are referre to as“beavoura atonaty”).

In ts sense, pure atonaty effects of te IPAS sceme seem to be rater o(see Grap 10). 9 % of te unertakngs ou not ave been carre out at a

Graph 104 IPAS–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servce provson,arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,4

1,7

1,5

1,5

1,4

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information

Quality of provided material

Delivery time


and demands



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 201 17-01-2008 11:11:16



203

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

cedure and thus the expressed interest to hep a smaer number of companiesintensivey. Low reevance rates are given to interna and externa referra possibiities(which is surprising) and spatia distance.


IPAS exhibits the following good practice elements:

• Experience of Enterprise Ireand’s IPU staff, who are abe to give advice not onyon patent protection but aso how enterprises shoud seek patent protectionin those countries which offer the best prospects for their invention;

• “Honest broker” roe: assisting SMEs to understand the advice that they mayhave received from patent attorneys in reation to inteectua property;

• Integration into a major SME funding organisation and the avaiabiity of compementary services and business know-how within Enterprise Ireand (notony reated to R&D and IPR but aso in terms of marketing and managementdeveopment);

• Organisation mode of EI in genera: Centra institution with regiona ofices,expertse pooe at eaquarter eve;

• Unqueness: Ony servce of ts kn n Irean;

• Coaboraton t patent attorneys: te sceme may act as a marketng tooan entry pont for te servce of patent agents; ess crong out of prvateservce provers;

• hg seectvty (but not prmary ue to buget restrctons);

• Royaty agreements (ere te company as to pay back a sare of ts ncomeform te successfuy commercase patent to cover te subsy costs), as

Graph 107 Key quaty factors for a servce such as IPAS, percentage of respondents*)

5

12

20

37

56

59

59

59

66

68

71

90

17

41

44

49

27

29

27

29

27

17

22

5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance


Referal to & availabilityof other services in-house

Administrativeefforts




Costs

Scopeof service


Individual contact

Timely delivery

Competenceof Staff

high relevance mediumrelevance

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 203 17-01-2008 11:11:18



204


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



they can be interpreted as an incentive for the staff (and as a performancemeasure).

However, there are aso a number of chaenges arising:

• Resource constraints;

• Low proie among SMEs;

• Te focus on patents an on nta IPR eveopment (regstraton, etc.) mostyeaves oter mportant areas of IPR support out of te pcture;

• Governance: No n-ept evauatons or oter quaty assurance mecansmsare mpemente (toug t sou be note tat Enterprse Irean unertakesperoc reves of ts support scemes an s currenty examnng a scemesn reaton to ne rues on state as ssue n 2006.);

• Ambguous performance: Ony a sma number of inancay supporteSMEs.

Te IPU s at te moment confronte t anoter mportant probem: as of January 2007, to IPU staff members ave eft Enterprse Irean an te servce sno beng operate by a snge staff member. No ecson as yet been taken on

provng repacement personne for te Unt.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 204 17-01-2008 11:11:18



20

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S10. The VIVACE Programme

Country: Hungary

Orgna tte: VIVACE Programme (Váakozói Iparjogvédemi Versenyképességet Aapozó Cseekvési Program)

Target group: SMEs onyCoverage: Nationa


Category*: x TrainingCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/pointsFinance & Lega Framework


10.1 The VIVACE Programme in a nutshellTe VIVACE programme s an exampe of a programme orkng n te context of a country n Eastern Europe (EE). Countres n EE are key to ave to ea t essstorc burens tan ter counterparts n western Europe, c means tat teycan tus take a fres approac toars te esgn of IPR servces tout payngtoo muc attenton to ong-estabse nsttutona set-ups. On te oter an,IPR servces n EE ave to take te specic pase of economc eveopment of tatregon nto account. Te VIVACE programme sos ays of o tese caengescan be tacke an s especay actve n te oman of aareness rasng. Teprogramme aso covers a range of preparatory actons neee to ntrouce “ger eve” IPR support servces, some of c ave areay been mpemente.

Te VIVACE programme, meanng “Action Plan Promoting Industrial Property

Competitiveness of Entrepreneurs” s a sceme set up an operate by te hungaranPatent Ofice (hPO) amng to foster te aareness of te nteectua property

system an te eveopment of an nustra property cuture tn sma anmeum-sze enterprses. One of te major objectves of te VIVACE programmes to promote te unerstanng an use of IP to ncrease te nnovatveness ancompettveness of hungaran SMEs n a natona as e as nternatona context.Organse n co-operaton t natona an regona partners (te so-cae“VIVACE group”), aareness rasng measures are offere to a broa pubcauence, speca tranng sessons an courses on IPRs are e to gve SMEs anea o to manage ter IPRs an to keep a ntereste partes up-to-ate tte atest nformaton an eveopments n te IPR or. Fankng measures, .e.inanca subses an economca ncentves, ave been mpemente at varouseves. Furtermore, VIVACE promotes a efforts amng at te reucton of tecosts of acqurng an mantanng IPRs.

VIVACE’s msson objectves are tree-fo:

• Creatng aareness for te mportance of eveopment of IP knoegetroug nformaton servces an eucaton;

• deveopment of user-freny IP servces;

• Avaabty of economca (inanca an/or tax base) ncentves to supportSMEs an entrepreneurs.

From te begnnng, VIVACE as set up cear target igures: Te programmeams to reac at east 10 % of a SMEs n hungary29 t ts servcepoo. Oter operatve ams, .e., an ncrease number of patent ings or enance censng actvty, ave been set, too. No restrctons are n

29 Aroun 900.000 enterprses ere base n hungary by te en of 2003; amost 99.9% of tem ere SMEs.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 205 17-01-2008 11:11:18



207

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

VIVACE is operated by a staff of around 7 empoyees on behaf of the HungarianPatent Ofice (hPO) as co-ornator, an by aroun 2 on beaf of te hungaranCamber of Commerce an Inustry (hCCI) as servce provers. If necessary, tehPO an te Camber of Commerce can ra on atona staff from oter unts

an/or epartments. Te hPO’s core operatona staff ncues senor managersan ske experts c possess reevant IP quaicaton n fferent ies (.e. IP,consutng, PR an marketng, mea, etc.). Externa servce provers engage nte VIVACE sceme (Feeraton of Tecnca an Scentic Socetes, PATLIBCentres) ave at east grauate from fferent unverstes an possess experencen eang t SMEs; oever, exact igures concernng te eucatonabackgroun of te staff ere not avaabe.

Te hungaran Patent Ofice as an annua buget of aroun € 14 mo c sfune entrey from ts on ncome. In 2006, te buget avaabe for VIVACEamounte to € 116.000, compare to € 200.000 n 200. durng te ast years,aroun 1 % of te tota VIVACE buget as use for te operatona management,c ncues marketng an eb eveopment, nnovaton support, ocumentatoneveopment an prntng, montorng of actvtes, accompsng bencmarkngsurveys, nta an peroc tranng of servce provers etc. Regarng marketngactvtes, a muttue of cannes as been empoye; from avertsements nreguar papers (n te form of aroun 10 artces c take about VIVACE) tobran creaton actvtes, roa sos (at te very begnnng, presentaton eree every to eeks at a fferent ocaton) an te usage of mutpers/exstngnetorks.

Modes of operaton

Te IP netork s te man par of VIVACE’s servce offerngs an resuts from co-operaton t an use of exstng netorks of a servce partners. Te core servceprover, te hPO an te Camber of Commerce aso offer oter IPR an Non-IPRreate measures to support enterprses an nvuas. In te foong, tefferent eements of te IP netork an servce prover offerngs are expane nmore eta.

HPO – Hungarian Patent Office

Beses beng a governmenta nsttuton an offerng „reguar” patent oficeservces (.e. grantng patents, atabase researc, etc.), te hungaran Patent Oficetsef aso proves fferent types of IP eucaton courses: from basc courses on IPR(60 ours) to more avance eve courses (240 ours of eucaton). In aton,taor mae courses are offere for nvua requrements.

Te Centre for IP Informaton an Eucaton (CIPIE) exercses a supervsory functonfor te offere nteectua property tranngs, organses courses an IP exams,especay te ones offere for peope o ant to become patent attorneys. In tsgt, t as to be note tat every hungaran patent attorney as to pass a patentattorney’s exam c s soey prove by te hPO. In aton, te CIPIEeveops, fosters an co-ornates te IP eucaton system bot t respect tograuate an postgrauate stues.

Oter servces offere by te hPO:• A speca omepage segment of te hungaran Patent Ofice s ecate to

prove up-to-ate nformaton to te pubc on events, campagns, tranngprograms, etc. reate to natona nnovaton;

• E-earnng programme eveopment: Patent/traemark moue;

• VIP Campagn (Informaton Programme on Innovaton), c covers a rangeof topcs rangng from “Commercasaton opportuntes” to “ApproacngInvestors”;

• Oter specic programmes, .e. “IP dpoma Aar”. Te hPO provesconsutaton to stuents o eveop an IP reevant tess; te inse tess

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 207 17-01-2008 11:11:19



209

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S


Regarding quaity assurance mechanisms, severa monitoring and evauationmeasures have been put in pace to ensure an accurate and professiona assessmentof the programme. Furthermore, a nationwide research survey was conducted with

00 Hungarian SMEs in 200 to anayse the “Innovation Afinty of SMEs”. Tesurvey resuts soe tat te majorty of hungaran SMEs are generay not aareof te potenta an beneits of usng IPR: 6 out of 10 enterprses ou ecomemore nformaton an eucaton materas on IPR an ts usage n a busnessenvronment; 4 out of 10 ou be ntereste n attenng reevant tranngs an/or events.

Contractua partners an te performance of ocay offere servces are asorevee reguary; a specic contrbuton to te quaty assurance of VIVACE arsesfrom te fact tat contracts cannot be renee tout fuing certanrequrements. As regars te performance of te servce, te foong igures avebeen prove:

• 3,237 VIVACE users31 ere counte n 2006 (200: 2,642) c aske for:· genera nformaton on IPR: 1,947 (2006); 1,388 (200)

· assstance n trae mark questons: 906 (2006); 24 (200)· ep t patent reate ssues: 162 (2006); 340 (200)· support t utty moes, esgns, copyrgts etc: 222 (2006); 390

(200)• 1 ntroucton campagn from September 2004 to February 200: every to

eeks an event promotng VIVACE natone;• IPR eucaton: One 60 ours moue for oca avsers (2 persons attene

n 2004 an 200);• 10 events organse n 200, c attracte aroun 4,000 SMEs;• 10 nespaper artces, severa TV reports, nterves, appearance on

conferences.

Performance ncators measurng te eve of ffuson of nformaton to te targetgroup reporte are:

•

ht rates: In 2006, VIVACE’s ebste a a t rate of aroun 24.000;• Pubcatons: 10 pubcatons t fferent crcuaton voumes; aroun 00

copes of te “Iparjogvéem szeme” (Inustra Property Rgts Protectonan Copyrgt Reve) an 00 copes of te “Szabaam Közöny” (Patentan Traemark Buetn) ere ane out to te pubc;

• Number of vstors n PATLIB-brares n 200: 3,977 persona vsts, 8,43ocuments use an 4,632 onne vsts.

As experts state, tere as been a ecreasng tenency n hungaran IP regstratonsover te past years. VIVACE s seen as one of te man programmes to reverse tstren. In 200, aroun 1,126 patents ave been grante. In aton, 3,47 oter IP regstrabe rgts (trae marks, esgns, etc) ere regstere urng te sametme. Compare to 200, a sgt ncrease n IP regstratons as been observe nte irst af of 2006.



0 companes ere surveye about ter experences t te VIVACE programme.Te strbuton of te user sampe conirme VIVACE’s partcuar focus on SMEs:36 % of te companes empoy not more tan 9 persons, 28 % ave 10 to 49

31 Tota number consstng of users of servces prove by te hungaran Patent Ofice an te hungaran Camber of Commerce; Servces ere offere by pone, fax an e-ma an for persona consutatons.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 209 17-01-2008 11:11:19



210


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 108 Company sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe, 2005, percentage

of respondents

36%

28%

30%

6%



Graph 109 Innovaton actvtes n nterve sampe, 2005, percentage of

respondents

20

56

40

12

30

34

68

0

20

40

60

80

100


&







e q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g



D e s i g n



%

*) mutipe answers aowed, Source: User Survey, n = 0

Graph 110 Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of

respondents*)

194 9

18

38

9 6

38

16

30

78 32

17 21

50

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 210 17-01-2008 11:11:20



211

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

empoyees and 30 % are arger companies with up to 249 empoyees (see Graph108).

As expected, users and/or participants of the VIVACE programme performed aconsiderabe number of innovative activities. Between 2003 and 200, around 70 %

introduced product innovations (new or signiicanty mprove proucts), 0 % ereabe to ntrouce process nnovatons n te same tme pero. As concerns R&d,amost 68 % conucte ntramura R&d. Interestngy, 6 % of te users ereengage n te acqustons of macnery an equpment (see Grap 109).

VIVACE users mae most use of te servce offere by te hPO: 18 % frequenty,78 % at east on an occasona bass (see Grap 110). Te reason for te g usageof patent attorneys may be a arge sare of users representng ong-term customersof te hPO c ie for patents more often tan oters o.

Regarng amperng factors for nnovaton actvtes, companes companemosty about g nnovaton costs (for 46 % of g an for furter 12 % of meum reevance), te ack of approprate sources of inance (of g reevancefor 46 %, of meum reevance for 12 %) an economc rsks (for 28 % of g, for 30 % of meum reevance; see Grap 111). Very unusua n ts context:

Reguatons an stanars are reporte to be obstaces, too. Cent responsvenessan organsatona ssues are reporte to be of a ess crtca nature.

Graph 111 Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*)

26

46 46

28

8 10 10 6 4

3812 12

30

28 18 1614 12

0

20

40

60

80

100


s t a n d a r d s

F i n a n c e

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s


L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

L a c k o f



i n f o


i s s u e s

C l i e n t



%


Graph 112 IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents*)

4434

8

30

52

2836

14

0

20

40

60

80

P a

t e n

t s f i l e d

P a

t e n

t s v a

l i d

a n

d / o r g r a n

t e d

D e s i g n p a

t t e r n s

a n

d / o r u

t i l i t y

m o

d e

l s

T r a

d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g

h t s

D e

f e n s i v e

P u

b l i s h i n g

T r a

d e

s e c r e

t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n

t s

D e s i g n

c o m p

l e x

i t y

L e a

d - t i m

e

a d v a n

t a g e

N o

d e

l i b e r a

t e

I P R s t r a

t e g y

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 211 17-01-2008 11:11:21



212


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



As can be seen from Graph 112, VIVACE users empoyed a high number of formaIPR protection methods between 2003 and 200. Regarding patents, haf of theusers ie for a patent or a a patent grante or va. Ts arge sare seems notsurprsng conserng te fact tat funng for patent appcatons, especay for

nternatona ones, as been mae avaabe uner te umbrea of te VIVACEprogramme. In aton, 44 % of te users state tat tey use esgn patternsan/or utty moes to protect ter IP; 34 % regstere trae marks. A conserabeg number of users aso empoye nforma protecton metos, .e. 2 % reeon trae secrets, 36 % tre to mantan a ea tme avantage over compettors(see Grap 113).

For VIVACE users, te costs of IP protecton (for 20 % of g an for anoter 34 %of meum reevance) are te man barrer perceve for usng IPR. Externa barrerstoars te avaabty of support servces are not consere to be a major obstace.hoever, te ack of nformaton, quaty an accessbty of externa servces as ateast meum reevance for aroun 20 % of te companes surveye.


VIVACE use varous nformaton cannes an sources to sprea te nformaton about

te servce offerngs, ncung nformaton offere on te nternet (6 %) an/or presente at conferences (40 %). A conserabe g sare of users ear about teservce aso troug te provng nsttuton tsef (38 %). Furtermore, an a tte bt

Graph 113 (Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms, percentageof respondents*)

20

4 6 6 4 10 8 8

34

34 28

24 26 16 14 2

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

A w a r e n e s s


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


%


Graph 114 Informaton channes, by hch users got to kno about theservce, percentage of respondents*)

56

24

40

10

3830

24

6

36 38

60

10

20

30

4050

60

70

I n t e r n e t

N e w s l e t t e r



G e n e r a l

n e w s p a p e r


j o u r n a l

P e r s o n a l



C o m m e r c i a l

b a n k s

A g e n c y

V I V A C E i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 212 17-01-2008 11:11:22



213

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

surprising, some companies got to know about the service through cassica media,i.e. professiona journas (38 %) and newspapers (10 %) (see Graph 114).

Overa speaking, VIVACE users were generay satsie t te key aspects of teservce c ere grae t “2.0” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie)

to 4 (unsatsie) (see Grap 11). Furtermore, aroun 80 % conser te extentof te servce offerngs to be aequate; 62 % beeve te amnstratve effort touse te servce s qute o. On te oter an, 24 % tnk t s too g. Spatastance oes not seem to be a probem. For 64 % of te users, te beneits of usng ts servce are aequate to te efforts; 22 % state tat te beneits cearyouteg te efforts.


In orer to anser te queston eter a support servce orks or oes not ork,one sou nqure nto te ae vaue of te servce – . e., at ou aveappene n case te servce ere absent. Ts s one n orer to soate a “netpostve effect” as oppose to tngs c ou ave appene anyay, espteof te servce. Smary, aso oter types of canges ncurre tn te enterprse,as a resut of usng te servce, are to be recore (tese types of canges are

referre to as “beavoura atonaty”).Te VIVACE programme as aceve rater o atonaty effects (see Grap116): 11 % of te unertakngs ou not ave been carre out at a n teabsence of support from te servce. In aton, 27 % of te projects ou avebeen carre out but t support from anoter inanca source. On te oter se,

Graph 115 Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servce provson,arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,8

1,8

1,8

2,0

1,8

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



Graph 116 Addtonaty of the inanca subsdy, percentage of respondents

32%

14%

11%

27%

5%

11%








01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 213 17-01-2008 11:11:23



21

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

32 % woud have carried out their patenting project, without any change in theproject settings.

Keeping in mind the major aim of the programme, to create genera awareness for the importance of IPR, one may say that VIVACE did quite we to achieve this aim.

The most striking changes in the attitudes towards the protection of IPR concerngenera awareness issues (increased for 46 %) and knowedge management(increased for 36 %). In addition, a review of the forma IPR responsibiities withina company has been carried out by 34 % of the surveyed users (see Graph 117).

Users of the VIVACE programme underine the importance of the competence of staff (for 2 % of high, for 34 % of medium reevance), timey deivery (highreevance for 8 %, medium for 22 %) and costs (for 4 % of high, and for 20 %of medium reevance) for a service simiar to VIVACE (see Graph 118). Individuacontact to service experts and (ow) administrative efforts aso pay an importantroe for such a service. Low reevance rates are given, surprisingy for a networkedprogramme such as VIVACE, to interna and externa referra possibiities and spatiadistance.

10.3 Elements of good practiceThe VIVACE programme acts as an umbrea scheme and offers a variety of servicesand activities towards different IPR issues. The programme’s objective is to increasethe competitiveness of Hungarian SMEs on a nationa and internationa eve. The

VIVACE programme shows the foowing eements of good practice:

• Integrated package covering IP awareness raising activities, economicincentives, educationa measures and economic incentives;

• Expert staff;

• Geographic distribution: Regiona nodes provide basis information and refer for more compicated services to the centra institution (the HPO) which haspooed its programme expertise nationay at a headquarter ocation;

• Strong networking and partnering activities with other actors active in

innovation support;• Carefu panning, business orientation and high eve of standardisation of

the programme;

• Compementary, non-IPR service packages are provided by the HPO’spartnering institutions, i.e. the Chamber of Commerce;

• Strong reputation of the service offerings in Hungary;

• Comparativey itte historic burdens to cope with. This impies that there arepenty of opportunities to do things right from the start, without having toworry too much about od structures.

Chaenges remain with regard to

• the sustainabe endowment with resources;

• the integration into the overa nationa innovation system;

• The varying degree of commitment of the invoved contracted partners for deivering the service.

The future deveopment of the programme is uncertain. As the programme is dueto end in December 2007, successor programmes are needed to take over where

VIVACE has started. According to expert opinions, foow-up programmes may facean unpredictabe future because of open questions concerning adequate funding.Furthermore, some experts noted that VIVACE is probaby not integrated enoughinto the nationa innovation system and overa innovation strategy. Interesting inthis context is the observation made by experts that there can be a threat of estabishing parae networks due to the ack of an overa integrated governmentainnovation poicy.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 215 17-01-2008 11:11:24



BENCHMARKING NATIONAL AND REGIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SMES IN THE FIELD O F INTE



217

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S11. IPR Services of the

Technology Watch

Center CVTCountry: Luxembourg

Orgna tte:Centre de Veie Technoogique (CVT) – Centre deRecherche Pubic Henri Tudor

Target group: A companiesCoverage: Nationa

(Pro-active) awareness raising measures/Pubic ReationsInformation Provision Services

Category*: Training

xCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/points

Finance & Lega Framework*cassicaton system eine by te Austran Insttute for SME Researc

11.1 The Technology Watch Centre CVTin a nutshell


Te case stuy on te Tecnoogy watc Centre (Centre e Vee Tecnoogque;CVT) of te Researc Centre for Pubc Researc (Centre e Recerce Pubque;CRP) henr Tuor as been seecte n te scope of te uneryng bencmarkngstuy to ustrate at can ork n very sma countres n terms of IPR support for SMEs. CVT as a number of so-cae “projects” c aress te ssue of IPR usage

by SMEs, ncung te creaton of a ecate pubcaton (LIIP – Lnkng Innovatonan Inustra Property), te estabsment of an e-earnng course or te provsonof counseng servces on IPR matters. Te CVT IPR servces are embee n aportfoo of oter servces c govern te subjects of “stanars an reguatons”an “tecnoogy roamappng/forecastng”. It s ame to create synergy effectsbeteen tese tree ies c can be consere to be cosey reate to eacoter. Internatona cooperaton s te key ssue for servce provers suc as teCVT n very sma countres – bot for te esgn an creaton of support measuresas e as for te reac-out to an aequate number of SMEs.

As one of te epartments of CRP henr Tuor, te objectves of te Tecnoogy watc Center (CVT) are to ncrease te aareness of companes to te grongmportance of nteectua property nformaton an to assst tem n settng upter nformaton management processes. Te CVT asssts companes n searcng,gaterng, treatng, anaysng an managng scentic, tecnca an tecncay-orente busness nformaton.

Te nta goa of te CVT as to support te actvtes of te nteectua propertyepartment of te Mnstry of Economcs an Foregn Trae by assurng teffuson of patent nformaton. Ten, ne competences n management of tecnoogy atc an compettve / busness / tecnca ntegence processesere create an ts msson gre up to:

• te assstance n settng up of tecnoogy atc an compettve ntegencepractces n companes;

• te eveopment an marketng of tecnoogy atc an compettventegence servces;

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 217 17-01-2008 11:11:25



218


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



• the increase of awareness for the growing importance of competitiveinteigence;

• the creation of new competencies in the ies of nformaton management.

Te pases of IPR usage targete are researc on nnovatve projects t a reaton

to IPR ssues an te process of eveopment/regstraton; te utsaton pase or te subject of IPR acquston are not targete. In terms of te egree of egaformaty, ampe of space s gven to varous forms of IP protecton – patents anforma IPR are treate ony as a part of a spectrum on o to approprate te IP of a company. Ts can certany be consere an eement of goo practce.

Te servce s generay open to companes of a szes an to pubc nsttutonssuc as, for exampe, te Luxembourg patent ofice. Nottstanng ts, specic“projects” are carre out to support expcty SMEs n te ie of IPR. Te CVTsubsumes uner te term “projects” a range of actvtes ecate to SMEs, sucas te creaton of case stues, pro-actve contactng of companes, te creaton of te LIIP pubcaton or te esgn of te e-earnng IPR course dIPS (Distance

learning applied to enhance the introduction of IP into management Strategies of SMEs ;see beo). No provsons are n pace for certan tecnoogy ies or nustres.

Modes of operaton

Te story of te servce ates back to te m 1990s. A feasbty stuy asconucte n 1994/199 ere user nees ere assesse. Te CVT starte tsactvtes n 1994 as a pot project uner te ntatve of te Inteectua Propertydvson of te Mnstry of Economcs an n cose coaboraton t te EuropeanPatent Ofice. Before 1994, no suc servce as prove n Luxembourg. Te potpase (an tus te preparaton tme) amounte to approxmatey to years –eventuay, n 1996, te Pubc Researc Centre henr Tuor estabse te CVT asone of ts epartments.

Te CVT acts as a servce unt tn te CRP – oter unts of te CRP may raon te servces prove by te CVT an ave, to ts en, eveope orkpackages tat escrbe te nvovement of te CVT. It s mportant to note, toug,tat eac epartment forms ts on, to an extent, sef-suficent busness unt; for

any of te CRP epartments, te CVT ooks very muc ke an externa servcesprover – servces of te CVT can be use, but tere s no obgaton to revert toCVT.

Te CVT s operate by a staff of 8 FTEs. Most of tem ave a tecnca backgroun,prmary n te ies of cemstry an n eectroncs/IT-reate ies, an possessreevant ork experence n te ie of IPR.

Te CVT offers ts servces on a non-proit, but cost-coverng bass (.e. expensesncurre must be covere by revenue receve).

Te foong servces are offere by te CVT:

• Patent ocumentaton an nformaton servces: Ts servce comprsesatabase searces on patents an traemarks (.e. novety searces, egastatus searces);

• Customze n-ept consutng on strategc IPR ssues: Consutng servcescover counseng n tecnonogca ntegence, compettve ntegence,busness ntegence an nformaton anayss (te atter referng many tobbometrc anayses);

• IP assstance for busness start-ups: Ts type of servces aresses specicayte nees of start-up enterprses (e.g., consutng n IP-strateges, generasupport for busness pannng);

• Tecnoogy watc servces: Tecnoogy atc servces are a type of servceere so-cae “compettve ntegence” s gatere; suc nformatonncues ata erve from ex-ante anayses of future trens n tecnoogcaies or n te oman of tecnca reguatons an stanars;

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 218 17-01-2008 11:11:25



219

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

• Creation of pubications: The LIIP guide (LIIP – Linking Innovation andIndustria Property) was pubished with the aim to give SMEs “10 pragmaticrecommendations for a better integration of IP in your business”. The 4 pageguide offers sections on the einton of IP, bref escrptons of te fferent

forms of IPR, guenes on c IP protecton nstrument to cose uner certan crcumstances, tps on o to enforce IP rgts an a varety of annexest contact etas of nternatona IPR-reate nsttutons. Its man targetgroup are IPR begnners. A number of rea-fe case stues on o IPR an IPmanagement s use by SMEs an a ceckst/questonnare t mutpecoce questons ntene to measure te eve of IPR aareness roun off tecontent of te prnte brocure. A Cd as been eveope to accompany teLIIP gue (cae “IP Mutmea Toobox Cd”) – t presents te nformatonof te LIIP gue n a more nteractce manner. Te Cd aso offers atonanformaton on IPR protecton an eps t usng te IPR system n severaEuropean countres. Te LIIP gue s an outcome of a jont cooperatve project(nvovng partners, mosty patent ofices, from Irean, Span, Luxembourg,Itay an Greece, t te CVT beng te project eaer) co-fune n tecourse of te t European Frameork Programme of te European Communty

as part of te Innovaton an SMEs programme;• Tranngs – te CVT s actve n te ie of IPR-reate tranng an as offerngs

coverng te foong subject areas:

· worksops on searcng an anaysng patent-nformaton on te nternetan IT-patent searcng strateges;

· IP-aareness orksops for seconary scoos (te target group beng 1to 18 year o stuents);

· Sporac aareness rasng events for te genera pubc (e.g., n tecourse of te Tour e France – c aso passe troug Luxembourg– t as ece to organse an exbton on te tecnoogy an storyof bcyces, out- an unernng aso IPR aspects appcabe to ts prouctgroup);

· dIPS (Distance learning applied to enhance the introduction of IP intomanagement Strategies of SMEs ): an e-earnng course n IP managementt te am to prove SME managers t bascs on o to ntrouceIP nto a busness strategy. Te course asts for 40 ours an s eveopen te frameork of a European Leonaro project; as of te rtng of tereport, te dIPS project as st n te test pase an tus not fuyoperatona.32

Te CVT offers ts servces on a stan-by bass as e as pro-actvey. Especay norer to ncrease aareness, CVT staff reguary ooks for ne potenta customersan makes vsts to companes on-ste. Searc servces are an exampe of a servceoffere on a stan by bass. Reguar searc requests are pa on a “per request”bass, appyng a stanarse prce. More customer-taore servces (.e. teconsutng servces) are cost by usng oury rates.

Aganst te backgroun of te sma country sze, cooperatve ork (especaynternatonay) s seen, accorng to experts, as essenta for te success of servcesuc as te CVT. To ts en, te most mportant strategc partners of te CVT sforemost te Mnstry of Economcs an Foregn Trae t ter InteectuaProperty department (te Luxembourg Patent Ofice): Te CVT as taken, uner contractua obgatons, over severa tasks of te Luxembourg Patent Ofice(namey, patent nformaton searc servces an busness servcng). Oter cooperaton partners are te Ofice Luxembourgeos ’Accrétaton et eSurveance (OLAS), te European Patent Ofice (EPO), an – sporacay – aso te

wor Inteectua Property Organsaton (wIPO) (te atabases of c are useby te CVT).

32 ttp://.ps-project.org

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 219 17-01-2008 11:11:25



220


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D




Reguar interim and ex-post evauations are carried out to manage and secure thequaity of the programme. Annua inanca auts are carre out by externaexperts. In aton, as part of te measurements of te nterna process

performance, user surveys are execute to evauate te satsfacton of tecustomers. an nterna ntranet/CRM system s set up to track CVT actvtes ancoect montorng ata (e.g. te number of rtten searc reports etc.). Te CVTs an ISO 9001 certie nsttuton.

Te user group conssts of enterprses of a szes, sectors an nustres, researccenters, patent attorneys, prvate nventors as e as pubc an prvateorganzatons representng te nterests of fferent enterprses. Te foong ataas prove concernng customer reac out (reference pero: 200):

• CVT as prouce 180 searc reports, coverng enqures of organsatonsconcernng patentng/tecnoogy nformaton (10 reports) an ssuesconcernng reguatons an stanars (74 reports).

• Te CVT as, furtermore, contacte 0 companes proactvey t te amto ncrease ter aareness on IPR ssues; te am s to ave a ift of te

contacte companes as reguar customers of te CVT. worksops c eat t o to use patent atabase nformaton ave beenvery popuar aroun 2000/2001. Te eman as snce ten roppe conseraby;te CVT assumes tat te majorty of te companes n Luxembourg c mgtbe ntereste n suc “o to use” patent nformaton offerngs as been reace.Ts ustrates tat inng an aequate number of customers to cover te costs for IPR servces of a arger scope tn a very sma country consttutes a caenge.On te oter an, oever, te CVT aso beeves – t respect to ter oter offerngs e.g. n te ie of IPR consutng – tat t as a rater o proie amongSMEs c nee to be aresse by respectve marketng actvtes. Internatonacooperaton s seen as te key souton to ts probem by te expertsntervee.



20 users ere entie an aske about ter experence t IPR servces offereby te CVT. Furtermore, as te CVT offers varous support servces targetngfferent nterests, fferent user groups ere ncue n te sampe. For teanayss n ts secton, te focus s put on a group of 12 users out of te 2033, otook avantage of speca n-ept consutng servces regarng IPR ssues.Conserng te sma sampe sze, great care as to be taken en nterpretng teresuts.

Out of te 12 IPR consutng users, af empoye not more tan 49 empoyeesbeteen 2003 an 200. durng te same tme pero, 8 servce users ntroucene or sgnicanty mprove proucts onto te market, 6 came up t processnnovatons. Regarng nnovaton actvtes, 7 conucte ntramura R&d, an0 % ere engage n te acquston of macnery an equpment as e astranng actvtes.

Beteen 2003 an 200, 6 out of 12 IPR consutng users mae occasona use of natona agences, took at most occasona avantage of te camber of commerce, an 4 of externa consutants (see Grap 119). Patent attorneys ere

33 due to reasons of statstca sgnicance, survey resuts from te remanng 8 CVT sub-servce users are not anaysefurter.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 220 17-01-2008 11:11:25



221

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

considered to be important too: 2 service users took frequent advantage of theservice offerings of patent attorneys, 3 did so on an occasiona basis.

Some companies experienced hampering factors for innovation during 2003 to200 (see Graph 120): the IPR consuting users compained mosty about economic

risks, high innovation costs and ack of inanca sources as e as quaiepersonne (for 4 users of g reevance, respectvey).

Regarng te metos of IPR protecton, 6 out of te 12 IPR consutng usersstate tat tey use trae secrets an/or secrecy agreements as e as regsteretraemarks as te most mportant IP protecton meto (see Grap 121). Inaton, of te servce users ie for a patent or a a patent grante or vabeteen 2003 an 200.

For te 12 IPR consutng users, te cost of mpementng IP protecton strategesrepresents te man nterna barrer for usng IPR metos (see Grap 122). Inaton, some servce users consere te ack of quaie personne an te tmeto make IP protecton ork as reevant externa barrers. Tese inngs are verymuc nne t tose from oter servces anayse. Externa barrers are perceveto be obstaces of, by comparson, o reevance: 4 out of 12 servce users

consere te ack of nformaton on avaabe servces reevant as an externabarrer.

Graph 119 Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, number of respondents *),IPR consutng servce

1112

6

52

3

4

21

01

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

N a

t i o n a

l

a g e n c y

R e g

i o n a

l

a g e n c y

C h a m

b e r o

f

c o m m e r c e

P a

t e n

t

o f f i c e

P a

t e n

t

a t t o r n e y

E x

t e r n a

l

c o n s u

l t a n

t s E U

O t h e r


N


Graph 120 Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, number of respondents *),IPR consutng Servce

4 4 4 4

21

21

2

4 4

2 2

45 3

3 1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

E c o n o m

i c r i s k s

I n n o v a

t i o n

c o s t s

F i n a n c e

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

L a c

k o

f

t e c

h n o

l o g y

i n f o

L a c

k o

f m a r k e

t

i n f o

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s

C l i e n

t


R e g u

l a t i o n s

&

s t a n

d a r d s


N


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 221 17-01-2008 11:11:26



222


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 121 CVT Henr Tudor–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users,2003 to 2005, number of respondents *), IPR Consutng Servce

5 5

1

6

2

6

4

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

P a

t e n

t s f i l e d

P a

t e n

t s v a

l i d

a n

d / o r g r a n

t e d

D e s i g n p a

t t e r n s

a n

d / o r u

t i l i t y

m o

d e

l s

T r a

d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g

h t s

D e

f e n s i v e

P u

b l i s h i n g

T r a

d e

s e c r e

t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n

t s

D e s i g n

c o m p

l e x

i t y

L e a

d - t i m

e

a d v a n

t a g e

N o

d e

l i b e r a

t e

I P R s t r a

t e g y


Graph 122 (Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms, number of respondents*), IPR Consutng Servce

6

2 21 1

1

3 3

21

4

22

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

A w a r e n e s s

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n


N



The 12 IPR consuting users received information about the service mosty throughpersona recommendations, the internet and information days (i.e. conferencesetc.). Agencies were mentioned as information sources by 4 service users. 3 out 12

users heard about the service by the CVT itsef. This share is surprisingy ow and ispossiby due to the before-mentioned improvement area in the domain of marketing activities.

Overa, 8 out of 12 IPR consuting users considered the extent of the service offeringsto be adequate. In addition, 6 stated that the beneits are aso aequate to te efforts; tnk tat te beneits ceary outeg te efforts. As can be seen from Grap 123,a servce users ere, on average, qute satsie t te servce.


due to te overa focus on aareness rasng of te CVT, t seems not surprsngtat te most sgnicant canges for te 12 IPR consutng servce users took pacen genera IPR aareness, knoege management kno-o an patentknoege n busness envronment, c ncrease for 7 an 6 of te servceusers, respectvey (see Grap 124). Te g number of beavoura aspects c

cange ue to usng ts servce can aso be attrbute to te overa openapproac toars a means to protect resp. approprate IP.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 222 17-01-2008 11:11:27



223

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Graph 123 Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servce provson,arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents, IPR ConsutngServce

1,5

1,8

1,8

1,5

1,6

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



Graph 124 Behavoura addtonaty of the IPR Consutng Servce, number of respondents*)

1

2

3

4

4

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

In-licensing

Out-licensing


IPR training










General awareness

inc reased decreased

N


A IPR consuting service users considered the competence of the staff invoved ina service simiar to the ones offered by CVT as very important (see Graph 12). Inaddition, timey deivery and the ease of access and enticaton ere aso fet tobe key factors. Spata stance an te referra to externa servces turne out not

to be mportant for suc a servce, n te ve of te users.

11.3 Elements of good practiceTe CVT offers an ntegrate package of IPR servces c exbt as a oe tefoong success factors (resp. eements of goo practce):

• Integratve approac;

• Competence of staff t etae knoege on a rater arge range of aspects regarng IPR;

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 223 17-01-2008 11:11:28



224


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



• not actuay focussed on patents, but rather broad approach towards IPprotection;

• Internationa cooperation which is essentia for a service of a rather argescope and operating in a sma country, and which has ed in some parts to

the successfu projects (e.g. the LIIP guide).Chaenges remain within the foowing areas:

• Reach out to a arge enough number of customers to cover operationacosts;

• Internationa cooperation – This subject wi stay on the agenda for a number of projects other than LIIP and aso with respect to increasing user reach out,notaby within the so-caed Greater Region (covering the neighbouring areasin Germany, France and Begium).

Graph 125 Key quaty factors for a servce such as the IPR Consutng Servce,number of respondents*)

2

3

5

5

6

6

7

8

9

10

12

5

6

3

3

5

2

4

5

3

1

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Spatial distance







Scope of service

Costs

Individual contact


Timely delivery

Competence of Staff


N


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 224 17-01-2008 11:11:28



22

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S12. Foundation for Finnish

Inventions (FIN)

Country: FinandOrgna tte: KeksintösäätiöTarget group: SMEsCoverage: Nationa


Category*: Training


x Finance & Lega Framework*cassicaton system eine by te Austran Insttute for SME Researc

12.1 Foundation for Finnish Inventionsin a nutshell

Te man objectve of te Founaton for Fnns Inventons s to foster Fnnsnventons by supportng prvate nvuas an sma entrepreneurs resng nFnan to eveop an expot nventon proposas an epng tem t teutsaton of te create nventons. Seconary goas are set .e. to ncreaseempoyment, exports, an overa nnovatveness an compettveness of Fnnscompanes at ome an nternatonay. Te servce as been cosen as a casestuy n te course of te uneryng bencmarkng exercse as t s an exampe of an ntegrate servce t e enoe resources resutng n rater goutcomes, t a e estabse governance structure an t some unqueservce eements (e.g., te prototype orksop).

Te Founaton acts as a “One-Stop-Sop” n IPR matters as t offers a range of IPR-reate servces: evauaton of ne nventons, guance, support n ssuesreate to protectng ones’ nventons, prototype orksops, ega counseng or ep t marketng. Amost a servces offere by te Founaton are someoreate to IPR. Expertse s pooe at te eaquarters n Espoo, but tere areregona outets n mportant organsatons suc as unverstes an economceveopment centres.

Te Founaton servces cover a e range of regstrabe IPR (patents, traemarks,esgns) an non-regstrabe IPR (e.g., copyrgts). Provng nformaton onnforma protecton metos s not expcty tn te scope of te servceportfoo of te Founaton but epenng on te expert gvng avce to tecustomer, nforma practses suc as trae secrets can aso be subject of scussonan consutaton. Accorng to te servce provers, oever, customers areusuay more ntereste n recevng nformaton about forma protecton metos

for ter unertakngs.Te Founaton actvtes are not taore to specic tecnoogy ies or nustres.Te organsaton, oever, as ony SMEs an prvate nventors as customers. Teservces are offere natone an cover a pases of IPR an IP protectoneveopment an usage.


Te Founaton for Fnns Inventons as estabse n te eary 1970s by aprvate ntatve. we te overa goa of te servce staye te same, te scopeof te actvtes as constanty ncrease snce ten. A furter mpetus to grotas gven n te 1990s, en te eaquarters ere move nto a tecnoogycentre, namey Innopo (Espoo Tecnoogy Centre). Te nearby Unversty of

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 225 17-01-2008 11:11:29



226


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Technoogy is considered to be an important additiona asset to the operationaenvironment.

The Foundation is we endowed with quaie personne an monetary funs,more so tan most of te oter servces anayse n te course of te bencmarkng

stuy. Te Founaton ras on a staff of about 24 experts n fferent busness antecnoogy ies at te ea ofice an as a atona orkforce of 29 “nnovatonrepresentatves” operatng regonay; 14 representatves are base at amost everyFnns unversty, 1 are ocate at te so-cae T&E Centres (Empoyment &Economc eveopment centres) across te country. Te nnovaton representatvesare fune by te Founaton, Natona Boar of Patents an Regstraton of Fnan an by oter, often regona, organsatons (e.g., a unversty or a T&ECentre).

Te T&E Centres operate uner te contro of te Mnstry of Trae an Inustry,but to oter mnstres (te Mnstry of Labour, an te Mnstry of Agrcuturean Forestry) contrbute to tese centres an can be consere mportantstakeoers. Te Centres act as pubc, regona organsatons provng avsoryan eveopment servces for busnesses an nvuas. It as to be note toug,

tat some of tese representatves are orkng ony part-tme for te Founaton. Aroun 0 % of te ea ofice staff as been orkng for more tan ive years atte Founaton; aroun 60 % are IPR experts o o unversty egrees. Teaverage age n te ea ofice amounts to 43.7 years. Beses, every representatveoperatng ocay os eter a unversty or poytecnc egree.

Te servce as an annua buget of € 6.1 mo, of c € 2.1 mo are avaabe for rect support an funng actvtes (e.g. to subsse R&d costs); te remanng€ 4 mo cover nrect support to te nventors (c ncues te personne costsan out of pocket costs for avce, evauaton an marketng of te nventons) anamnstraton ncung mantenance of atabase system an IT nfrastructure.Toug avng starte out as a prvate offerng, te Founaton can be noaaysconsere a pubc servce as t s amost entrey pubcy fune by te Mnstryof Trae an Inustry.

Modes of operatonIn orer to aceve ts goas, te Founaton for Fnns Inventons tres to serve asa nk beteen nventors, nnovators, consumers, busnesses an nustry n Fnanor oter parts of te or on a matters reate to settng up of prouctonfactes, censng actvtes or any oter means of expotng an nventon. In tscontext, te foong servce eements can be stnguse:

• Advice and evaluation concerning nventons (an mportant servce par especay t respect to nventons of prvate nvuas an mcroenterprses)

• Financial support (rsk inancng, grants an oans).

• Support by pro-actively marketing and commercialising inventions:Te Founatonrecty contacts companes by e-ma, by pone or personay an offersnventons tey ave prevousy fune to te contacte irms for

commercazaton. In aton, te Founaton partcpates n fars, often ncooperaton t te T&E Centres an te Natona Boar of Patents anRegstraton of Fnan. Te servce staff tus proactvey seeks to searc for Fnns an/or or foregn partners for ter customers (“matcmakngfuncton”).

• Expert advice through cooperation with other IPR support giving institutions: Patent attorneys are sometmes use as experts an gve, for exampe, ecturesn semnars organse by te Founaton. Te Founaton aso eps nventorsto gan funng from oter sources, f neee (referra an avsoryactvtes).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 226 17-01-2008 11:11:29



227

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

• Dissemination of information on inventions and license opportunities: Informationon inventions and innovations is activey disseminated to the media, inseminars and by participating in reevant trade fairs. The Foundation aso hasits own “marketpace” in the internet (www.nventonmarket.i). Tere, ne

nventons an busness eas are presente to ntereste partes for commercazaton. A nventons are inance by te Founaton for FnnsInventons. Te eas are te property of te nventors an nventngcompanes, st, an are ony markete t te support or funng from teFounaton.

• Legal and other assistance n censng negotatons an preparatoryagreements;

• Organisation of (awareness raising) campaigns (for exampe “Keks ja Tee”,c seects one regon n Fnan n a gven pero of tme ere t tres tose/cense nventons specicay to companes n te regon);

• Te “Venture Cup” s a busness pan competton tat eps stuents,researcers an oters to take ter busness ea from concept to actua start-up. Te Venture Cup motvates partcpants to eveop ter eas by ans-on

coacng an feeback as e as troug nspratona events an orksops.Founatons representatves act as experts n oca evauaton jures;

• Te operaton of a prototype workshop, a combne aboratory facty for supporte nventors.

In te foong, some of te fferent eements of te servce sa be escrbe nmore eta:

The prototype workshop

Ts very unque servce eement can be best escrbe as a aboratory facty for nventors. At te founaton’s premses at Innopo, nventors can ra on expertservces to prouce observaton moes an eveop, bu an test prototypes.Ts orks n suc a ay tat te experts bu te prototype on beaf of te SMEs– te SMEs temseves o not ave rect access to ab factes. Te esgns anbueprnts of te prototype are jonty eveope by Founaton personne an te

nventors n a conienta manner. hoever, t s aso possbe to test ancommsson te prototypes t support from te Founaton eseere – for exampe, at nsttutes of tecnoogy.

In 200, 14 nventons ere eveope n te prototype orksop. Te costs are,as a rue, ae to te support funng (see beo) receve. Toug teFounaton staff an te nventor coaborate cosey on te nventon, t s guaran-tee tat te nventor o a rgts to s/ers nventon a te tme.

Financial support

Funng n te form of rsk inance s prove by te founaton for teeveopment of nventons for prvate nventors an SMEs. Coateras are notrequre for ts type of inancng actvty, an te money oes not ave to be paback uner certan crcumstances (e.g., f te nventon fas commercay). Inaton, te payback sums are usuay ony to cover te costs of te Founaton

– no atona nterest s carge. Per nventon, te subsy generay varesbeteen € 2,000 an € 200,000. Te ger subses are ece on an pa outn severa nstaments (oever, te oe subsy as to be pa out tn tree

years after a postve funng ecson). Te tota funng voume for subsesamounte to € 2.1 mo n 200.

In orer to be egbe for inanca support, an nventon as to meet severarequrements: It sou be usabe, ne an nvove an nventve step–n oter ors, ts patentabty s beng cecke for. Furtermore, t sou ave enougmarket potenta n orer to emonstrate a reasonabe probabty tat teFounaton get ts a out funs back.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 227 17-01-2008 11:11:29



228


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



In the year 200, the Foundation accepted 136 new invention proposas for funding and decided to continue funding of another 11 aready running projects.Thus, in tota 21 undertakings were given one of three possibe types of subsidies:

• Grants: About 14 % of the funded projects were given so-caed grants. Thistype of subsidy aims at covering the eary costs of the deveopment of aninvention. Funding decisions are made rather quicky on the basis of theinnovativeness, technica functionaity and economica evauation of theinvention proposa. The inventor has to suppy the Foundation with a writtenreport on the use of the funds but there is no refund obigation.

• Support funding: Support funding is generay used for paying the costs reatedto patenting, ater-stage product deveopment and commerciaisation. Itincorporates a conditiona re-payment cause to the Foundation depending onthe success of the project and on the revenue received from it by the inventor.The amount to be refunded is imited to the amount of support granted by theFoundation, i.e. the subsidy is interest-free. If the invention fais to achievecommercia success, the inventor is under no obigation to pay the subsidy

back. In the year 200, 116 “support funds” (or 8 % of the tota positivefunding decisions) were awarded, making this instrument the most importantone among the inanca subsy nstruments.

• Loan: If te nventor starts a busness t te centra objectve of expotngan nventon nustray an commercay, te Founaton can en tenventor-entrepreneur orkng capta n te nta stages of commercasatonof te nventon project. In te year 200, ony one suc oan as aare.Te oan s aare soey to sma companes (not prvate nventors). Usuayte oan s use for te irst proucton runs. Toug te terms of payment arenvuay negotate, te preferenta nterest rate appe (oans are teony subsy nstrument ere nterest rates are appe) s te same for abeneicares.

wt respect to funng of patentng costs, some ponts seem noteorty: Usuay,te patentng process starts t omestc patentng (costs n te irst year arebeteen € 3,000 an € 6,000). Te next step ou be a PCT appcaton cTe next step ou be a PCT appcaton ccosts about € 6,000 to € 7,000. Later n te PCT pase, costs e.g. for transatons€ 6,000 to € 7,000. Later n te PCT pase, costs e.g. for transatons6,000 to € 7,000. Later n te PCT pase, costs e.g. for transatons€ 7,000. Later n te PCT pase, costs e.g. for transatons7,000. Later n te PCT pase, costs e.g. for transatonsare ncurre c amount to up € 20,000.-, epenng on te number of countres protecton s sougt for. Te Founaton may subsze eac of teseFounaton may subsze eac of tesemay subsze eac of tesepases, but funng ecsons are mae separatey an epen on ncreasngrequrements trougout te patentng process regarng te commercazatonpossbtes. For te 2n pase, te PCT appcaton, te Founaton ear teFounaton ear te ear teopnon of te Fnns patent autortes about te probabe success of teappcaton. In ater pases, te Founaton ony forar subses f teFounaton ony forar subses f te ony forar subses f tenventon as extremey cear-cut cances of success n foregn markets an/or f te nventor s negotatng censng agreements. Even ten, te Founaton oesFounaton oesoesnot necessary fun te appcaton for every country te cent s seekng protectonfor. “Support funng” s avaabe aso for IP rgts oter tan patents (e.g., utty

moes) but usuay oter IPR nstruments are consere ess n funng ecsons.Te money forare s transferre recty to te nventor’s/company’s account.to te nventor’s/company’s account.


In terms of quaty assurance mecansms, tree user surveys ere carre out nte past ten years. Te resuts ncate tat te mage of te Founaton s tat of a reabe an customer freny organsaton. Te g competence of te staff asunerne, as as aso te quaty of genera avce gven t regar to patents.

weaker ponts seem to be te tme t funng ecsons are reace (2 monts onaverage), an tere aso seems to exsts some unmet eman for avce onmarketng an more genera commercasaton nees. Some of te customerstnk tat tere sou be more veponts consere en evauatng te market

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 228 17-01-2008 11:11:29



229

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

potentia for an invention (e.g., end user opinions). A forma evauation of thefoundation was commissioned in 2006; resuts shoud be avaiabe by the end of 2007.

With respect to evauations it is aso worthy to note that an internationa evauation

group evauated Finnish invention activities as a whoe in 1998. The study asocovered the Foundation’s performance and stated that the Foundation is animportant payer in the Finnish innovation poicy andscape. It especiay highightedthe fact that the Foundation provides some unique services, and made further positive remarks with regard to its sgnicant roe for prvate nventors an smacompanes an ts goo netorkng performance. Last but not east, a user surveyas aso conucte for te Founaton’s on pubse nespaper n 200. Onemportant outcome as te esre to rea more about success stores.

Te foong performance igures ere prove by te Founaton for FnnsInventons for te bencmarkng stuy:

• Te Founaton ane approxmatey 20,000 nformaton requests byprospectve nventors (SMEs an prvate nvuas) n 200.

• 802 funng appcatons ere receve n te year 200 an 21 of tose

receve a postve response, .e. tey got fune. Ts means tat ony about27 % actuay pass a crtera for funng – an ncator for a seectveproceure an a rater g quaty of te supporte projects.

• 41 projects ere commercase n 200. Most of tese projects appe for inanca assstance concernng patents. Assumng tat te number of funeprojects remans constant over some pero of tme, ts ou ncate tatfor about 19 % of te supporte projects patentng becomes an ssue.

• Estmates so tat about af of te appcatons, subsse projects ansubsse patent appcants stem form prvate nvuas/nventors, an teoter af from SMEs.

• Te average amount of subsy as € 10,000.

• Most nventons ere reate to te ie of pyscs (17 %).

•

Snce 1971, about 2,200 patents ave been grante t support from tsservce.

• In terms of pro-actve contactng, 171 organsatons (mosty SMEs) erecontacte an 32 nventons ere offere to tem. 104 vsts ere mae for ts purpose on ste.

Performance ncators measurng te eve of ffuson of nformaton to te targetgroup reporte are:

• Mea Cppngs: Te founaton as been mentone 14 tmes n te mea(nespapers, magaznes an rao/TV)

• ht rates: Te ebste of te founaton a a t rate of 127,000 n 200.

• Crcuaton voumes: A founaton nespaper s pubse one tme a year,t a yeary crcuaton voume of 3,000 (c s rater g)

Toug IP protecton metos oter tan patents an IP-reate commercasatonactvtes (especay censng actvtes) can be consere mportant n te servcecontext, igures to ts en ave not been mae avaabe. Te Founaton stressestat te mportant part of te servce s not a focus on patents, but to be abe toep nventors an sma SMEs n te best possbe ay. Ts rater broa approacon te usage of fferent IP nstruments can be certany consere an eement of goo practce.


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 229 17-01-2008 11:11:30



230


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D




In the course of the user survey, 12 private inventors and 37 users from SMEs wereinterviewed. The incusion of private inventors was done in order to anaysewhether it is feasibe to incude SMEs and private inventors in one target group and

treat them both aike or, aternativey, whether both groups have different needsand perceptions of the services which shoud be accounted for. One hypothesisregarding private inventors in this context coud be that they might be futurefounders of successfu start-ups and therefore worthwhie to foster. On the other hand, private inventors are often associated with peope working on commerciayuseess inventions just for the fun of inventing – in such a case extending supportwoud be hard to argue for.

Within the group of the interviewed SMEs around 98 % empoy ess than 9empoyees and are thus micro-enterprises; the remaining companies have at most10 to 49 empoyees. A focus of the Foundation on very sma organisationa sizes(even in the group of SMEs) is thus apparent.

Between 2003 and 200, 60 % of the SME users introduced product innovations(new or signiicanty mprove proucts) onto te market; an aroun 3 % came

up t process nnovatons. As can bee seen from Grap 126, a g number of enterprses ere engage n nnovaton actvtes across a number of mentonecategores. Aroun 6 % of te servce users from SMEs conucte ntramuraR&d. On average, about 84 % of te staff orks n R&d. Te prvate nventors

Graph 126 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–Innovaton actvtes n ntervesampe, 2005, percentage of respondents*), SME users

6559

46

5168

54 54

0

20

40

60

80

100


&







e q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g



D e s i g n



%


Graph 127 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–Usage of dfferent servceprovders by SMEs, percentage of respondents*), SME users

46

8

38

14 163

46

51

41

2230

23

386

0

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 230 17-01-2008 11:11:31



231

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

questioned see themseves as highy innovative, too, and stated for the most part(11 out of 12 responses) that they are engaged in R&D.

Users from SMEs take most frequenty advantage of the service offerings of nationaagencies and the patent ofice (see Grap 127). Interestngy, founaton users

utse more often te servces of externa consutants tan tose of patent attorneys– inngs t oter servces ou on one an ncate tat externa consutantspay ess of a roe n overa nnovaton support, e patent attorneys are amongte servce provers c are use te most. At te same tme, SME users of teFounaton often take avantage of te servces of te patent ofice.

Regarng amperng factors for nnovaton actvtes, companes companemosty about g nnovaton costs (for 62 % of g an for furter 22 % of meum reevance), economc rsks (for 9 % of g an 22 % of meumreevance) an te ack of approprate sources of inance (of g reevance for 49 %, meum for 24 %, see Grap 128). Te statements gven by te prvatenventors so a smar pcture. Tese inngs are very muc n ne t oter support servces offere n te ie of IPR.

Graph 128 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*), SME users

62 5949

14 11 822

3 5

22 22

24

41

22 22

16 8

5

0

20

40

60

80

100

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s


F i n a n

c e

L a c k o f m a r k

e t

i n

f o

C l i e

n t

r e s p o n s i v e n e

s s

L a c k

o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n

e l

R e g u l a t i o n s

&

s t a n d a r

d s

L a c k

o f

t e c h n o l o g y i n

f o

O r g a n i s a t i o n

a l

i s s u

e s


%


Graph 129 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–IP protecton methods empoyedby servce users, 2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*), SMEusers

92

54

22

43

1419

81

30

76

22

0

20

40

60

80

100






m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 231 17-01-2008 11:11:33



232


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



92 % of the SME users stated that they ie for a patent beteen 2003 an 200(see Grap 129). 4 % a patents grante or va n te same tme pero. Teusage rates of nforma protecton metos ere aso rater g – .e. trae secretsan/or secrecy agreements (81 %) or reyng on ea tme avantage (76 %). Agan,

t can be seen tat SMEs usuay o not rey on one snge IP protecton metoen t comes to securng an usng ter nteectua property. Furtermore, t canbe suspecte – gven te g sare of patents ie – tat te Founaton usersntervee ere probaby a n ater commercasaton pases of ter projects.Fnngs t prvate nventors so a smar pcture: A a ie for a patentbeteen 2003 an 200 an mae aso use of nforma protecton metos.

Te by far most mportant nterna barrer for usng IPR metos s, for te users fromSMEs, te costs of IP protecton (for 38 % of g, for 3 % of o reevance). Cost/beneit conseratons (.e. te queston on y or y not to patent) pay anmportant roe, too. Aareness seems to be aso an ssue, but for most ony of meumreevance. Te ansers of prvate nventors are agan very smar (see Grap 130).

Externa barrers, suc as te ack of accessbty (for 11 % of g an 16 % of meum reevance) an te ack of quaty of avaabe externa support servces (for

11 % of g an % of meum reevance) are not perceve to be too muc of a probem by te founaton usng SMEs.

Graph 130 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–(Interna) barrers to usng IPprotecton mechansms, percentage of respondents*), SME users

38

516 1111

3

8

35

35 1616

27 1114

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o f I P

p r o t e c t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

u n c l e a r



T i m e t o m a k e


w o r k

L a c k o f i n f o

o n I P

p r o t e c t i o n

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l


i s s u e s


i n b u s i n e s s

c o n t e x t


%


Graph 131 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–Informaton channes, by hchusers got to kno about the servce, percentage of respondents*),SME users

44

2519

25 25

64

14

28

47

110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

I n t e r n e t

N e w s l e t t e r



G e n e r a l

n e w s p a p e r


j o u r n a l

P e r s o n a l



C o m m e r c i a l

b a n k s

A g e n c y

F f F I i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 232 17-01-2008 11:11:34



233

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S


Information about the service seems to have been spread widey through manychannes. Notwithstanding this, the most important source from which SME usersfound out about the service were persona recommendations (64 % of the users

heard about the foundation through this channe); amost haf of the users gotknowedge about the service from the foundation itsef. No distinctivey differentpicture was found for private inventors (see Graph 131).

Users from SMEs are, on average, rather satsie t te servces offere by teFounaton. As can be seen from Grap 132, a aspects (every tme, tecompetence of staff, te reevance of te prove nformaton, etc.) are graet “2.0” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie) to 4 (unsatsie). Aroun70 % conser te extent of te servce offerngs to be aequate – on te oter se, te sare of users (30 %) o tnk t’s too narro/superica s asoconserabe. Furtermore, 3 % conser te amnstratve burens as acceptabee 17 % beeve tey are too g.

Spata stance seems not to be a probem for te users from SMEs (for 73 % avery o-eve barrer an for anoter 22 % a factor consere to be acceptabe).

78 % tnk tat te beneits of usng ts servce ceary outeg te efforts; 16 %state tat te beneits are aequate to efforts.

Graph 132 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–Satsfacton eves th dfferentaspects of servce provson, arthmetc means of grades gven byrespondents, SME users

1,5

1,6

1,8

2,0

1,5

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



Graph 133 Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons–Addtonaty of the inancasubsdy, percentage of respondents, SME users

19%

19%

15%

19%

2%

26% Undertaking carried out without anychange/modification







01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 233 17-01-2008 11:11:35



234


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 134 Behavoura addtonaty of the Foundaton for Fnnsh Inventons,percentage of respondents*), SME users

8

14

14

14

19

19

22

24

27

51

62

62

68

76

-16

-8

-3

-3

-3

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80



Out-licensing

In-licensing


IPR training








General awareness

increased decreased

%


Graph 135 Key quaty factors for a servce such as the Foundaton for FnnshInventons, percentage of respondents*), SME users

27

32

54

57

59

59

62

68

76

81

81

86

32

35

32

32

30

32

11

19

19

19

16

14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance


Scope of service



Costs



("why/why notto patent")

Individual contact

Timely delivery


Comptence of Staff


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 234 17-01-2008 11:11:37



23

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Simiar to the users from SMEs, a rather arge share of private inventors tend toconsider the extent of the service offerings as too narrow/super ica, but most aresatsie n ts respect. Spata stance s for prvate nventors not a probem: 10out of 12 users conser t a o barrer. A prvate nventors questone agree tat

te beneits offere by te servce ceary outeg efforts.Addtonaty of the servce


Atonaty effects for te offere inanca assstance scemes seem to be rater g (see Grap 133). Accorng to te survey resuts, 26 % of te unertakngs of users from SMEs ou not ave been carre out tout support from te servce.On te oter an, 19 % ou ave carre out te unertakngs tout any

cange or moicaton.Te usage of te servce portfoo offere by te Founaton, from inanca supportto marketng an support n commercazaton of nventons, seems to avecange te treatment of many IPR-reate aspects by te servce utsng irms.Te most notabe canges took pace t respect to genera aareness on IPRssues an patent usage n te corporate IPR strategy (ncrease for 76 % an 68 %of te users, respectvey) (see Grap 134). Te Founaton can tus cam tat tsservces sgnicanty cange te atttue of ts SME customer base toars tecreaton of patents. Furtermore, patent an knoege management kno-oas ncrease conseraby. Interestngy, trae secrecy usage n te IPR strategyaso receve a ot more attenton – an ncaton tat te Founaton staff oes arater goo job n consutng t regar to genera IP management c oucover aso nforma protecton metos. Equay nterestng aganst te backgrounof te servces g focus on inng censees for ter nventors s, oever, asotat censng actvtes seem to ave ncrease ony for a sma sare of users.

Ientie by a g sare of users from SMEs, te most mportant eements of aservce portfoo comparabe to tat of te Founaton are te competence of staff cosey fooe by te ease of access an enticaton an tmey every (seeGrap 13). Informaton on fferent IP strateges (y or y not to patent) asaso consere to be one of te most mportant key factors. Interestngy, userssoe aso keen nterest n tecnca nformaton regarng IPR. Amnstratveefforts an spata stance receve te oest reevance igures. Prvate nventorssare te ves of te SMEs an seem to pace a ot of mportance on teexstence of nvua contacts.

As can be seen from te user survey resuts, prvate nventors an users from SMEsso very smar nees an ants regarng assstance t IPR ssues. despte tefferent caracterstcs, t seems tat targetng bot groups t one compreensveportfoo of support measures ou ork very e for a servce comparabe to teFounaton.

12.3 Elements of good practiceTe Founaton for Fnns nventons offers an ntegrate package of IPR servcesc exbt as oe te foong success factors (resp. eements of goopractse):

• Naton-e offere servces t regona outets (at/t reevantnsttutons);

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 235 17-01-2008 11:11:37



236


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



• Uniqueness: this refers especiay to the service eement of the prototypeworkshop;

• Competence of staff with detaied knowedge on a aspects regarding IPR; notactuay focussed on patents, but rather broad approach to IP protection;

• Far reaching and broad support for different stages of inventive activities(deveopment, ater commerciaisation) which underines the integrativecharacter of the service;

• Support for very sma SMEs AND private inventors (with the intent to pushindividuas more into commerciaising their ideas – an otherwise rather untapped territory);

• Existing evauation cuture, and stemming from this, customer-orientation (theservice eements do not seem to be rigid, but can be adapted and taioredeasiy to the needs of the supported persons);

• Restrictive seection criteria guarantee high-quaity projects;

• Strong networking and referra activities;

• Coverage of forma IPR as we as ess forma IP protection methods;

• Strong endowment with resources (inanca an uman).Some caenges for te servce reman:

• Tere s probaby a nee to ncrease furter netorkng, marketng actvtesan enrc te servces concernng te (not so muc patent reate) marketng/commercasaton of nventons (.e. t te Natona Boar of Patents, patentattorneys an TEKES, anoter Fnns Innovaton Agency), accorng toexperts;

• Strct rues en seectng prvate nventors for funng: A ot of ork goes ntote iterng process c may be too muc gven te possbe outcome;

• Some evence exsts tat tmey every mgt consttute an area for mprovement.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 236 17-01-2008 11:11:37



237

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S13. Promotion of Industrial

Property (by SEGAPI)

Country: Spain

Orgna tte:Fomento de a Propiedad Industria (by Servicio Gaegode Propiedad Industria (SEGAPI))

Target group: SMEsCoverage: Regiona (Autonomous Community of Gaicia)


Category*: TrainingCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/points


13.1 Promotion of Industrial Property (SEGAPI)in a nutshell

“Promoton of Inustra Property” (Fomento e a Propea Inustra) s an IPRsupport servce to promote te usage of IP among SMEs n te autonomouscommunty of Gaca. It can be seen as an exampe of o an IPR support servcecan aso ork n te regona context.

Te man objectves of te servce are:

• to ncrease IPR ings from te Gacan regon (as statstcs ave reveae tatrespectve IPR ings are beo te Spans average);

• to estabs an IP cuture among Gacan enterprses;• to furter strengten te roe of IPR as a compettve factor (agan, statstca

ata suggests tat Gacan SMEs are aggng ben companes n oter Spans regons en t comes to IPR usage);

Te servce s targete specicay at SMEs from a stnctve regon (Gaca),toug t oes not am expcty at any companes from a specic nustry or froma specic tecnoogy ie. Te companes actuay usng te servce beong to avarety of nustry sectors an tecnoogy ies, ereby no tecnoogy ie or nustry stans out n te user group.

A types of regstrabe IPR (patents, esgns, trae marks an utty moes) arecovere; oter IPR nstruments (e.g., non regstrabe IPR, nforma protectonpractces) are not specicay aresse. Furtermore, te servce targets tepases of researc on nnovatve projects an reate IPRs (pre-regstraton pase),te process of regstraton/eveopment of IPRs an aso te acquston of exstngIPR rgts. It oes not, oever, tacke te ssue of o to utze IPRs – a n a,

te servce s prmary an nstrument to get SMEs to better use te forma IPR sys-tem.

Te subsy programme starte n 200 as a poneer. No target igures ave beenset n 200. For te future, target igures may be ntrouce but, accorng toservce experts, ts s st ebate.


Te servce provng organsaton, te Inustra Property Servce of Gaca(Servco Gaego e Propea Inustra – SEGAPI) as estabse n Apr 2004an s toay run by te regona eveopment an funng agency “Gacan Boarof Innovaton, Inustry an Commerce“ (Conseera e Innovacon e nustra).Te servce s part of a pocy at regona eve an inance by te regonagovernmenta boy of Gaca.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 237 17-01-2008 11:11:37



238


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



During the set up of the service, a number of preparation activities were initiated,i.e. foresight exercises, exporation of user needs and the invovement of externaconsutants (i.e. the Institute of Industria Law of the University of Santiago –Gaicia). Moreover, SEGAPI entie an anayse smar ntatves tn ts

nearer geograpca negbouroo n orer to earn from oter programmesreate to IPR an offerng subses. SEGAPI aso ooke nto a programmempemente n Portuga for te promoton of R&d as e as at a specic IPRsupportng servce offere n te Spans Regon of Extremaura. In aton, ex-ante assessments for te pero 200–2006 (n co-operaton t a consutancycompany) ere carre out. Taken togeter, ts ponts to a rater torougpreparaton process.

Beses offerng subses for te regstraton of IPR, SEGAPI as aso estabseaccompanyng measures to prove assstance n ssues reate to IPRs – actvtesn ts respect ncue offerng nformaton on te proceures of IP regstraton,tecnoogy nformaton servces (researc on patent an utty moes), avce onega matters an aareness rasng actons focusse especay on SMEs. SEGAPIcoaborates actvey t te Spans PO by means of coectng IPR appcatonsan supportng users t ega proceures (ne appcatons, reneas, transfers,moicatons, etc.), anaysng te ocuments ane n by enterprses, provngega avce an tecnoogca nformaton. As a g number of Spans IPRnsttutons n autonomous communtes ke Gaca receve IPR appcatonsaresse to te Spans PO, some experts suggest tat SEGAPI amost acts ke anoutet of te Spans PO.

hoever, SEGAPI can aso refer ts users to oter, non-IPR reate servces tnte “Gacan Boar of Innovaton, Inustry an Commerce” c empaszes tentegratve nature of ts servce package. Te agency conssts of a number of genera ofices t fferent objectves suc as researc, eveopment annnovaton (R&d&I), nustra promoton, nformaton socety, nustry, energyan mnes, commerce an toursm. In partcuar, te genera ofice of R&d&I aseveope fferent subsy programmes ame at fosterng R&d&I actvtes (.e.Fomento e a nnovacón empresara (Support to Enterprse Innovaton)).

SEGAPI s operate by aroun 10 persons; to peope are soey responsbe for te“Promoton of Inustra Property” measure. Most of te staff possesses anavance knoege regarng IPR, some experts are experence engneers antrane n te ie of IPR. Externa consutants are nvove to te extent tat teyare subsse to execute patent searces, vabty stues etc. In 200, te bugetavaabe for funng actvtes (tout personne overeas) as € 300,000 anas oube to € 600,000 n 2006. Subses can ony be aare as ong as tebuget s not use up competey.

Regarng promotona actvtes, SEGAPI use a varety of cannes to ssemnatenformaton about te programme suc as te ebste of SEGAPI, pressavertsements, ectures e at IP conferences, communcaton t IP agencesoperatng n te regon, nformatve brocures evere to Gacan enterprses,etc.

Modes of operaton

Te programme supports SMEs an mcro-companes c are regstere nGaca an ave at east one proucton facty n ts autonomous communty. Itconssts bascay of a subsy c covers te foong areas:

• Te appcaton for, mantenance or transfer of tte of patents, nustraesgns an stnctve sgns, natonay or nternatonay;

• Reports over te tecnca state one pror to te appcaton for patents an/or utty moes (carre out by an externa consutancy);

• Reasaton of tecnca an economc vabty stues reate to teeveopment an commercasaton of an nventon or nustra esgn(carre out by an externa consutancy);

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 238 17-01-2008 11:11:37



239

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

• Estabishment of contractua reations with business partners for the industriadeveopment of an invention or industria design (with the support of anexterna consutancy).

The subsidy covers up to 70 % of the costs (60 % in case of big enterprises) with

a ceiing of € 36,000 (2006; 200: € 30,000). Once the subsidies are granted, theservice providing organisation wires the sum directy to accounts of the beneicares.Even f externa consutants are nvove n te process, te subsy s inaygrante to te beneitng SMEs.


Regarng exstng quaty assurance mecansms, a montorng system smpemente c s base on a atabase of appcaton forms. Monty, eekyan at tmes ay cecks are beng mae to see eter tere s enoug bugeteft an n orer to anayse te types of appcatons receve. As a consequence,sgt aaptatons ave been ntrouce to mprove or exten te servce. In teatter context, te buget as for exampe extene from 200 to 2006.Furtermore, once te Spans PO pubses te annua statstcs on InustraProperty n Span, SEGAPI anayses te evouton of IPR regstres n Gaca as e

as te possbe mpact of ter subses on tat evouton. In aton to ts, anevauaton s currenty uneray.

Te take-up of te servce n ts irst operatona year can be consere to be rater goo. Te foong overve summarzes te 200 resuts:

• Number of applications filed: 33; 31 ere soey from SMEs (2 fromnvuas);

• Number of applications granted: 14 out of 33. It sou be note tat eacappcaton for a subsy mgt ncue fferent expenses to be covere;terefore, a snge appcaton for funng mgt ncue to appcatons for traemark or tree esgn reneas, for nstance;

• Total amount of subsidized IPR activities: 370, tereof…

· … 19 ne patents ere ie an grante t support from ts servce;

· … 288 oter IP rgts (traemarks, esgns, etc.) ere ney regsteret subsy support from SGEAPI); 67 out of te 288 ere nternatonaregstratons;

· … 63 oter IPR actvtes ere performe (mosty reate to mantenance,transfer, tecnoogca nformaton or feasbty pans, etc.).

Regstraton actvtes emanatng from Gaca (measure as te amount of appcatons regstere) ncrease by 21.34 % n 200 compare to te prevous

year, ereas te average grot rate for Span amounte to +4.61 %. hoever,no anayss s avaabe to so o muc SEGAPI paye a roe n ts context.

In tota, 3 avertsement campagns ere execute urng 200. 1 events ereparty co-organze (tere ere ectures e at IP conferences), attene byapproxmatey 20 peope per event. Overa, about 2,00 SMEs ere approacen 200 n one ay or te oter.



As part of te bencmarkng stuy, 3 SMEs ere subjecte to a user survey ccecke for user satsfacton an te mpact te servce a on te utsngcompanes. Te strbuton of te user sampe sos tat te servce targetsmosty sma enterprses (83 %) t ess tan 0 empoyees (see Grap 136).

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 239 17-01-2008 11:11:38



240


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 136 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–Company szedstrbuton n nterve sampe, 2005, percentage of respondents

40%

43%

17%



Graph 137 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–Usage of dfferent servceprovders by SMEs, percentage of respondents*)

819

81

22

4

0

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


Graph 138 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*)

68

40 34

15 15 17 136

19

30

13

2815 11 13

21 112

0

20

40

60

80

100

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s


F i n a n c e

L a c k o f

q u a l i fi e d

p e r s o n n e l

C l i e n t



s t a n d a r d s


i s s u e s


i n f o

L a c k o f



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 240 17-01-2008 11:11:39



241

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Like with other services anaysed in the scope of the underying study, service usersseem to be highy innovative: Around 3 % of the service users introduced new or sgnicanty mprove proucts onto te market beteen 2003 an 200, 4 %ere abe to ntrouce process nnovatons n te same tme frame. hoever, ony

a fe servce users conucte ntramura R&d, compare to oter users of IPRsupport measures. It seems tat cassca R&d pays a ess mportant roe tn tesurveye companes c s aso empasse by a reatve o percentage of staff engage n R&d (17 % on average). Ts may be seen as a irst ncaton tatSEGAPI users may stem from Lo- an Meum Tec (LMT) nustres, an onecou ascertan tat tey ou tus focus more on ncrementa nnovaton tanraca ones; foong ts reasonng one mgt suspect tat patents pay ess of aroe n te SEGAPI context – a ypotess c s substantate furter (seebeo).

SEGAPI patent promoton users utse most frequenty te servces offere byregona agences. As one may guess, te use regona support as most keySEGAPI tsef (see Grap 137). On te oter an an very surprsng, no centmae use of any support from patent attorneys or externa consutants. Ts seems,at irst sgt, surprsng as externa consutants are often argey nvove n teprogramme (e.g., to execute patent searces) an sou be tus vsbe to teenterprses. hoever, te statements receve by te responents mpy tat manyof te surveye enterprses ve SEGAPI as te servce provng nsttuton.

As regars factors amperng nnovaton actvtes, te users compane mostyabout g nnovaton costs (for 68 % of g an for furter 19 % of meumreevance), economc rsks (for 40 % of g an 30 % of meum reevance) aninanca sources assocate t nnovaton projects (for 34 % of g an 13 % of meum reevance) (see Grap 138). By contrast, te ack of quaie personne,reguatons an stanars, cent responsveness or organsatona ssues areconsere ess mportant. Tese inngs are aso n ne t tose from oter servces anayse n te scope of te uneryng bencmarkng stuy.

Regarng te metos of IPR-protecton, most users (92 %) regstere trae marksbeteen 2003 an 200 fooe by ings for patents (32 %); aroun 26 %

areay a a patent grante or va n tat tme pero (see Grap 139).Interestngy, nforma protecton metos are not so muc on te agena of SEGAPI users – at east not conscousy. Te g sare of trae marks ncates, nne t te rater o R&d actvtes, tat te companes may be nee esstecnoogy orente. Accorng to te servce prover, most of te surveye

Graph 139 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–IP protecton methodsempoyed by servce users, 2003 to 2005, percentage of respondents*)

3226

17

92

8 820

20

40

60

80

100

P a t e n t s fi l e d





m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 241 17-01-2008 11:11:40



242


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



enterprises were sma sized and mainy invoved in trade mark registration for marketing purposes.

For the SEGAPI patent promotion users, the costs of IP protection (for 2 % of highand for another 32 % of medium reevance) are the main barrier perceived for

using IPR. The ack of quaie personne (for 23 % of g, an for 11 % of meum reevance) an genera aareness ssues are aso consere mportant(see Grap 140). Externa barrers are perceve to be rater arge obstaces: teack of nformaton on avaabe support servces (g reevance for 38 %, meumfor 19 %) an te ack of accessbty (for 30 % of g an 9 % of meumreevance) are consere to be a probem. Te quaty of te avaabe externasupport servces (for 8 % of g an 11 % of meum reevance) seems to be, nturn, not an ssue.

Accorng to te ntervee experts, te ack of pubc aareness of te servce sargey ue to ts sort operaton story. Base on anecota evence, mostregona SMEs are smpy not yet aare of te servce’s exstence.


Users got to kno about te SEGAPI patent promoton many from consutants

(80 %) an from nformaton on te nternet (23 %). Furtermore, ony fecompanes got to kno about te servce from te servce provng organsaton

Graph 140 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–(Interna) barrers tousng IP protecton mechansms, percentage of respondents*)

25

19

23 23

13 9 9 8

32

17 11 9

911 9 4

0

20

40

60

80

C o s t s o f I P

p r o t e c t i o n

T i m e t o m a k e


w o r k

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

A w a r e n e s s

L a c k o f i n f o

o n I P

p r o t e c t i o n


i n b u s i n e s s

c o n t e x t


i s s u e s

u n c l e a r




%


Graph 141 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–Satsfacton eves thdfferent aspects of servce provson, arthmetc means of gradesgven by respondents

1,5

1,5

1,3

1,2

1,5

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 242 17-01-2008 11:11:41



243

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

itsef (4 %); no user received information about the service from an agency. Theseresuts may point to areas of improvement regarding pubic reations and showsopportunities for marketing activities.

The service users were, on average, very satsie t te servce: a aspects (te

competence of staff, te quaty an reevance of te prove nformaton, etc.)are grae t “1.” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie) to 4 (unsatsie)(see Grap 141). In aton, aroun 9 % conser te extent of te servceofferngs to be aequate; 1 % beeve tat te amnstratve effort to use teservce s qute o – for 43 % at east acceptabe.

Spata stance (for 8 % a very o-eve barrer an for anoter 37 % a factor consere to be at east acceptabe) oes not seem to be a probem, c s notsurprsng for a servce offere on a regona eve. For aroun 70 % of te users,te beneits of usng ts servce ceary outeg te efforts.

Graph 142 SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property–Addtonaty of theinanca subsdy, percentage of respondents

32%

26%

24%

9%

9%



Undertaking carried to a smaller scope (e.g. less geographicalcoverage)





Graph 143 Behavoura addtonaty of the SEGAPI Promoton of IndustraProperty servce, percentage of respondents*)

2

2

4

6

6

6

6

8

15

23

47

-4

-2

-2

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

Out-licensing


In-licensing



IPR training







General awareness


increased decreased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 243 17-01-2008 11:11:42



244


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D




In order to answer the question whether a support service works or does not work,one shoud inquire into the added vaue of the service – i. e., what woud havehappened in case the service were absent. This is done in order to isoate a “net

positive effect” as opposed to things which woud have happened anyway, despiteof the service. Simiary, aso other types of changes incurred within the enterprise,as a resut of using the service, are to be recorded (these types of changes arereferred to as “behavioura additionaity”).

The subsidy has achieved rather ow additionaity effects, which might be expainedby the focus on trade marks: Trade mark appications are much ess costy thanpatent appications, and the cost barrier tacked by subsidies is thus not as high aswith patents. Around 9 % of the undertakings woud not have been carried out ata in the absence of support from the service. In addition, 24 % woud have beencarried out but to a smaer scope, another 26 % of the enterprises surveyed woudhave carried out their undertakings at a ater stage. Around 32 % woud havecarried out their IP-reated undertaking, regardess of the service (see Graph 142).

Bearing in mind that most of the subsidized IP actions in 200 were reated to the

registry of other forma IPR methods than patents (i.e. newy registered trademarks, designs, etc.), it seems not surprising that the most striking changes in theattitudes towards the protection of IPR concern the usage of trade marks andgenera IPR awareness. Very few behavioura aspects were recorded with respect toother IP protection and usage toos (see Graph 143). This is not per se a badexampe for SEGAPI, as the positive effects are sti in ine with the goas of theservice. It shows that a regiona initiative can have high effects in particuar seectedareas but that a arger more open service (covering e.g. aso informa protectionmethods) might be needed as a compementary offering on the nationa eve.

Graph 144 Key quaty factors for a servce such as SEGAPI Promoton of Industra Property, percentage of respondents*)

9

25

26

32

36

43

51

53

66

68

68

70

21

21

8

28

38

34

40

28

23

19

13

23

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance




Scope of service

Individual contact


Competence of Staff



Costs


Timely delivery


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 244 17-01-2008 11:11:43



24

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

Users were aso asked what they fet to be the most important eements of a servicesimiar to the SEGAPI offerings. Ease of access and enticaton (gven te fact tatmarketng st seems to be an area for mprovement), amnstratve efforts ancosts as e as tmey every ere consere as most mportant factors

contrbutng to te success of a servce ke SEGAPI. Interestngy, te competenceof te staff as aso consere mportant by most of te SMEs surveye, but tesare of users o put “g” reevance to ts aspect as ess tan t oter servces anayse n te scope of ts stuy (see Grap 144). Ts can be ue to tefocus on trae marks c may be consere easer to ane tan patents.


The service exhibits the following success factors(resp. good practice elements):

• Ceary state, very specic goas, offere n a regona context;

• Governance structure: Carefu pannng process an exstng evauaton

cuture;• Integraton nto a er range of IPR-reate servces; nteracton t genera

nnovaton support programmes;

• Referra actvtes to externa consutants (by subssng tem), en soutonsare neee tat cannot be suppe to SMEs recty;

• Unqueness: Ony servce of ts type n Gaca;

• Qute arge take up.

Te servce faces te foong caenges:

• Lo vsbty t ts target group, supposey ue to ts young age

• Accorng to te statements receve by programme oficas, arger companesare ncreasngy seen as a vabe target group, but aso prvate nvuas.Terefore, t seems tat te regona government s gettng more ntereste

not to aress SMEs ony. A step n ts recton as been taken n 2006, snceen subses ere aso offere on an expermenta bass to arger companes,but ony to cover expenses erve from te geograpca extenson of areayexstng IPR ttes.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 245 17-01-2008 11:11:43



BENCHMARKING NATIONAL AND REGIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR SMES IN THE FIELD OF INTE



247

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S14. Danish Patent and

Trademark Office (DKPTO)

Country: DenmarkOrgna tte: Patent- og VaremærkestyresenTarget group: A companiesCoverage: Nationa


Category*: Training

xCustomized in-depth consuting and advisory services/pointsFinance & Lega Framework


14.1 The Danish Patent Office SME services(DKPTO) in a nutshell

Te on-ne servces of te dans patent ofice an ter tranngs courses avebeen cosen for ustratng eements of goo practce regarng te creaton anmantenance of an IPR-reate ebste an te operaton of IPR eucatonameasures, bot from c SMEs can beneit to a arger proporton. Te servcepackage anayse enjoys a g reputaton nternatonay.34 It sou be mentone,n aton, tat te dKPTO offers aso oter servces from c SMERS coubeneit – t as, for exampe, aso eveope an IP too (“IP Score”) c s usefor vaung te IP of an enterprse; furtermore, te dKPTO s aso actveycooperatng t oter patent ofices an nternatona nsttutons t respect tofurter enancng an expanng ts servces. Tese actvtes sou be asomentone n more eta, too, as tey ustrate te beneits of an ntegrate

approac t g netorkng actvtes. Eventuay, te dKPTO s aso an exampeof o natona patent ofices are trvng to become fu-scae servce provers.

Te dans Patent Ofice (dKPTO) s te natona IPR competence centre for nformaton regarng IPR an te protecton of tecnoogy an kno-o. As agovernment agency, te dKPTO grants patents an regsters trae marks, uttymoes an esgns an offers a e range of servces tat assst busnesses toexpan ter nnovaton capacty. Te dKPTO sees tsef as a market- an customer-orentate nsttuton amng to support busnesses by offerng kno-o, guancean counseng en t comes to IPR.

Te man entry pont for a partes ntereste n IPR reate ssues s dKPTO’s ebste(. kpto.k) c proves an overve of a te servces, scemes anactvtes offere n a very etae manner (.e. content of te servce, antcpatebeneits, costs an every tme). Te most mportant goa of te dKPTO s to

ncrease aareness an unerstanng of IPR ssues among dans busnesses anoters ntereste n IPR-reate ssues. Furtermore, te dKPTO ams:

• to foster te eveopment, usage an protecton of knoege antecnoogy,

• to assst busnesses n usng IPR t a range of fferent support servces tostrengten ter nnovaton capabtes an compettveness on te natonaan nternatona market an

• to expan ts roe as te natona IPR competence centre n te future t team to encourage te eveopment of knoege an competences n te

34 see, for exampe, aso Moun & Tue 200

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 247 17-01-2008 11:11:44



248


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



ie of IPRs n co-operaton t reevant IP stakeoers an payers n tennovaton system.

Beses te above mentone ebste tere are aso oter nformaton servcesoffere, ncung brary an onne servces. Te dKPTO proves a varety of

commerca servces reate to IPR c ncue searces n fferent atabases onpatents, trae marks an esgns an tecnca surveances an proie anayses.In aton, varous courses t fferent foca ponts regarng IPR are offere toexterna ntereste partes. Accorng to te servce prover, commerca actvtesare mosty use by arger, foregn enterprses to support tem en ing a patent.Smaer ngenous companes, by contrast, use servces free of carge more fre-quenty.

Te dKPTO oes not ave an expct servce focus on SMEs but pays specaattenton to te nees of sma enterprses. Te servces are offere to companesof a szes an cover a pases of IPR usage. No restrctons are n pace for certannustres or tecnoogy ies. Experts note toug tat companes from teparmaceutca sector can generay be consere as te majorty of te overaservce users. Te servce s offere on a natona eve; most of te nformaton

actvtes, oever, are carre out on a regona bassBackground and resources

Estabse n 1894 an base n Taastrup, cose to Copenagen, te dKPTO s apubc agency operate uner te Mnstry of Economc an Busness Affars. Inaton to te grantng of patents, trae marks an utty moes, te dKPTOasssts companes by offerng kno-o an guance troug te fferent pasesof an nnovaton process, nformaton servces, ncung a brary, aarenessprogrammes an onne servces combne t nvua consutng on acompany’s strategy regarng IPR (IP Management). In orer to catc up t teatest eveopments n te IPR or, a servce offerngs an concepts are upateon a reguar bass to mantan te g quaty programme.

Te dKPTO s actve on an nternatona eve but aso experence n natona anregona cooperaton projects. In ts manner, te dKPTO orks n cose

coaboraton t oter pubc autortes (e.g. tecnoogy nformaton centres(TICs)) an co-operates, mosty project-base, t te prvate sector. Amng tofoster partnersps t eucatona boes, te dKPTO aso co-operates e.g. tte dans Tecnoogca Insttute promotng te “Entrepreneur-apprentce” anseeks to set up coaboraton ork t a busness scoo to create an IP researcenvronment to anayse te backgroun ben IP actvtes n genera. Referraactvtes by te dKPTO to suc autortes or nsttutons are key to occur.

In ts context, a feasbty stuy on te estabsment of a Jont Norc patentautorty uner te PCT (Patent Cooperaton Treaty) as been carre out n 2004.Te stuy ame to so o a cooperaton moe beteen patent ofices anoter IPR reate stakeoers n nvua Norc countres cou serve to promoteoca frameorks. Base on ts feasbty stuy, anoter stuy as carre out toscuss etae proposas for an enance Norc cooperaton n te patent ie,ncung te estabsment of a Norc Patent Insttute (NPI). hoever, negotatonson ts matter are st ongong. Te Norc Patent Insttute ams to be operatvefrom January 2008 on. By te en of 2006, te co-operaton patform consste of te patent ofices n denmark, Icean an Noray.

Aroun 270 empoyees operate te dKPTO. Te staff conssts of gy experencenustry or tecnoogy experts trane n IPR an reate ssues: amost 100 aresoey responsbe for patent examnatons, aroun 0 possess a ega backgrounan 30 are trae mark specasts. Te dKPTO sees tsef as a market-orenteservce prover an busness partner. In ts gt, t sou be empasse tat tedKPTO s not fune or subsze by te government but sef-inance from tsrevenues an expentures generate from operatng ts servces an troug tson consutng actvtes. In 2004, te tota ncome of te dKPTO as approxmatey

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 248 17-01-2008 11:11:44



249

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

€ 22.8 mio (DKK 169 mio); tota expenditure was around € 19.8 mio (DKK147.4 mio). Net proits for 2004 amounte to € 2.4 mo (dKK 18.1 mo).

Conserng te arge servce portfoo offere by te dKPTO, servce experts statetat tere are no crong out effects vsbe t respect to prvate servce

provers. In ts gt, some experts argue tat te dKPTO offers ony support nIPR ssues, .e. searces an anayses, but eaves t up to te companes to makeassessments out of t. Ts assures, as experts note, no conlct of nterest beteenbeng a servce prover an pubc autorty at te same tme.

Regarng marketng actvtes, a natona an nternatona nformaton nfrastructureas set up to ssemnate nformaton on te servce offerngs. Personarecommenatons an or-of-mout marketng s consere as on of te mostmportant pubc reatons toos. Furtermore, te servce s markete at conferences,nustry fars, troug nesetters an va rect ma. As servce experts note, tedKPTO s e aare of te mportance of meetng peope face-to-face to get tokno te nees an ants of te varous busnesses.

Modes of operaton

Te servce portfoo offere by te dKPTO ncues: 3

• Organsaton of aareness rasng measures an ntatves (.e. takng atconferences, ong ectures);

• dagnostc an vauaton toos, .e. searces on patents, trae marks anesgns, tecnca surveances an proie anayses; usng surveancemetos;

• Tranng sessons an semnars to scuss IPR ssues an IP pocy;

• Lega an oter assstance n censng negotatons.

durng te ast years, te dKPTO partcpate n a number of events, .e. te hI Far (Scannava’s argest trae far), an ntatves t te regona busness servcecentres to promote nnovaton, R&d an IPR ssues. Togeter t te nformatonservces an tranng courses, tese measures formuate mportant pars of teservce offerngs by te dKPTO. In te foong, te onne an softare base

servces an tranng courses are escrbe more n eta an aso be scussefurter n te user survey.

Online services and software tools

PVSonne s te nternet servce prove by te dKPTO. Ts servce aoseectronc access by subscrpton to ega rgts atabases an offers te possbtyto searc n patents, utty moes, esgns an trae marks. Te searc s free of carge an covers a arge number of IPR atabases. Moreover, an e-ing system soffere c accepts onne ings of trae marks. Regstraton an payment (bycret car) can be mae recty troug te ebste. In ts context, some servceexperts agree tat onne patent screenng requres certan kno-o regarng IP.It as been notce qute often tat companes turne to te dKPTO for epbecause tey experence probems t conuctng te onne-researc processon ter on.

In aton, te dKPTO eveope a patent atc system, IPsurvey™. Troug tssurveance system, te user s aoe to montor patent nformaton by settngup a searc proie coverng te tecnoogy areas n c e/se s ntereste. Ins persona atc atabase, te users can track reevant patent appcatons. Teservce s upate reguary t ne references. Te annua cost of IPsurvey™ sabout € 2,700 (VAT not ncue).

Beses te onne avaabe nformaton servce, te softare too IPscore® (Verson2.0 by te en of 2006) s offere c proves a toroug evauaton of patentsan tecnoogca eveopment projects. IPscore® focuses on ive categores (egastatus, tecnoogy, market contons, inance an strategy) an aks te

3 See aso: .kpto.k

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 249 17-01-2008 11:11:44



20


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



participant through around 40 assessment factors to identify the vaue of differentbusiness products and to deiver the basis for professiona IP-management. IPscorewi be deivered as a software package (CD-Rom) with a user’s manua; the costsfor the service pack amount to € 2,400.

It has to be mentioned, though, that the DKPTO hods the rights for IPscore® inDenmark but decided to assign internationa rights to the European Patent Ofice.

As experts state, te dKPTO fet ts step as mportant, snce te toos vauencreases t te amount of companes tat use t.

Trainings courses and seminars

Te dKPTO aso proves a arge number of targete IPR courses. Te varousepartments of te dKPTO sen ter experence personne to o semnars tote pubc n a e range of IPR reate areas, aso n IP management. hoever,te average course s a one-ay event, typcay about patents (at proucts canbe patente an o, genera ntroucton, assstance t patentabty evauatons,appcaton formuatons etc).

More tan 40 courses an semnars are offere every year. As te user group s veryeterogeneous, te dKPTO arranges customse courses an semnars. Apart from

companes tat seek knoege about IPR n reaton to ter proucts, tere areaso courses targetng IPR agences an patent agents. Aroun 9 % of te coursesare e at te dKTPO’s premses n Taastrup, Copenagen. At te en, te coursesare evauate by an evauaton too (cae ‘customer ogc’ from Anayse denmark).Servce experts report tat te overa feeback from partcpants s generay verygoo.


A number of nstruments an quaty assurance mecansms are n pace to furter ncrease eficency an servce quaty. Customer satsfacton, response tme anevery tme are bencmarke an anayse to mprove performance. In tscontext, te servce prover unernes especay te g eve of customer satsfacton evence n annua surveys. Te focus of te performance measuresseems to be on te core operatng ie of IPR ing an processng – nformaton

regarng te assessment an performance measurement of te oter servcesavaabe as, except for fact tat IPR courses are evauate usng te “customer ogc” too, not avaabe.

In 2004, te dKPTO processe aroun 2,000 dans patent appcatons, ,100appcatons ere ie n te ie of trae marks. By contrast, dans esgnappcatons ave seen a steay ecne urng te ast years (2002: 2,100appcatons; 2004: 700 appcatons). As te 2004 Annua Report of te dKPTOoutnes, ts eveopment s bascay ue to te fact tat companes cose to usene possbtes of appyng for a esgn protecton offere at European evenstea of ing t te dKPTO ony.

As te dKPTO operates uner te auspces of te dans Mnstry of Economcs anBusness Affars, te dKPTO s requre to carry out performance measurementsc enta assessments of suc targets as processng tme for patent appcatons

an trae marks regstratons. In 2006, te processng tme for patent appcatonsas consere to be “satsfactory” by te users, as aroun 96 % of te appcatonsere processe tn te eine tme mt. On te oter an, users rate teprocessng tme for trae mark regstraton n 2006 as “not satsfactory” as amost30 % of te appcatons ere not processe tn te tme mt. Base on oficanformaton from te dKPTO, te atter resut as ue to nterna reorgansatonprocesses.

dKPTO’s ebste s consere to be a man entry pont for customers t montyt rates rangng to 120,000 ts. In aton, t s estmate tat te dKPTOanes about 10 teepone nqures ay.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 250 17-01-2008 11:11:45



21

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S14.2 The user’s view

In order to get an idea on how the service is perceived by its users and customers,a user survey was carried out in the scope of the underying benchmarking study,the resuts of which are presented beow. The focus of the survey ied on users thatmade use of the website or have attended an IPR course.


In tota, 3 users were surveyed about their experiences with the DKPTO: 2 madeuse of the speciaized IP courses, 10 took advantage of the PVSonine eectronicaccess service. Thus, for the accuracy and cosure of the survey, these service userswere spit into two groups and anaysed separatey. However, considering the smauser sampe size, care has to be taken when interpreting resuts.

As can been seen from Graph 14, users/attendants of the IP course are spread veryeveny across a company sizes; 27 % had aso more than 249 empoyees. Bycontrast, haf of the questioned PVSonine users are micro-enterprises with ess than9 empoyees. Service experts conirm ts user-take up as representatve.

Beteen 2003 an 200, IP course users/attenants ere very nnovatve: aroun

92 % ntrouce ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts onto te market; moretan 60 % came up t process nnovatons. 96 % of te IP course users/attenants conucte ntramura R&d, 88 % ere engage n tranng actvtes

Graph 145 DKPTO–Company Sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe, 2005,percentage of respondents*), IP course users

9%

32%

32%

27%



Graph 146 DKPTO–Innovaton actvtes n nterve sampe, 2005, percentageof respondents*), IP course users

63

8379

38

54

88

96

0

20

40

60

80

100


&







e q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g



D e s i g n



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 251 17-01-2008 11:11:46



22


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



(see Graph 146). In addition, about 4 % of the staff works in R&D. PVSonineusers were innovative as we: 8 out of 10 deivered product innovations tocustomers; 7 users deveoped process innovations.

IP course users/attendants most frequenty take advantage of the service offerings

of patent attorneys and, not surprisingy, the patent ofice tsef (see Grap 147).Te g usage of patent attorneys seems not surprsng f te g sare of argecompanes s taken nto conseraton. havng sa tat, te prevaence of patentattorneys as servce provers ponts to te mportant roe tey pay n te contextof IPR servce provson.

Interestngy, te servces offere by externa consutants ere use very oftenbeteen 2003 an 200. Amost te same resuts ere foun for te PVSonneusers, ere te usage of patent attorneys an te dKPTO stan out.

Some IP course users/attenants experence amperng factors for nnovatonurng 2003 to 200, mosty companng about economc rsks (for 40 % of gan for furter 12 % of meum reevance), g nnovaton costs (for 36 % of gan 12% of meum reevance) an sources of inance (g reevance for 32,meum for 16 %; see Grap 148). Even toug te IP course inngs are n ne

t te resuts from smar servce offerngs, te g sare of arge companes nte user sampe sou be consere. Amost te same resuts ere foun for

Graph 147 DKPTO–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of respondents*), IP course users

116

12

43

62

41

15 20

37

24 12

29

14

27

30 20

0

20

40

60

80

100

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


Graph 148 DKPTO–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005,percentage of respondents*), IP course users

40 36 32

12 8 4 4 4 4

1212 16

2420

16 16 16 12

0

20

40

60

80

100


I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s

F i n a n c e


i n f o

L a c k o f

q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

C l i e n t


L a c k o f



i s s u e s


s t a n d a r d s


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 252 17-01-2008 11:11:47



23

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

PVSonine users; ony reguations and standards were considered to be even moreimportant (for 3 out of 10 users of high, for 2 of medium reevance).

Regarding the methods of IPR-protection, most IP course users/attendants (72 %)ie for a patent beteen 2003 an 200; 32 % areay a a patent grante or

va (see Grap 149). 60 % of te users state tat tey use trae marks toprotect ter IPR. On te oter an, some enterprses aso empoye nforma IPRprotecton metos, .e. trae secrets an/or secrecy agreements (60 %) or reeon ea tme avantage (32 %). For te PVSonne users, smar resuts ere foun:6 out of 10 ie for patents; aso 6 utse trae marks as a protecton meto.Some enterprses o use PVSonne state tat tey empoy aso nformaprotecton mecansms; 6 out of 10 focuse on a compettve ea tmeavantage.

For te IP course users/attenants, genera aareness ssues (for 24 % of g, anfor 16 % of meum reevance) an cost/beneit conseratons (g reevance for 20 %, meum for 24 %) are perceve to be te man nterna barrers for usngIPR (see Grap 10). Except organsatona ssues an uman resources, acategores ere consere reevant for a tota of 30 % an more. Conserng

tese inngs, a broaer IPR management counseng cou ep to oer tesebarrers. For te PVSonne users, cost ssues an te tme to make te IP protectonork ere consere to be reevant.

Graph 149 DKPTO–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents*), IP course users

72

3224

60

1624

60

2432

80

20

40

60

80

P a

t e n

t s f i l e d

P a

t e n

t s v a

l i d

a n

d / o r g r a n

t e d

D e s i g n p a

t t e r n s

a n

d / o r u

t i l i t y

m o

d e

l s

T r a

d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g

h t s

D e

f e n s i v e

P u

b l i s h i n g

T r a

d e

s e c r e

t s / s e c r e c y

a g r e e m e n

t s

D e s i g n

c o m p

l e x

i t y

L e a

d - t i m

e

a d v a n

t a g e

N o

d e

l i b e r a

t e

I P R s t r a

t e g y

%

mutpe ansers aoe. Source: User Survey, n = 2

Graph 150 DKPTO–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*), IP course users

20 2412 16 12 16

4 4

24 1628 20 24 12

12 8

0

20

40

60

80

100

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o

f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

A w a r e n e s s

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n


t

i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x

t

L a c

k o

f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e

l

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a

l

i s s u e s


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 253 17-01-2008 11:11:48



2

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

The IP course offered by the DKPTO was seemingy successfu to incite changes inattitudes toward IPR protection (see Graph 11). The most sgnicant canges tookpace n knoege management kno-o (ncrease for 44 %) an generaaareness (ncrease for 40 %). On te oter an, atttues toars nforma IPR

protecton measures (.e. reance on esgn compexty an/or ea tmeavantage) not cange very muc. It seems tat nforma IPR protecton s notat te eart of te avaabe servce offerngs (.e. IP courses) atoug servceexperts cam tat te courses o not focus soey on patent ssues: ficuty evean content (.e. nformaton sutabe for IPR begnners or for IPR experts) varesey. Regarng PVSonne users, te most promnent cange concerne tetrae mark usage n te IPR strategy (ncrease for 4 out of 10 users).

A IP course users/attenants consere te competence of te staff nvove n aservce smar to te one offere te dKPTO as most mportant (for 96% of g,for 4 % of meum reevance) fooe by te ease of enticaton (g reevancefor 72 %, meum for 16 %) an te scope of te servce (for 68 % of g an32 % of meum reevance) (see Grap 12). A sgnicant g reevance as asonote for nformaton on fferent IP strateges (“y/y not to patent”). On teoter an, spata stance seems not to be an mportant part of suc ameasure.

Competence of staff an tmey every ere entie by amost a PVSonneusers (bot for 80 % of g an 20 % of meum reevance) as key quatyeements for a servce comparabe to te eectronc access troug PVSonne.Unsurprsngy for a servce c s avaabe on te nternet, spata stance s nota probem.

Graph 152 Key quaty factors for a servce comparabe to the ones offered bythe DKPTO, percentage of respondents, IP course users

16

28

32

32

32

36

48

48

60

68

72

96

28

28

24

32

48

32

16

32

20

32

16

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance




Costs

Individual contact


Timely delivery



Scope of service


Competence of Staff


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 255 17-01-2008 11:11:52



26


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



14.3 Elements of good practiceThe DKPTO can be considered as a very service oriented organisation withexperienced staff who provide information, as expert’s note, “in a language that

ordinary people understand” . In particuar, the service exhibits the foowing successfactors (resp. good practice eements):

• Besides possessing a ong experience as a government IPR agency (grantingpatents, registering trade marks, utiity modes and designs) the DKPTO offersa wide range of services and activities supporting enterprises, especiay SMEs,to protect their technoogy and knowedge;

• Avaiabiity of compementary services;

• Easy user interface of the web site, together with the possibiity to conductremote patent searches;

• Experienced, highy skied staff with an extensive technica and egacompetence;

• Co-operation activities with reevant stakehoders and others engaged in IPRissues;

• Timey deivery, reasonabe rates (fees);

• Quaity evauations are carried out to assess the effectiveness of the serviceofferings.

However, some shortcomings regarding the internationa orientation of the DKPTOwere identie. Some experts argue tat te dKTPO s probaby too focuse ondans IPR ssues an ess nternatonay orente. Accorng to experts, companes eman more an more IPR protecton on a European-e or nternatonaeve n te future. Te ecreasng dans esgn appcatons n favour of appcatons on a European eve corroborate ts tren.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 256 17-01-2008 11:11:52



27

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S15. Technology Network

Service – Intellectual

Property (TNS IP)Country: France

Orgna tte:Prestation technoogique réseau propriété industriee(RDT IP)

Target group: SMEsCoverage: Nationa


Category*: Training



15.1 The Technology Network Service –Intellectual Property (TNS IP) in a nutshell

Te Tecnoogy Netork Servce (TNS) serves as a naton-e tecnoogca annnovaton support system amng to prove assstance n nnovaton projects,famarse SMEs t nteectua property rgts an, n case of te TNS InteectuaProperty (TNS IP), offer ncentves for companes to pursue IPR protecton (“FrstPatent” TNS). Prove by te Frenc nnovaton agency “Oséo nnovaton”(formery knon as ANVAR), te TNS acts as part of te Frenc RdT-Netork(Tecnoogy deveopment Netork/Réseaux e éveoppement tecnoogque),c conssts of oter ecate tecnoogy an nnovaton support agences:dRIRE (Inustry, researc an envronment regona recton), ARIST (regonastrategc an tecnoogy nformaton agences) an CRIT (nnovaton antecnoogy transfer regona centres).

Te RdT-Netork ams to entfy te nnovaton potenta of companes an toprove accurate guance regarng nnovaton management an/or IPR protecton.Te netork s use mosty to get nto contact t (oca) SMEs an nform temabout te atest eveopment n nnovaton (protecton), to offer an overve onIPR an to promote avaabe support servces n ts ie. In case of te TNS, tenetork offers avce an assstance n nnovaton management an protecton,partcuary measures to entfy tecnoogca nees (.e. epng t scenticfeasbty stues, mpementng tecnoogy ntegence, etc.).

Moreover, as a specase extenson of TNS, te Tecnoogy Netork Servce –Inteectua Property (TNS IP) offers an IPR support measure focusng on te patent

appcaton process, te so-cae “Frst Patent” TNS. Ts servce subsses anaut of te enterprse’s strategy t regar to nteectua property ssues ccovers aroun 7 % of te tota costs t a ceng of € ,000. Te subsy s parecty to te consutant n carge of te aut.

TNS operates natone troug regona centres an s not mte n uraton.decate to a types of SMEs, te man user group are mcro-enterprses: In 200,92 % of a partcpatng enterprses a ess tan 0 empoyees, 0 % of tem aess tan 10. Te most expanng factor s tat SMEs are ony egbe f tey avenot appe to a natona tecnoogy servce n te to prevous years. Furtermore,te TNS tres to reac rater tratona nustry’s SMEs (texte, oo, etc.) tanSMEs from te h-Tec sector. No restrctons are n pace for certan nustres or tecnoogy ies.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 257 17-01-2008 11:11:53



28


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D




In 1989, the RDT-Network was estabished with the aim to raise awareness towardsinnovation and technoogy deveopment issues in France. The TNS was set up aspart of a poicy at nationa eve and was one of the irst servces offere tn te

RdT-Netork. Te rater ong preparaton tme of aroun 30 monts as aso ueto a seres of stues carre out, te resuts of c ere reevant for te esgnof te netork (.e. Franços Bouver, 1988). Regarng target igures, no specicncators ere set for ts servce.

Toay, TNS s offere an inance by Oséo Innovaton, an nnovaton agency ncarge of nnovaton promoton among SMEs at natona eve. Oséo Innovatonempoys aroun 400 peope an operates tn te umbrea group Oséo (2.000peope) c proves aso oter busness support measures an servces. Teservce s party mpemente by n ouse staff at Oséo c coornates tenetork tasks an 1 to 2 persons n eac regona antenna. In 2006, Oséo’s totabuget ecate to overa busness support amounte to € 270 mo, aroun€ 7, mo ere accounte for te TNS; € 1, mo ere aocate for “Frst patent”TNS.

Te RdT-Netork s avaabe n 22 regons; tese regona antennae manage anetork of aroun 1,300 experts recrute from varous nsttutons, suc as dRIRE(nustry, researc an envronment regona recton), ARIST (regona strategcan tecnoogy nformaton agences), CRIT (nnovaton an tecnoogy transfer regona centres) an unverstes. Regona experts promotng TNS servces arerecrute on a vountary bass. Tey support te regona antennae by entfyngte nees an ants of SMEs. Once entie, a seres of TNS servces s offere(“1st patent, etc.). In aton, an expert s cosen for te mpementaton of temeasure (.e. patent appcatons). In oter ors, te regona antennae serve asbroker beteen SMEs an te IPR experts. From te enterprses’ pont of ve,regona antennae reuce searcng costs. Lkese, experts ave te avantage of reucng marketng un pubc reaton costs.

Experts promotng te servce possess verse backgrouns an tranng n reevanttecnoogca an nnovaton protecton ssues. Te fact tat tese experts areactuay empoye at e-knon nnovaton support nsttutons s suppose to besuficent to prove ter professona quates.

Tere are no specic marketng actvtes set for TNS: promoton s manyperforme by persona/pro-actve contactng an usng te exstng RdT-Netorkfor marketng an pubc reaton purposes. Eac regona netork s n carge of te promoton of te avaabe measure(s). Accorng to servce specasts, te1,300 experts orkng for TNS vst aroun 20,000 enterprses every year.

Modes of operaton

Members of te RdT-netork vst oca enterprses, especay SMEs to get to knote current busness stuaton an to offer avce on nnovaton management anprotecton an promote avaabe support servces. If an enterprse gets nterestean ants to go eeper nto te subject of IPR protecton or areay knos (.e.

troug te anayss of IP Préagnoss; pease refer to te case stuy “IPPréagnoss”, p. 1) tat IP protecton as to be mpemente, te avser offersto beneit from te “Frst patent” TNS.

Te servce offere by te TNS conssts of subssng an (tecnca/ega) aut of te enterprse’s strategy t regar to nteectua property ssues. Frst, anappcaton form as to be ie out by te SMEs oner c s sent to tenetork’s regona antenna. Te appcaton s normay accompane by a etter from te avser. An anser sou be receve tn 8 ays. It as to be noteat te “Frst patent” servce can be use ony by SMEs tat never ie a patentappcaton before.

If te appcaton s successfu, 3–4 IPR experts, usuay specaze n te enterprse’ssector of actvty are nvte to present cost estmates for an aut. For “Frst patent”

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 258 17-01-2008 11:11:53



29

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

TNS, the cost estimation may depend on the compexity of the patent, the degreeof ega and technica advice etc. pus fees the experts usuay charge.

TNS services’ audit can concern a variety of topics: technoogy inteigenceorganisation, IPR expoitation strategy, etc. and normay asts between 4 and

days.The enterprises can choose their preferred experts (depending on the price, thenotoriety of the expert, his knowedge of the sector of activity etc.) from a ist of registered members. Ony quaiie IPR experts can be n carge of tempementaton of “Frst patent” TNS; one crteron s tat tey ave to beregstere on a natona st governe by te Natona Inustra Property Insttute(INPI). Te organsaton tat actuay proves te servce s pa bot by te SMEan by te tecnoogy eveopment netork. Te enterprse pays 2 % at tebegnnng an te remanng 7 % s recty pa by Oséo Innovaton to teexpert n carge of te actua mpementaton of te servce. Te maxmumamount covere s € ,000, but as experts state, te cost of a irst patent s onaverage aroun € 4,000 to € 4,00.

Te compementary approac of te RdT-netork to offer a set of ecate

nnovaton support servces enabes SMEs to beneit from tese professonaservces tat cumuatvey bu on eac oter to meet ter nees. Te “Frstpatent” TNS can be seen as suc a compementary servce. After an nustraproperty pre-agnoss, prove by te Natona Inustra Property Insttute (INPI)ere IPR experts scuss te company’s stuaton t ts manager an raseaareness toars IPR protecton possbtes (for etae nformaton, pease refer to te case stuy “IP Préagnoss”, p. 1), enterprses may ece tat tey neeto regster a patent. In ts gt, te “Frst patent” TNS compements te anayssof IP Préagnoss to ep enterprses t ter patent regstraton by offerngtecnca an inanca support.


Quaty assurance s many carre out troug regona nterm evauatons everysecon year. In aton, to ensure tat te servce offerngs are prove an

presente aequatey to te target group, Oséo strongy focuses on te quaty of te expert recrutng process. wtn te netork, te personne gvng IPR avceave to ave a certan professon. Regarng forma IPR protecton, assstance for .e. patent appcatons can ony be gven by quaie IPR professonas.

No ecate ncators are set to measure te performance of te servce.hoever, some ncaton can be erve from a stuy pubse n 200 cstate tat a arge number of SMEs beneite from te support of Oséo-ANVAR &RdT for ter patent appcaton. It sou be note tat n te course of ts stuy,no specic IPR support servce as mentone by te surveye SMEs. hoever, tsinng unernes te goba mportance of te nnovaton support from Oséo. Inaton, te satsfacton rate s consere as performance ncator for te servce.

As experts note, te servce s very muc apprecate among SMEs an sos ag satsfacton rate.



0 companes ere surveye about ter experences t TNS. A companesntervee use te “1ere brevet/ Frst patent”. due to te cose reatonsp t“IP Préagnoss” (see te corresponng case stuy) an te compementarystructure an functon of tese to support servces, te resuts of bot user surveys are qute smar.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 259 17-01-2008 11:11:54



260


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



Graph 153 TNS IP–Company Sze dstrbuton n nterve sampe, 2005,percentage of respondents

75%

20%

5%



Graph 154 TNS IP–Innovaton actvtes n nterve sampe, 2005, percentageof respondents

27

58

40

18

3340

78

0

20

40

60

80

100


& e x p e r i m e n t a l






e q u i p m e n t

T r a i n i n g



D e s i g n

O t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n s

f o r


%


Graph 155 TNS IP–Usage of dfferent servce provders by SMEs, percentage of respondents*)

814 18

1218 20

2

24 12 814

10 6

86

0

20

40

60

80

N a t i o n a l

a g e n c y

R e g i o n a l

a g e n c y

C h a m b e r o f

c o m m e r c e

P a t e n t

o f f i c e

P a t e n t

a t t o r n e y

E x t e r n a l


E U

O t h e r


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 260 17-01-2008 11:11:58



261

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

The distribution of the TNS user sampe conirms tat te servce targets mostymcro-enterprses: 7 % of te SMEs n te sampe ave at most 9 empoyees;20 % ave 10 to 49 empoyees; ony % are arger companes t up to 249empoyees (see Grap 13).

Lookng at te eveopment actvtes, te stuy reveas tat TNS users ere verynnovatve urng te ast years (see Grap 14). Beteen 2003 an 200, 68 %of te servce users ntrouce ne or sgnicanty mprove proucts onto temarket. durng te same tme, more tan 36 % evere prouct nnovatons tocustomers. As concerns R&d, 78 % of te servce users conucte ntramura R&d.In aton, 8 % of te surveye users ere engage n te acquston of macnery an equpment.

Beteen 2003 an 200, TNS users mae frequent use of externa consutants(20 %), patent attorneys (18 %) an te camber of commerce (18 %; see Grap1). Te g usage of patent attorneys unernes – as t oter servcestrougout Europe – te mportance of ts professon for IPR servce provson. Bycontrast, te rater g sare of externa consutants use seems to reate to tefact tat te servce supports te usage of externa experts by offerng inanca ep

for an (tecnca/ega) IP aut.

Graph 156 TNS IP–Hamperng factors for nnovatons, 2003 to 2005, by SMEs,percentage of respondents*)

56 5042 36 34

2418

8 6

2428

3636

28

32

2030

24

0

20

40

60

80

100


F i n a n c e

I n n o v a t i o n

c o s t s


s t a n d a r d s

C l i e n t



i n f o

L a c k o f

q u a l i fi e d

p e r s o n n e l

L a c k o f



i s s u e s


%


Graph 157 TNS IP–IP protecton methods empoyed by servce users, 2003 to2005, percentage of respondents*)

60

3844

48

6

16 20 18

28

20

20

40

60

80

P a t e n t s fi l e d





m o d e l s

T r a d e m a r k s

C o p y r i g h t s

D e f e n s i v e

P u b l i s h i n g

T r a d e


a g r e e m e n t s

D e s i g n

c o m p l e x i t y

L e a d - t i m e

a d v a n t a g e



%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 261 17-01-2008 11:12:01



262


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D



A high number of companies experienced hampering factors for innovation duringthe past years (see Graph 16). The rankings towards the singe aspects is verycomparabe to simiar IPR support services: TNS users compain mosty abouteconomic risks (for 6 % of high and 24 % of medium reevance), ack of inanca

resources (for 0 % of g an 28 % of meum reevance) an g nnovatoncosts (for 4 % of g an for furter 36 % of meum reevance). Oter factors,.e. reguatons an stanars or cent responsveness are aso consere to bemportant.

TNS users empoye a g number of forma IPR protecton metos urng 2003an 200 (see Grap 17). 60 % state tat tey ie for a patent n tat tmepero; 38 % a a patent grante or va. Moreover, 48 % use trae marks toprotect ter IP, 44 % esgn patterns/ utty moes. Regarng nforma IPRprotecton, 28 % tre to mantan a ea tme avantage over compettors, 20 %use trae secrets an/or secrecy agreements; 18 % ree on te compexty of esgn.

For TNS users, costs, tme ssues an uncear cost/beneits of IP protecton representte man nterna barrers for usng IPR metos (see Grap 18). It can be assume

tat te reason y genera aareness s consere ess reevant s smpy tat TNSoffers compementary servces to tose companes c are areay aare of ter IPR.

Graph 158 TNS IP–(Interna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

6248

30 2618 12 16

6

26

38

44

2634 40 30

20

0

20

40

60

80

100

C o s t s o

f I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n

T i m e

t o m a

k e

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

w o r k

u n c

l e a r

c o s t / b e n e

f i t o f

I P p r o

t e c

t i o n

L a c

k o f

q u a

l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l

L a c

k o

f i n f o

o n

I P

p r o

t e c

t i o n


i n b u s i n e s s

c o n

t e x t

A w a r e n e s s

O r g a n

i s a t i o n a l

i s s u e s


%


Graph 159 TNS IP–(Eterna) barrers to usng IP protecton mechansms,percentage of respondents*)

48

34

14

24

36

32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


services


services


support services


%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 262 17-01-2008 11:12:03



263

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S

The overa understanding of IPR issues is provided by services ike “IP Prédiagnosis”; if companies after such an anaysis fee that the best way to protect their IP is ing for apatent, te next ogca step ou be te usage of “Frst Patent” TNS.

Externa barrers are perceve to be sgnicant obstaces among TNS users. Te

ack of nformaton on avaabe support servces (g reevance for 48 %, meumfor 24 %), te ack of accessbty (for 34 % of g an 36 % of meum reevance)an te ack of quaty of avaabe externa support servces (for 14 % of g an32 % of meum reevance) so, compare to oter IPR support servces, greevance rates an pont to tte vsbty of te servce t te user group (seeGrap 19). But ten agan, TNS (an aso IP Préagnoss) seem to beong to acass of servces c try to reac out to companes (.e., ook for tem) cave oterse tte knoege about support servces n te ie of IPR – an for tose companes, c are not actvey ookng for support temseves, externabarrers are perceve to be of ger reevance.


Unsurprsngy, amost af of te TNS users got to kno about te servce trougpersona recommenatons, 42 % ear about TNS troug te servce provng

organsaton tsef (te atter agan ncatng te pro-actve roe of te TNS servce)(see Grap 160). In aton, 28 % aso gatere nformaton troug consutantsan 20 % from agences. Te nternet an cassca mea ere ranke rater o

Graph 160 TNS IP–Informaton channes, by hch users got to kno aboutthe servce, percentage of respondents*)

102

142

10

46

28

0

22

42

18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

I n t e r n e t

N e w s l e t t e r



G e n e r a l

n e w s p a p e r


j o u r n a l

P e r s o n a l



C o m m e r c i a l

b a n k s

A g e n c y

T e c h N e t i t s e l f

O t h e r

%


Graph 161 TNS IP–Satsfacton eves th dfferent aspects of servceprovson, arthmetc means of grades gven by respondents

1,4

1,6

1,7

1,6

1,5

1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 4,0

Competence of staff


information


Delivery time


and demands



01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 263 17-01-2008 11:12:04



264


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D



among the avaiabe information channes. These inngs it te overa pcture of te promotona actvtes of TNS.

TNS users ere, on average, satsie t te servce: a aspects (te competenceof staff, te quaty an reevance of te prove nformaton, etc.) are grae

t “1.7” or better, on a scae from 1 (very satsie) to 4 (unsatsie). Furtermore,te servce offerngs are consere to be aequate for aroun 84 % of te userssurveye (see Grap 161).

Spata stance oes not seem to be a probem; 63 % cam amnstratve burensto be acceptabe en usng te servce – 29 % tnk tey are actuay qute o.Overa, 49 % of te enterprses state tat te beneits of usng te servce cearyouteg te efforts; 43 % tnk tat te beneits are aequate to te efforts.

Graph 162 TNS IP–Addtonaty of the inanca subsdy, percentage of respondents

12%

27%

13%6%

23%

19%Undertaking carried out without anychange/modification







Graph 163 Behavoura addtonaty of the TNS offerngs, percentage of respondents*)

6

6

10

16

16

20

24

30

38

38

46

56

60

62

-2

-2

-6

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

In-licensing


Out-licensing



IPR training







General awareness


increased decreased

%


01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 264 17-01-2008 11:12:05



26

A N N E x I – C

A S E S T U D I E S


In order to answer the question whether a support service works or does not work,one shoud inquire into the added vaue of the service – i. e., what woud havehappened in case the service were absent. This is done in order to isoate a “net

positive effect” as opposed to things which woud have happened anyway, despiteof the service. Simiary, aso other types of changes incurred within the enterprise,as a resut of using the service, are to be recorded (these types of changes arereferred to as “behavioura additionaity”).

As can been seen from Graph 162, considerabe additionaity effects have beenachieved using support provided by TNS: 19 % of the undertakings woud nothave been carried out at a in the absence of support from the service; 27 % of theusers stated that they woud have carried out the project but at a ater stage. Onthe other hand, around 12 % woud have carried out their patenting project,regardess of the service.

The most prominent changes in attitudes toward IPR protection among TNS usersconcern genera knowedge management know-how foowed by IPR awareness andpatent knowedge in the business environment, which increased for 62 %, 60 % and

6 %, respectivey (see Graph 163). The attitude towards forma and informa IPRprotection methods has changed rather eveny. In this ight, it seems that TNS hasnot just deivered information about the various forms of IPR usage but aso aboutthe usage of non-patent IP protection methods and its potentia beneits.

Te users surveye unerne te mportance of te competence of staff (for 90 %of g, for 8 % of meum reevance) an, not surprsng for a servce provngtecnca consutng, nformaton on tecnca ssues (for 80 % of g, an for 18 % of meum reevance) en offerng servces smar to te one of TNS (seeGrap 164). Tmey every (g reevance for 76 %, meum for 20 %) an

Graph 164 Key quaty factors for a servce such as TNS IP, percentage of respondents

10

20

24

44

44

48

64

66

68

76

80

90

48

58

50

40

50

44

30

28

24

20

18

8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Spatial distance




Scope of service

Costs




Individual contact

Timely delivery


Competence of Staff


%

*) mutpe ansers aoe. Source: User Survey, n = 0. 15.3 Elements of good practice

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 265 17-01-2008 11:12:06



266


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D



individua contact were aso fet to be important for a service comparabe to theone offered by TNS. Spatia distance and the referra to externa services wereconsidered of ess signiicance for suc a servce.

15.3 Elements of good practiceTNS an te servce portfoo prove by te RdT-netork use compementaryapproaces toars te same overa objectve: to offer avce an assstance nnnovaton support an aso IPR protecton. TNS ams to entfy tecnoogcanees of SMEs an tres to rase overa aareness on te necessty to mpementan IPR strategy. It s suppose to be a irst step, a ay for sma enterprses to beabe to protect ter nnovatons.

Te servce exbts te foong success factors (resp. goo practce eements):

• workng trange of natona coornaton, regona operaton an strbutenetorkng;

• Promote an mpemente by quaie oca experts (o ave to gotroug a quaicaton sceme); te servce beneits gy from te exstng

RdT Netork;• Integraton nto a ecate busness support organsaton;

• Ease of use: fast an unbureaucratc anng of te measure;

• Lnk to oter compementary IPR servces (IP Préagnoss);

• Avaabty of inanca grants, c cover a rater arge number of ays for consutng.

Very mportant for te success of te servce as te areay exstng an e-estabse netork c proves access to eac regon. Toay, te servce s eknon an very muc apprecate among SMEs at regona eves. On te oter an, te TNS can ony exst because experts accept to promote an support tetecnoogy netork servce. Experts knong te TNS system are orre tat teack of quaie personne an mte buget resources cou so onpromotona actvtes for TNS n te future.

Agan, experts unerne te fact tat t s gettng more an more ficut to inquaie consutants ng to ork t SMEs, o are abe to unerstan ter sector of actvty an ter specic probems. Quaie experts are aso neee toane grong future topcs, .e. IPR counterfetng. Oter IPR servces offere or promote by te RdT-netork, .e. “IP Préagnoss” face smar ssues.

In aton, t seems tat foo up measures an ong-term guance to SMEsmgt be areas of mprovement tn te servce package of TNS an/or te RdT-Netork. Experts knong TNS tness no accompanment of te enterprsentatves toars te mpementaton of a ong-term IPR strategy. Overa speakng,tese are furter reasons for estabsng a performance evauaton system, ccou ncue actua mssng sustanabty ncators an may ever te bass for assessng atonaty effects.

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 266 17-01-2008 11:12:06



ANNEx II – SUPPORT SERVICESANALYSED

Benchmarkng Natona and RegonaSupport Servces for SMEs n the Fed

of Inteectua and Industra Property

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 267 17-01-2008 11:12:06



269

A N N E x I I – S U P P O R T S E R V I C E

S A N A L Y S E D

Tabe 10 Overve of pubc avaabe IPR support servces n Europe and Overseas

Nr. B* Country Title of the Service Sub-Service Responsible Organisation

1 Austraia teQstart Investment Fund Queensand Department of StateDeveopment, Trade and Innovation

2 Austraia BioStart Queensand Department of StateDeveopment, Trade and Innovation

3 Austraia Innovation Start-UpScheme (ISUS)

Queensand Department of StateDeveopment, Trade and Innovation

4 Austraia Ideas2Market Austraian Institute for Commerciaisation Ltd

Austraia Knowedge Fund Commercia. Grants BusinessACT

6 Austraia Knowedge Fund Proof of Concept Grants BusinessACT

7 Austraia Knowedge Fund Coaboration Grants BusinessACT

8 Austraia BioBusiness Programmes Non-ResearchEstabishment Costs

NSW Department of State & RegionaDeveopment

9 Austraia BioBusiness Programmes High Growth Bio Business NSW Department of State & RegionaDeveopment

10 Austraia BioBusiness Programmes Proof of Concept NSW Department of State & Regiona

Deveopment11 Austraia Commercia Ready AusIndustry

12 Austraia PharmaceuticasPartnerships Programme(P3)

AusIndustry

13 Austraia R&D Tax Concession Industry Research and Deveopment (IR&D)Board (through AusIndustry) and the

Austraian Taxation Ofice (ATO)14 Austraa Reneabe Energy

deveopment Intatve(REdI)

AusInustry

1 Austraa Bung Entrepreneurspn Sma Busness (BESB)

Te Sma BusnessEntrepreneurspProgramme (SBEP)

AusInustry

16 Austraa Bung Entrepreneurspn Sma Busness (BESB) Sma Busness FeOficers Programme(SBFO)

AusInustry

17 Austraa Commercasng EmergngTecnooges (COMET)

AusInustry

18 Austraa Innovaton InvestmentFun

AusInustry

19 Austraa Pooe deveopmentFuns (PdF) Programme

AusInustry

20 X Austraa Smart Start IP Austraa

21 Austraa Bo Innovaton SA Bocatayst Programme State Government of Sout Austraa

22 Austraa Market ReayCommercasatonProgramme

State Government of Tasmana

23 Austraa Sma Busness Programme State Government of Tasmana24 Austraa Scence, Tecnoogy,

Innovaton Intatve (STIIntatve)

State Government of Vctora

2 Austraa Informaton Cty Mentor CapabtyBung Programme

Informaton Cty

26 Austraa Recentre Innovaton PartnerngProgramme

Recentre Austraa

27 Austraa Austraan dstrbuteIncubator (AdI)

Austraan dstrbute Incubator

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 269 17-01-2008 11:12:07



270


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D




28 Austraia Services offered by theCentre for Innovation andTechnoogy

Commerciaisation

State Government of Victoria

29 Austraia Pane of Professiona Advisors

Department of Innovation, Industry andRegiona Deveopment–Sma Business

Victoria30 X Austraia Government Inteectua

Property Support UnitState Government of Western Austraia

31 Austraia VIP@iNNOVIC VIP@iNNOVIC

32 Austria Sma trade oan Patent oan action aws–Austria Wirtschaftsservice GesmbH

33 Austria Patent promotion TIP Technoogie- und Innovationspartner,Lower Austria Wirtschafts- undTourismusfonds

34 X Austria Tecma–TechnoogyMarketing Austria

aws–Austria Wirtschaftsservice GmbH

3 Austria Seminar: Overview of Industria Property Rights

Österreichisches Patentamt (Austrian Patent

Ofice)36 X Austra Serv.p patent searces Österrecsces Patentamt–serv.p

37 Austra “eas.e.protecte”Roaso

Österrecsces Patentamt (Austran PatentOfice)

38 X Austra TecnoogyCommercasatonOffensve

CATT Innovaton Management Gmbh

39 Austra Tecnoogy an patentsearc

wISTO–wrtscafts-Stanort VorarbergBetrebsanseungs Gmbh

40 X Austra Patent Servce for SMEs CAST–Center for Acaemc Spn-offs Tyro

41 Austra GEN-AU Genome Researcn Austra

as (Austra wrtscaftsservce) / FeeraMnstry for Eucaton, Scence an Cuture(for ne projects after 200: GEN-AU nternaIPR servces)

42 Austra ApusB ImpuseProgramme

FFG–Austran Researc Promoton Agency

43 X Austra Patent Consutng day wrtscaftskammer (Austran feeraeconomc camber)

44 Austra “Innovatve Companes” wrtscaftskammer (Austran feeraeconomc camber)n cooperaton t teInsttute of Busness Promoton (wIFI)

4 Austra Innovaton protectonprogramme (IPP)

as–Austra wrtscaftsservce Gmbh

46 X Begum SME servces of teBegan ofice for nteectua property

Feera Pubc Servce for Economy, SMEs,Sef-empoye an Energy

47 Begum SME servces of teInsttute for te promoton

of Innovaton by Scencean Tecnoogy nFaners

Insttuut voor e aanmoegng van nnovateoor wetenscap & Tecnooge n

Vaaneren

48 X Begum SME servces of te teBrusses Enterprse Agency

Te Brusses Enterprse Agency

49 Bugara Center of InteectuaProperty–BIA

Bugaran Inustra Assocaton (BIA)

0 Bugara Natona Innovaton Funt te Mnstry of Economy an Energy

Bugaran Sma an Meum EnterprsesPromoton Agency

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 270 17-01-2008 11:12:07



271


S A N A L Y S E DNr. B* Country Title of the Service Sub-Service Responsible Organisation

1 Bugaria SME services of the PatentOfice of te Repubc of Bugara

Patent Ofice of te Repubc of Bugara

2 Bugara Tecnoogy market Jont effort beteen te Bugaran Inustra Assocaton (BIA), GIS Transfer Centre of teBugaran Acaemy of Scences an teEuropean Innovaton Centre

3 X Canaa Bank of Speakers Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice

4 Canaa Busness deveopmentOficers

Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice

Canaa CIPO web ste Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice

6 Canaa databases .e. Canaan Patentsdatabase, etc


7 X Canaa IP Tookt Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice

8 Canaa “Stan out from your compettors” (Pubcaton)


9 X Canaa “Success Stores”(Pubcaton) Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice

60 Canaa Trae marks databaseTutora


61 Canaa Trae so partcpaton Canaan Inteectua Property Ofice

62 Canaa Brocure: “wat’s n aname?”


63 Canaa Feera Partners nTecnoogy Transfer (FPTT)

Fnt Box Feera Partners n Tecnoogy Transfer

64 Cyprus SME servces of teepartment of Regstrar of Companes an oficaRecever

Te Inteectua anInustra Property Secton

Mnstry of Commerce, Inustry an Toursm

6 Czec Repubc Support of Innovaton of

Proucts, Tecnoogesan Servces–INNOVATION

no tte specie, but

costs reate to certanIPR actvtes are asofunabe

CzecInvest

66 Czec Repubc Support programme for ynamcay eveopngsma an meumentrepreneurs–dEVELOPMENT

no tte specie, butcosts reate to certanIPR actvtes are asofunabe

CzecInvest

67 Czec Repubc Mutpurpose SupportProgramme for Sma anMeum-szeEntrepreneurs–MARKET


Czec-Moravan Guarantee an deveopmentBank

68 Czec Repubc Support programme for ynamcay eveopngsma an meumentrepreneurs–PROGRESS



69 Czec Repubc Programme of support of Busnesses n te Intadeveopment Pase–CREdIT



70 Czec Repubc Programme of support of Persons Startng aBusnesses–START



71 X Czec Repubc Te eb-ste of teInustra Property Oficeof te Czec Repubc

Te Inustra Property Ofice of te CzecRepubc (IPO CR)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 271 17-01-2008 11:12:07



272


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D




72 X Czech Repubic “Technica soutions andtheir ega protection”(Pubication)

The Industria Property Ofice of te CzecRepubc (IPO CR)

73 Czec Repubc “Traemarks an ter ega protecton”(Pubcaton)


74 Czec Repubc “desgns an ter egaprotecton” (Pubcaton)


7 denmark Guance of SMEenterprses anentrepreneur

Busness Centres Busness centre, .e. Bornoms, Norsjæan,Fyn, etc

76 denmark Guance of SMEenterprses anentrepreneur

EVU Centre EVU Busness centre; Copenagen anFreerksberg

77 X denmark Informaton Servces of tedKPTO (hep for regstraton an ega

avce servces)

dans Patent an Traemark ofice

78 denmark Internet porta (.tectrans.k)

Te Natona Netork for TecnoogyTransfer

79 X denmark Pubc Servce for Inventors Center for Ié og Vækst (Centre for Ieas anGrot/Te Inventon Centre)

80 Estona R&d FnancngProgramme

Founaton Enterprse Estona (busnesssupport organsaton operatng uner tegovernance of te Mnstry of Economc

Affars an Communcatons).81 Estona Consutng Programme

(EAS)Founaton Enterprse Estona (busnesssupport organsaton operatng uner tegovernance of te Mnstry of Economc

Affars an Communcatons).82 Estona SME servces of te

Estonan Patent OficeEstonan Patent Ofice

83 X Estona Patent Lbrary Estonan Patent Lbrary

84 Estona Support for nustraproperty tem patentprotecton

Tann Cty Government, Tann CtyEnterprse Boar

8 Fnan Te Fnns Natona Funfor Researc andeveopment (Stra)

Innovaton programme2004-2008

Te Fnns Natona Fun for Researc andeveopment (Stra)

86 Fnan IPR Unversty Center IPR Unversty Center

87 X Fnan SME servces of teFounaton for Fnnsnventons

Keksntösäätö (Founaton for Fnnsnventons)

88 Fnan Natona Boar of Patentsan Regstraton of Fnan

Natona Boar of Patents an Regstraton of Fnan

89 Fnan TEKES–Fnns Funng Agency for Tecnoogyan Innovaton

TULI–From Researc toBusness

Fnns Scence Park Assocaton TEKEL

90 Fnan Empoyment & Economcdeveopment Centre/Enterprse Servces

Inventon representatve Empoyment & Economc deveopmentCentre

91 Fnan Gramex-copyrgt socety Gramex ry

92 Fnan Empoyment & Economcdeveopment Centre/Enterprse Servces

ProuctStart Empoyment & Economc deveopmentCentre

93 Fnan TEKES- Fnns Funng Agency for Tecnoogyan Innovaton

R&d Capta oan TEKES

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 272 17-01-2008 11:12:08



273



94 X Finand Ideapiot Nationa Board of Patents and Registration of Finand

9 X France IP Prédiagnosis INPI–Institut nationa de a propriétéindustriee in co-operation with OSEO Anvar

96 X France Technoogy servicenetwork inteectuaproperty

OSEO Anvar and RDT (Réseaux de diffusiontechnoogique)

97 France Inteectua propertystrategic audit

INPI–Institut nationa de a propriétéindustriee in co-operation with OSEO Anvar and RDT (Réseaux de diffusion techno-ogique)

98 X France Technoogy networkservice–First patentappication

INPI–Institut nationa de a propriétéindustriee in co-operation with OSEO Anvar and RDT (Réseaux de diffusiontechnoogique).

99 France Research Tax Credit Ministère déégué à ’enseignement supérieur et à a recherche / Direction de a technoogie

100 X France Regiona strategic andtechnoogy informationagencies

Chambres régionaes de commerce etd’industrie (CRCI) with the support of theMinistry in charge of industry

101 Germany SME services of the INSTI-Innovation Action

INSTI e.V.

102 X Germany INSTI-SME-Patent Action INST Network Members

103 Germany InnovationMarket INSTI-Project Management: Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft (IW) Kön

104 Germany INSTI-Commerciaisation Action

Network of INSTI partners

10 Germany “With the Patent toSuccess” (Pubication)

Lessons Learned andResuts of the Project SMEPatent Action

Editor: Institut der Deutschen Wirtschaft (IW)Kön, INSTI Projektmanagement

106 Germany SME services of the INST-

Innovation e.V.

INST-Innovation e.V.

107 Germany Fraunhofer Patent Centrefor German Research

Fraunhofer Patent Centre for GermanResearch

108 X Germany Fraunhofer Service for Inventors

Fraunhofer Patentstee für die deutscheForschung (Fraunhofer Patent Centre for German Research)

109 X Germany Patent andCommerciaisation

Agencies

Germany-wide network; Exampe: TransMITGeseschaft für Technoogietransfer mbH

110 X Germany Patent information centres PIZ Stuttgart Germany-wide network of 28 patentinformation centres

111 Germany BMBF-Patentserver Federa Ministry of Education and Research(BMBF, Bundesministerium für Bidung undForschung, Referat 16)

112 Germany Patent-/Markenpaner Onine

Federa Ministry of Economic Affairs andTechnoogy (Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftund Technoogie, BMWi) in co-operation with

A2C Software AG113 Germany RALF-License Information Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt (German

Patent and Trademark Ofice)114 Germany PaTrAS (Patent an

Traemark AppcatonSystem)

deutsces Patent- un Markenamt (GermanPatent an Traemark Ofice)

11 Germany Fnanca support for costsof proceengs (ega a)

deutsces Patent- un Markenamt (GermanPatent an Traemark Ofice)

116 X Germany Inta Consutancy for Inventors

varyng–Exampe: AGIL Gmbh Lepzg

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 273 17-01-2008 11:12:09



27



136 Hungary SME services of theCorvinus Risk FundManager Ltd.

Gazdasági és Közekedési Minisztérium

137 Hungary SME services of theHungarian InnovationUnion/Hungarian

Association for Innovation

Magyar Innovációs Szövetség/Hungarian Association for Innovation

138 X Hungary Support for internationaregistration of Hungarianinventions

Ministry of Economy and Transport

139 Hungary Poitics of Science andTechnoogy

Nationa Ofice of Researc an Tecnoogy

140 hungary IP Consutancy danuba Patent Ofice / Sovo BotecnoogyPc.

141 hungary SME servces of te S.B.G.& K Patent an LaOfices

S.B.G. & K Patent an La Ofices

142 hungary Prouct eveopment,nnovaton management

Screenng, novety searcreate to patents

Centra hungaran Innovaton Centre NpC

143 X Irean Inteectua Property Assstance Sceme

Enterprse Irean

144 Irean hger Eucaton Sector Patent Protecton Sceme

Enterprse Irean

14 X Irean SME servces of te IrsPatents Ofice

web ste of Irs PatentsOfice

Irs Patents Ofice

146 Irean Tec Searc Enterprse Irean

147 Itay Reneabe InnovatonFun–dECREE 16/01/2001

Artce Mnstry for Economc deveopment

148 Itay Unie Support Package Mnstry for Economc deveopment

149 Itay SME servces of teInsttute for Inustra

Promoton (IPI)

Support Programme for IP Isttuto per a Promozone Inustrae (IPI)

10 X Itay Itaan Netork for Innovaton dffuson anTecnoogy Transfer

IP web Porta RIdITT

11 Itay AIPPI (Internatona Assocaton for IPProtecton)

AIPPI

12 X Itay INGENIO Fnombara S.p.A.

13 Itay NETVAL- Itaan UnverstyNetork for te

Vaorsaton of Researc

NETVAL s a netork to c most Itaanunversty partecpate troug ter Tecnoogy Transfer Ofices. So far t asbeen orkng n te form of an nformanetork, but t soon be transforme ntoan assocaton.

14 X Itay INFOBREVETTI(INFOPATENTS) Netorkof te centres of nformaton for teffuson of te patentcuture

INFOBREVETTI s te netork, manage byUnoncamere, te Assocaton of ItaanCambers of Commerce

1 X Japan MEXT 34 speca UnverstyIPR dvsons

MEXT (Mnstry of Eucaton, Cuture, Sports,Scence an Tecnoogy

16 Japan Fuson of researc actvtyto brng to Patent, desgn,Traemark

AIST Natona Insttute of Inustra Scencean Tecnoogy

17 X Japan Loans for protecton of IPRan usng IPR as coatera

deveopment Bank of Japan

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 275 17-01-2008 11:12:09



276


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D




18 Japan Loans to SMEs and microoca businesses inOkinawa

The Okinawa Deveopment Finance Corp.

19 Japan Business oans to Microand SMEs who haveficuty obtanng oansfrom prvate inancansttutons.

Natona Lfe Insurance Corporaton

160 Japan Entruste oans to Agrcuture, Forestry anFseres. FnancaCorporaton transferre tooca government for pubc forest mantenancean pasture mprovement

JFM Japan Fnance Corporaton for MuncpaEnterprses

161 X Japan Soko: Cukn BankNetork

Start-up, Innovaton anRevtasaton

Te Centra Cooperatve Bank for Commercean Inustry: Soko-Cukn Bank

162 Japan SME servces of te JapanPatent Ofice Support Scemes for SMEs Japan Patent Ofice

163 Latva Lega protecton of regstrabe nteectuaproperty

Patent ofice of te Repubc of Latva

164 X Lectensten Informaton servcesregarng InteectuaProperty

Amt für Voksrtscaft er Lectenstenscen Lanesveratung (Oficeof Economcs of te Lectensten pubcamnstraton)

16 X Lectensten Patent Lbrary Lectenstensce Lanesbbotek

166 Ltuana Informaton on protectonan regstraton of patents, traemarks,servce marks annustra esgn

Letuvos smukaus r vutno verso pėtrosagentūra (Ltuanan deveopment Agencyfor Sma an Meum Sze Enterprses–SMEdA)

167 Ltuana SME servces of teNatona InustraProperty Protecton Ofice

Letuvos Respubkos vastybns patentų buras (Te State Patent Bureau of teRepubc of Ltuana)

168 X Ltuana Enancement of Innovaton anCompettvenessProgramme

Fnanca Support for Compensatng teExpenses Reate toObtanng a Patent

Letuvos verso paramos agentūra (LtuananBusness Support Agency)

169 Ltuana SME servces of te PatentInformaton Centre

Letuvos tecnkos bboteka (Te TecncaLbrary of Ltuana)

170 Ltuana SME servces of teInnovaton Reay Centre(IRC)

Informaton aboutnteectua propertyprotecton

Letuvos novacjų centras (LtuananInnovaton Centre)

171 Ltuana Servces offere by teInfoBat Copyrgt Agency

Asocacja ‘InfoBat’ (‘InfoBat’ Assocaton)

172 Ltuana Servces offere by te Agency of LtuananCopyrgt Protecton

Assocaton

Ltuanan Copyrgt Protecton Assocaton

173 Ltuana Servces offere by teInteectua PropertyCommsson of teInternatona Camber of Commerce (ICC) Ltuana

Tarptautna prekybos r ūma ICC Letuva (ICCLtuana)

174 Ltuana Informaton about EUcountry compusoryprouct requrements

Informaton aboutnteectua propertyprotecton

Letuvos ekonomnės pėtros agentūra(Ltuanan deveopment Agency)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 276 17-01-2008 11:12:10



277



17 X Lithuania The Programme for Creating Pubic Awarenessabout IPR

Ministry of Cuture of the Repubic of Lithuania

176 X Luxembourg Technoogy Watch Center–Center for Pubic ResearchHenri Tudor

Center for Pubic Research Henri Tudor

177 X Luxembourg SME services of theDepartment for IPR–Ministry for Economy andForeign Trade

Ministry for Economy and Foreign Trade

178 Luxembourg SME services of Luxinnovation–Nationa

Agency for innovation andresearch

Luxinnovation GIE

179 Luxembourg LIIP-Project (LinkingInnovation and IndustriaProperty)

Center for Pubic Research Henri Tudor

180 Mata Information SupportService

Industria Property Registration Directorate

181 X Norway SME services of theNorwegian Patent Ofice

Te Noregan Patent Ofice organse uner te Mnstry of Trae an Inustry

182 Noray Ben CompanyInformaton

VINN on beaf te Mnstry of Trae anInustry

183 Noray SME servces of te OsoPatentkontor AS (Osopatent ofice AS)

Oso Patentkontor

184 Poan SME servces of teRegona PatentInformaton Center

Potecnka Gańska

18 Poan Assocaton–Unversty/Coege counc of patentmen

NO responsbe organsaton, t s anassocaton of patentmen n pos gscoos

186 Poan Regona PatentInformaton Center

Unersytet Zeonogórsk

187 X Poan SME servces of te Oficefor protecton of nteectua property anpatent nformaton

Potecnka wrocłaska

188 Poan Patent Informaton Center by Scentst an PatentCenter of Man Lbrary of Mtary hg Scoo n

wroca

wyższa Szkoła Oicerska wojsk Ląoyc e wrocłau

189 Poan Regona PatentInformaton Center

Unversty of Loz

190 Poan Patent Informaton Centre Potecnka Łózka

191 Poan Regona Centre of PatentInformaton n wKTRLubn

wojeózk Kub Tecnk Racjonazacj

192 Poan Patent Informaton Center wrocłaska Raa Feeracj Stoarzyszeń Naukoo–Tecncznyc

193 Poan Servces offere by te Assocaton of Pos Poto Artsts

Assocaton of Pos Poto Artsts

194 Poan Servces offere by teUnon of Assocatons for

Artsts an Performers

Unon of Assocatons for Artsts anPerformers

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 277 17-01-2008 11:12:10



278


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N

T H E F I E L D




19 Poand Services offered by the Association of CoectiveManagement of Copy

Rights Beonging to Authors of Scentic anTecnca work

Assocaton of Coectve Management of Copy Rgts Beongng to Autors of Scentic an Tecnca work

196 Poan Servces offere by teUnon of Auo VeoProucers

Unon of Auo Veo Proucers

197 Poan Servces offere by te Assocaton of PosFmmakers

Assocaton of Pos Fmmakers

198 Poan Servces offere by tePos Musca Performng

Artsts Socety

POLISh MUSICAL PERFORMING ARTISTS’SOCIETY

199 Poan Servces offere by te Assocaton of fok artst

Assocaton of fok artst

200 Poan Servces offere by te Assocaton of wrters anPubsers–Pos Book

Assocaton of wrters an Pubsers–PosBook

201 Poan Servces offere by te tePos Assocaton of Brane GoosManufacturers–ProMarka

Te Pos Assocaton of Brane GoosManufacturers–ProMarka

202 Poan Servces offere by tePos Assocaton of

Autors–Zaks

Pos Assocaton of Autors–Zaks

203 Poan Servces offere by tePos Camber of Informaton Tecnoogyan Teecommuncatons

Poska Izba Informatyk I Teekomunkacj–PIIT

204 Poan Servces offere by te Assocaton of PosJournasts

Press Freeom MontorngCenter

Stoarzyszene dzennkarzy Poskc

20 Poan Servces offere by teInternet socety

Center for free Softare Internet Socety–Poska

206 Poan Servces offere by te Assocaton Pos SoftareMarket

Assocaton Pos Softare Market

207 X Portuga Incentve Sceme for teUse of Inustra Property

PRIME Management Ofice

208 X Portuga Servces offere by teofices for te Promotonof Inustra Property(PATLIB Regona Ofices)

INPI–Insttuto Nacona a PropreaeInustra (te Natona Patent Ofice)

209 Romana RoPatenTSearc–Patent

ata base

Romanan State Ofice for Inventons an

Trae Marks210 Romana Fnanca support for

patent regstraton abroaby Romanans

Romanan State Ofice for Inventons anTrae Marks

211 Romana Programme to ncreasete compettveness of foo proucts

Mnstry of Agrcuture, Forests an Ruradeveopment

212 Romana Assstance servces n IPR–Pubc Reatons


213 Romana Programme to ncreasete compettveness of nustra proucts

Mnstry of Economy an Commerce

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 278 17-01-2008 11:12:11



279



214 Romania Nationa Programme for sustaining the innovationand technoogy transfer

infrastructure

Ministry of Education and Research–Nationa Authority for Scentic Researc

21 Romana Fnanca support for patent appcaton–INVENT

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF RESEARChdEVELOPMENT FOR MAChINES ANdINSTALLATIONS dESIGNEd TO AGRICULTURE

ANd FOOd INdUSTRY–INMA216 Romana Tarff reucton for

ocumentary researcesservces


217 Romana IP events Romanan State Ofice for Inventons anTrae Marks

218 Romana Genera nformatonservces, offere by PubcReaton Ofice


219 Romana Prntng an pubsng

servces

Romanan State Ofice for Inventons an

Trae Marks220 Romana Copyrgt an reate

rgts assstanceRomanan Copyrgt Ofice

221 Romana Regster for Computer Programs

Romanan Copyrgt Ofice

222 Sovaka Support for R&d,mpementng quatymanagement, protectonof nustra rgts anusng tecnca stanarsn manufacturng anservces

Support for protecton of nustra rgts

Sovak Energy Agency

223 X Sovaka Te Open day Te Inustra Property Ofice of te SovakRepubc (IPO SR)

224 X Sovaka Ján Baý–Aar Te Inustra Property Ofice of te SovakRepubc (IPO SR)

22 Sovaka UmInEx Exbton Te Inustra Property Ofice of te SovakRepubc (IPO SR)

226 Sovaka Possbtes to exbtorgna Sovak tecncaan esgner soutons atexbtons abroa

Te Inustra Property Ofice of te SovakRepubc (IPO SR)

227 Sovaka Specase semnars anorksops


228 X Sovaka “Let’s create traemark”(Pubcaton)


229 Sovaka “Attractve esgn–Introucton to te ssueof esgns for sma an

meum enterprses”(Pubcaton)


230 Sovaka Courses–InteectuaProperty Rgts


231 Sovaka Te ebste of teInustra Property Oficeof te Sovak Repubc


232 Sovaka Support for eveopngne an exstngenterprses an servces

Natona Agency for deveopment of Smaan Meum Enterprses

233 Sovena Voucer Programme of Counseng

JAPTI–Javna agencja RS za pojetnstvo ntuje nvestcje/JAPTI–Pubc Agency for Entrepreneursp an Foregn drectInvestment

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 279 17-01-2008 11:12:11



280


N A T I O

N A L A N D



I N T

H E F I E L D




234 X Sovenia Seminars and workshopson inteectua propertyrights

Urad Repubike Sovenije za inteektuanoastnino (Sovenian Inteectua PropertyOfice)

23 Sovena Internatona conferenceon deveopment of nnovaton capabty ante roe of nteectuaproperty

Ura Repubke Sovenje za nteektuanoastnno (Sovenan Inteectua PropertyOfice) an JAPTI–Javna agencja RS zapojetnštvo n tuje nvestcje (JAPTI–Pubc

Agency for Entrepreneursp an Foregndrect Investment)

236 Span ORdER of November,11t, 200 of tedepartment of Inustry,Commerce an Toursmfor te support of regonanustra companes n2006 to renforce ter compettveness an

mprove ter prouctvty

Programme of nustratecnoogca nnovaton,obtanng of patents

Servco e Fomento Inustra, departamentoof Inustra, Comerco y desarroo, Gobernoe a Comuna Autónoma e Aragón(Servce of Inustra Promoton, departmentof Inustry, Commerce an deveopment,Regona Government of te AutonomousCommunty of Aragón

237 Span Assstance to te InustraSector of te BaearcIsans

Tecnoogca researcan eveopment anprouct nnovaton

dreccó Genera e Promocó Inustra,Conseera ’Economa, Comerc Inústra,Goberno e a Comuna Autónoma e asIsas Baeares (drectorate-genera Of Inustra deveopment, Cabnet of Economy,Commerce an Inustry, RegonaGovernment of te Baearc Isans.

238 X Span Promoton of researc,eveopment annustra nnovaton

Promoton of nustraresearc projects

Centro e Innovacón y desarrooEmpresara (CIdEM), (Centre of Innovatonan Busness deveopment (CIdEM)

239 Span decree 106/2002 of Juy,23r for te Promoton of Inustra Property nExtremaura

dreccón Genera e Promocón Empresarae Inustra, Consejería e Economía,Inustra y Comerco.

240 X Span Promoton of InustraProperty

Servco Gaego e Propea Inustra(SEGAPI), Conseería e Innovacón, Inustra

y Comerco (Servce of Inustra Property of Gaca (SEGAPI), Boar of Innovaton,Inustry an Commerce)

241 Span decree 360/2000 of 20November, capprove support for researc, eveopmentan nnovaton

Measures ntene topromote regstraton anmantenance of patentsby SMEs

departamento e Inustra y Tecnoogía,Comerco y Trabajo; dreccón Genera eInustra y Comerco; Goberno e Navarra(department of Inustry an Tecnoogy,Commerce an Empoyment; drectonGenera of Inustry an Commerce of teRegona Government of te AutonomousCommunty of Navarra)

242 Span Support for companes:researc an eveopmentprogramme

(Comuna Vaenca) Insttuto e a Meana y Pequeña Inustra Vaencana (IMPIVA)(Autonomous Communty of Vaenca)(Insttute of te Sma an Meum-szeInustra Vaencana Company)

243 X Span INNOTEK Programme Accompanyng actons toResearc, deveopmentan Innovaton actvtes(Compementary actons)

dreccón Innovaton y a Socea eInformacón, departamento e Inustra,Comerco y Tursmo, Goberno Vasco.(drecton for Innovaton an te InformatonSocety, department of Inustry, Commercean Toursm, Regona Government of te

Autonomous Co)244 Span La /1999 of

december, 29t, Tax, Amnstratve an SocaOrer Measures

Artce 33. Tax deuctonsfor scentic researc antecnoogca nnovatonactvtes

Agenca Estata e a AmnstracónTrbutara, Mnstero e Economa y hacena(State Agency for Tax Contro Amnstraton,Mnstry of Economy an Tax)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 280 17-01-2008 11:12:12



281



24 Spain Programme for thePromotion of TechnicaResearch (PROFIT),

incuded in the NationaPan of Scentic Researc,deveopment anTecnoogca Innovaton2000-2003 an 2004-2007.

Support for patentstn te frameork of te Natona Pan for Researc, deveopmentan Innovaton 2004-2007

Mnstero e Cenca y Tecnoogía (Mnstryof Scence an Tecnoogy)

246 Span Pan for te promoton of nternatona actvty

Insttuto e Comerco Exteror (Insttute for Internatona Commerce)

247 X Span Subses to foster patentappcatons abroa

Oicna Españoa e Patentes y Marcas(Spans Patent an Traemarks Ofice)

248 Seen Te orkng group for IPR Te Ses Mnstry of Justce

249 Seen Busness Incubator Camers Innovaton

20 X Seen IK2 Innovaton Skåne, teBrge of Knoege

Am Busness Partner Skåne

21 Seen Contrbuton to tecommercazaton of researc-base anknoege-ntensvebusness eas

Innovatonsbron

22 X Seen Te Entrepreneur’s Gue Nutek, Ses Agency for Economc anRegona Grot

23 Seen Regstraton of IPR Te Ses Patent an Regstraton Ofice

24 X Seen wn No Vnnova, te Ses Governmenta Agencyfor Innovaton Systems

2 TeNeterans

TecnoPartner KnoegeExpotaton funngprogramme

TecnoPartner

26 Te

Neterans

Programme Frst exports

on Foregn Markets (PSB)

EVd Internatona Busness an Informaton

(an agency of te Mnstry of Economc Affars), n cooperaton t te regonaCambers of Commerce, Syntens (nnovatonconsutancy, aso an agency of te Mnstry of Economc Affars), an a number of trae

27 X TeNeterans

Innovaton by patentsnformaton (IOI)

Octroocentrum Neeran (NeteransPatent Ofice) an Syntens (nnovatonconsutancy, an agency of te Mnstry of Economc Affars, as e as te Patent Ofice)

28 X TeNeterans

worksop: Searcng ngta patent atabases

Octroocentrum Neeran (NeteransPatent Ofice), commssone by te Mnstryof Economc Affars.

29 X Turkey Inustra Property RgtsSupport

“KOSGEB”: Küçük ve Orta Öçek SanayGeştrme ve destekeme İares Başkanığı(Sma an Meum Inustry deveopmentOrgansaton)

260 Turkey Traemark GuanceSupport


261 Turkey Tecnoogy Researc andeveopment Support


262 UK Servces offere by teBusness an InteectuaProperty Centre

Brts Lbrary

263 UK Innovaton hubs Innovaton hubs Natona heat Servce (NhS)

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 281 17-01-2008 11:12:12



European Commission

Benchmarking national and regional support services for SMEs

in the field of intellectual and industrial property

Luxembourg: Ofice for Ofica Pubcatons of te European Communtes

2007 — 282 pp. — 21 x 29.7 cm

ISBN 978-92-79-06926-0

01_2007_5552_txt_EN.indd 283 17-01-2008 11:12:13

benchmarking national and regional support services for smes in the field of intellectual and...

Documents