NU
MBE
R6
Geneva, November/December 2003
WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION
UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRYPARTNERSHIPSFinding the Right Balance
FRANCHISING ASA BUSINESS OPTION
LEVERAGING IP FORECONOMIC GROWTHThe African Experience
“Encouraging Creativity”World Intellectual Property Day - April 26, 2004
World Intellectual Property Day – April 26 – offers an ideal opportunity to promote, inform andteach the importance of intellectual property as a tool for economic, social and cultural develop-ment. The theme of World Intellectual Property Day 2004 will be “Encouraging Creativity.” WIPOurges its Member States to participate in the event and organize activities on a national level.
To assist them in their outreach activities for World Intellectual Property Day, the Organizationwill send its Member States and all organizations with observer status at WIPO the three newposters pictured here before the end of the year. A CD containing print-ready versions of each ofthe posters in the six official UN languages will be enclosed with the posters. This CD and the CDcontaining the WIPO comics (sent to Member States for World Intellectual Property Day 2003)may be used to print as many copies of the material as needed for outreach activities.
WIPO will also send a new kit containing more outreach material for World Intellectual PropertyDay in early 2004.
WIPO invites its Member States and all the organizations receiving its outreach material to informthe Organization of any activities planned at the national level. Such information will be publishedon a special page on the WIPO website. The broad participation and support received during theprevious observations of World Intellectual Property Day has helped make the event a successworldwide. For more information on past activities, please visit www.wipo.int.
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
1
Table of Contents
Geneva,November-December2003
2 � 2003 Session of WIPO Assemblies Meet
5 � Exhibition: Traditional Costumes and Music
6 � Intellectual Property as a Lever for Economic Growth:The African Experience, Part II
10 � IP and DevelopmentUniversity-Industry Partnerships: Finding the Right Balance
14 � IP and BusinessStarting a New Company: Consider Franchising as an Option
18 � Protection of Traditional Knowledge andGenetic Resources
22 � PCT-SAFE Moves Ahead
23 � Registration System for Industrial Designs Set to Expand
24 � Creative Planet
26 � Spotlight on Women and IP
27 � News RoundupWIPO Director General Meets with President of BulgariaWIPO and Trilateral Offices Agree to Reinforce TiesWIPO Pledges to Boost its Patent Statistics ActivitiesWIPO Launches Cyber-Learning Course in Arabic
29 � Schedule of Meetings
2W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
The WIPO Assemblies concluded onOctober 1 following a review of ac-tivities and agreement on the agendaof the Organization for the next year.Ambassador Bernard Kessedjian ofFrance chaired the meetings of theAssemblies, which bring together the179 Member States of the Organi-zation as well as representatives ofa number of intergovernmental andnon-governmental organizations.Ms. Dorothy Angote, Registrar-Gen-eral, Department of the Registrar-General, Attorney-General’s Cham-bers of Kenya and Mr. WangJingchuan, Commissioner, State In-tellectual Property Office of China,served as Vice Chairs.
In his closing remarks, AmbassadorKessedjian welcomed the positiveoutcome of the Assemblies and thesuccessful review of the Organiz-ation’s activities and its future direc-tion. He applauded the spirit of con-sensus that characterized the deci-sion-making process at the Assem-blies.
“Intellectual property, a powerfulcatalyst of growth and progress,should be increasingly put at the ser-vice of development, that is, at theservice of all, as a universal tool
whose benefits are equally shared,”said Ambassador Kessedjian. Hethanked WIPO Director GeneralKamil Idris and the staff of the Orga-nization for consistently offering theMember States comprehensive pro-grams, in spite of budgetary con-straints. He commended Dr. Idris forhis leadership of the Organizationsaying “thanks to his sense of balance,justice and his willingness to listen,we are able to respond to the mostdifficult questions without anyonefeeling sidelined.” AmbassadorKessedjian said WIPO is executing itsmandate in an “exemplary” manner.
The highlights of the meetings, whichtook place from September 22 toOctober 1, include:
Program and Budget2004-2005
The General Assembly approved byconsensus the 2004-2005 Programand Budget, which proposes a slightdecrease as compared to 2002-2003, owing to the completion ofmajor infrastructure projects in thearea of information technology andbuildings during that financial pe-riod. Member States approved a bud-get amounting to 638.8 million SwissFrancs (CHF). This reflects a decrease
of 30 million CHF, or 4.5 percent ascompared with the revised budgetfor 2002-2003 of 668.8 million CHF.
Member States also endorsedDr. Idris’ strategy and mid-term planfor the next six years, which stressesthe development of an intellectualproperty (IP) culture as a strategicgoal to help all stakeholders realizethe potential of IP as a tool for eco-nomic, social and cultural develop-ment. The plan affirms that the eco-nomic health of a country – as wellas its success in meeting develop-ment challenges such as bridging theknowledge divide and reducing pov-erty – will depend on an ability todevelop, utilize and protect its na-tional creativity and innovation. Aneffective and well-balanced IP sys-tem, allied to pro-active IP policy-making and focused strategic plan-ning, will help nations to promoteand protect intellectual assets, driveeconomic growth and generatewealth.
WIPO Patent Agenda
The Assemblies considered four stud-ies on the effect of the patent systemon developing countries by expertswith various backgrounds from Af-rica, the Arab region, Asia and LatinAmerica. The studies were commis-sioned by WIPO within the contextof the WIPO Patent Agenda to helpidentify issues which need to betaken into account to ensure that thepatent system generates the maxi-mum benefit for states at varyinglevels of development. A number of
2003 SESSION OFWIPO ASSEMBLIES
WIPO Deputy Director GeneralPhilippe Petit,
WIPO Director GeneralKamil Idris,
French AmbassadorBernard Kessedjan and
Assistant Director GeneralFrancis Gurry
Phot
o: M
erce
des M
artín
ez D
ozal
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
3
developing countries emphasizedthat, while this was a useful step, fur-ther careful consideration was stillneeded, especially in areas of par-ticular policy concern.
The WIPO Patent Agenda was initi-ated by the Director General in Sep-tember 2001 to coordinate discus-sions on the future development ofthe international patent system. Itsgoal is to develop an internationalpatent system that is more user-friendly and accessible, and providesan appropriate balance between therights of inventors and the interestsof the general public, while at thesame time taking into account theimplications for the developingworld.
Traditional Knowledge,Folklore and GeneticResources
Member States decided to push for-ward with work relating to the IP as-pects of traditional knowledge (TK),folklore and genetic resources. TheGeneral Assembly decided on an ex-tended mandate for the WIPO Inter-governmental Committee on Intellec-tual Property and Genetic Resources,Traditional Knowledge and Folklore(IGC). The mandate requires the IGCto accelerate its work, and to focus inparticular on the international dimen-sion of IP and genetic resources, TKand folklore. The new mandate ex-cludes no outcome for the IGC’s work,including the possible developmentof an international instrument or in-struments in this field.
Many comments highlighted the factthat the IGC’s work to date has al-ready led to a much greater under-standing of the concepts and issuesaddressed, and has clarified how todeal with concerns about inadequaterecognition and protection of TK andTraditional Cultural Expressions(TCEs). The discussions highlightedthe expectation of a number of coun-tries that specific steps should betaken to strengthen protection, in-cluding the development of specificnew international instruments. Othercountries stressed that the signifi-cance of the issues, and their com-plexity, require further analysis andclarification before reaching formaloutcomes. Still other countries heldthe view that more work needs to bedone in exploring the full potentialof existing IP rights and systems toprotect TK and TCEs.
The program and budget approvedby the current session of the Assem-bly included a range of complemen-tary activities, such as continued ca-pacity-building, legislative assistanceand cooperation with a range of na-tional, regional and international ini-tiatives in the areas of TK, folklore,and genetic resources.
The Madrid System
Member Sates agreed that compa-nies and individuals seeking to pro-tect their trademarks in multiplecountries could file their applica-tions in the Spanish language as ofApril 1, 2004. Currently, interna-tional trademark applications underthe Madrid Protocol for the Interna-tional Registration of Trademarks arerequired to be submitted in Englishor French. Inclusion of Spanish willbe a strong incentive for Spanish-speaking countries to join theMadrid Protocol, as it promises tofacilitate their accession process andwill pave the way for the Madrid sys-tem to become a truly global regis-tration mechanism. Participation inthe Madrid system of the 18 Span-ish-speaking countries that are cur-rently outside the system is of sig-nificant interest for existing as wellas potential users of the system.
Member States also decided toamend the Common Regulationsunder the Madrid Agreement andProtocol in order to make the Madridsystem fully compatible with the Eu-ropean Community trademark sys-tem. In view of these changes, theEuropean Community (EC) delegatesaid that it was likely that the ECwould submit its instrument of ac-cession to the Madrid Protocolwithin one year. The accession of theEC to the Madrid Protocol will bethe first time that the EC, as a regionalbody, adheres to a WIPO treaty.
>>>
4W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
PCT Reform
The Assembly of the Patent Coopera-tion Treaty (PCT) Union made a num-ber of amendments to the PCT Regu-
lations following previously adoptedmajor changes designed to stream-line and rationalize the PCT system,and agreed on a future work programfor PCT reform. The Assembly alsomodified certain fees in connectionwith the processing of PCT applica-tions. The international filing fee wasfixed at 1,400 Swiss francs and thehandling fee was reduced from 233to 200 Swiss francs. Fee reductionsfor applicants from least developedcountries were expanded and a newscale of fee reductions was adoptedfor international applications filed inelectronic format.
The National Board of Patents andRegistration of Finland was ap-pointed by the Assembly as an Inter-national Searching Authority and In-ternational Preliminary ExaminingAuthority under the PCT, with likelyeffect in 2004. Finally, the Assemblytook note of status reports on twomajor IT projects relating to the PCT:the IMPACT (Information Manage-
ment for the PAtent CooperationTreaty) Project and the PCT-SAFE (Se-cure Applications Filed Electroni-cally) Project.
Audiovisual Performances
Member States reiterated their sup-port for convening an ad hoc infor-mal meeting in Geneva on the pro-tection of audiovisual performanceson November 6 and 7. The meeting,open to all Member States and inter-ested intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, is de-signed to renew the international dia-logue on the protection of audiovi-sual performances with a view toclarifying and resolving outstandingissues. Delegates agreed that themeeting is necessary and timelygiven the importance of the questionfor all stakeholders. A number ofcountries urged for the early resolu-tion of the outstanding issues so thata new treaty could be established.The Member States also agreed tokeep the subject under review at theirSeptember 2004 meetings.
The Second WIPO InternetDomain Name Process
Member States were briefed aboutthe status of recommendations madeby the General Assembly last year infollowing-up on the Second WIPOInternet Domain Name Process. TheGeneral Assembly had recom-mended that the Uniform DomainName Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP), which is currently limitedto trademarks, be extended to pro-tect country names and the namesand acronyms of intergovernmentalorganizations against their abusiveregistration as domain names. WIPO
has transmitted these recommenda-tions to the Internet Corporation forAssigned Names and Numbers(ICANN), the body responsible foramending the UDRP. ICANN has setup a working group to deal with tech-nical issues of implementing WIPO’srecommendations, in which WIPOwill participate.
Constitutional Structure
Member States formally adoptedthree specific amendments aimed,among others, at streamlining andsimplifying WIPO’s governance andconstitutional structure to reinforcethe transparency, efficiency and ef-fectiveness of the Organization.These changes include the abolitionof the WIPO Conference and the for-mal adoption of a unitary contribu-tion system and changes in contri-bution classes to reflect the currentpractice, which more equitably takesinto account the different economiccircumstances of WIPO MemberStates. The third amendment to therelevant WIPO-administered treatiesmakes provision for holding ordinarysessions of the WIPO Assemblies onan annual rather than a biennial ba-sis. Under current arrangements, theAssemblies meet once a year, buteach alternate year is considered anextraordinary session. The threeamendments will enter into force onemonth after written notifications ofacceptance, effected in accordancewith their respective constitutionalprocesses, have been notified to theDirector General by three-fourths ofWIPO’s Member States.
Phot
o: M
erce
des M
artín
ez D
ozal
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
5
Exhibition: Traditional Costumes and Music
WIPO hosted the exhibition “TraditionalCostumes and Music from Albania, Bulgaria,Croatia, Greece, Hungary and Romania”from September 22 to October 3. The ex-hibition provided an insight into the rich cul-ture and traditions of these six countries,featuring a sampling of the hundreds of cos-tumes in varying colors and materials fromthe region. Two musicians from Romaniaperformed at the opening of the exhibitionon the first day of the WIPO Assemblies, and music from the regionplayed through its duration.
Croatia
Bulgaria
Romania
Program Performance
In approving the Program Perfor-mance Report for the year 2002, theGeneral Assembly noted WIPO’sachievements during the first six-yearterm of Dr. Idris, as documented inthe consecutive and comprehensiveProgram Performance Reports sub-mitted to Member States on an an-nual basis since 1998. These docu-ments – part of WIPO’s results-basedmanagement system – inform Mem-ber States of results achieved by theOrganization in line with the crite-ria established in the program andbudget. Member States in particularunderscored WIPO’s achievementsin becoming a more transparent,open and forward-looking Organi-zation and in promoting IP as a toolfor social, economic and cultural de-velopment worldwide.
Many Member States expressed ap-preciation for WIPO’s wide range oftechnical and legal assistance in themodernization of IP infrastructureand implementation of internationaltreaties. They requested that WIPOcontinue to support their IP devel-opment and provide expertise tocontribute to their national capacity-building and the integration of de-velopmental aspects into intellectualproperty policies. They further ex-pressed their confidence in futureachievements during the DirectorGeneral’s second term in office.Member States also noted the Pro-gram Implementation Overview,which contained information on theimplementation of major activitiesduring the first six months of 2003.
♦
Both the music and costumesrepresent a great variety ofstyles, illustrating the power ofhuman creativity to enrich ourenvironment, making it moreinteresting and enjoyable.WIPO and its Member Statesactively encourage a broaderunderstanding and apprecia-tion of the value of creativityand innovation as natural re-sources common to all nations.
6W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
“The real voyage of discovery con-sists not in seeking new lands but inhaving new eyes”. — Marcel Proust
Seeing things differently – spottingthe potential in an object or idea,imagining new or better ways totackle a problem, wanting to share avision of life in words, art or music –that is the start of the creative andinnovative process. This article is thesecond in a series that examines howthe intellectual property (IP) systemcan transform the fruits of that pro-cess into valuable assets which canbe used as building blocks for eco-nomic growth, while contributing tosocial well-being and cultural en-richment.
The first article, in last month’s issue,identified certain key elements thatneed to be in place at the nationallevel to enable the effective creationand identification of IP assets andtheir subsequent transformation intouseful and effective tools for wealthcreation. It examined specific in-stances of IP use – including the de-velopment of an anti-HIV vaccineand a treatment for sickle-cell dis-ease – to highlight potential benefitsin leveraging the IP system. This ar-ticle continues that examination withthe story of a plant – a cucumber-like succulent – growing in the harshearth of the Kalahari Desert in SouthAfrica, home to the San people forthousands of years.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS ALEVER FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH
The African Experience, Part II
Knowledge, IP and benefit-sharing
The San have used the bitter flesh ofthe Hoodia plant (Hoodia gordonia)for centuries to block feelings of hun-ger and give them energy when hunt-ing or on long trips across their in-hospitable land. This practice wasbrought to the attention of the SouthAfrican Council for Scientific andIndustrial Research (CSIR), based inPretoria, which began to take an in-terest in the properties of the Hoodia.The innovative environment inwhich the CSIR functions allows itto carry out much important researchand development. The work resultedin this case in certain properties ofthe Hoodia and of their potential asan appetite-suppressant and anti-obesity drug. The market potential ofsuch a new drug is considerable, par-ticularly as it is derived from a natu-ral product and, seemingly, does nothave the side effects of many suchtreatments. Thus the CSIR was ableto license its patented technology1
to Phytopharm, a UK-based com-pany, for the necessary investmentneeded to further test, develop andcommercialize this new IP asset.
Importantly – although after a con-troversial start involving some legalnegotiation – the role of San ancientknowledge and innovative activity inthe initial discovery and develop-ment of the properties of the Hoodiawas recognized, explicitly acknowl-edged by the CSIR, and set out in amemorandum of understanding(MoU) between the CSIR and theSan. The MoU was followed by abenefit-sharing agreement, providingfor the San to obtain 8 percent of all
milestone payments2 received fromthe licensee by CSIR as well as 6percent of any royalties CSIR receiveson sales of the final product. Reportsestimate that the milestone paymentswill amount to some US$1 to $1.5million, while royalty paymentscould bring additional millions to theeconomically poor San.
South Africa’s Minister of Arts, Culture,Science and Technology, Dr. Ben Ngubane,is being shown how Hoodia is traditionallysliced and eaten by Mr. Petrus Vaalbooi,Chairman of the San Council, withDr Sibusiso Sibisi, CSIR President, looking on.The benefit-sharing agreement between theSan and the CSIR was signed on the sameday, with Dr. Ngubane as witness.
Phot
os: C
SIR
The Hoodia plant
1 The CSIR filed an international patent application through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) (WO98/46243, filed on April 15, 1998,covering more than 100 countries) on the basis of its national application (national application number 97/3201, filed on April 15, 1997).
2 Milestone payments are paid during the clinical development stage on the successful completion of certain technical performance targets.
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
7
The development of this Hoodia-de-rived product has had several impor-tant consequences for the San. It hasresulted in the 100,000-strong Sanpopulation organizing and setting upthe San Hoodia Benefit SharingTrust3, which will ensure that themonies received are used for “thegeneral development and training ofthe San community.” Immediateplans include buying land, buildingclinics and investing in educationand development projects.
At a workshop on benefit-sharingheld last year “it was decided thatthe relationship between the CSIRand the San should involve not onlymonetary ‘sharing’ but also the shar-ing of knowledge.”4 Thus the San arenow involved in sharing their expertknowledge and ability to identify andpinpoint the properties of the floraof their arid land with the CSIR.
The lawyer representing the San inthe Hoodia case, Roger Chennells,says the ground-breaking, benefit-sharing agreement “represents enor-mous potential for future bio-pros-pecting successes based on the San’sextensive knowledge of the tradi-tional uses of indigenous plants ofthe area. We are optimistic that thiscase will serve as a sound founda-tion for future collaboration, not onlyfor the San but also for other holdersof traditional knowledge” (seewww.csir.co.za).
Thus, the San have been key partici-pants in an agreement that has beencalled a turning point for indigenous
people fighting to protect their rolein the development of potentiallyeconomically valuable products.Other benefits include possible Saninvolvement in the commercial cul-tivation of Hoodia – if a botanical“crop” is required for future produc-tion of the potential drug.
The San and the CSIR, as well as de-velopment organizations and thedrug companies, seem satisfied withthe agreement:
� Petrus Vaalbooi, Chairman of theSan Council – “We see this as anopportunity to engage with a part-ner in a way that will achieve ben-efits that will permeate to the verypoorest people within our commu-nities” (see observer.guardian.co.uk/ internat ional/s tor y/0,6903,676735,00.html). (As earlyas 1998, a WIPO fact-finding mis-sion on IP and traditional knowl-edge met with Mr. Vaalbooi andother members of the San commu-nity to discuss their IP needs andexpectations.)
� Dr. Petro Terblanche, CSIR Bio/Chemtek Director – “We areproud to be working in domainswhich require us to enter maidenterritory in terms of how indig-enous knowledge and scienceinteract and how this interactioncan best unlock the economicand social benefits inherent in thecountry’s biodiversity” (seewww.csir.co.za).
� Richard Dixey, CEO ofPhytopharm – “ I have always be-lieved that this type of knowledge
is the most valuable asset of in-digenous tribes…royalty pay-ments from medicines couldtransform their prospects” (seeeducat ion.guardian.co.uk/higher/medicalscience/story/0,9837,508790,00.html).
� Kxao Moses, Chairman of theBoard of Trustees of The WorkingGroup for Indigenous Minoritiesin Southern Africa (WIMSA) –“The international interest that theagreement…has aroused hashelped…to raise awareness of theneed to protect and control Sanintellectual property…”5
Lessons learned
The Hoodia story illustrates many ofthe elements necessary in construct-ing an effective IP strategy that im-pacts positively on national eco-nomic growth and is of benefit to allthe protagonists:
� Recognition of existing and po-tential national intellectual assets– here, traditional phyto-pharma-ceutical use of Hoodia: manycountries would profit from an “IPaudit” to identify and assess theircompetitive sectors to enable tar-geting and clustering of innova-tive activity in those areas;
� Strong government support forresearch and development (R&D)and innovation creation: CSIR hasgovernment support and partialgovernment funding; it is also theowner of patents it takes out onthe fruits of its research and hasgained experience in using these
3 The trust is composed of three representatives appointed by the San Council, a CSIR representative, a non-voting observer from the SouthAfrican Department of Science and Technology, three representatives appointed by WIMSA, a member of WIMSA, and a professional appointedby the San Council.
4 Paper prepared by V. Geingos and M. Ngakaeaja for the Second South-South Biopiracy Summit in August 2002.5 Speech delivered to the San Hoodia Benefit Sharing Agreement Celebration at Molopo Lodge, South Africa on 24 March 2003.
8W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
to obtain financial return to fundfurther research. The percentageof government funding hasdropped considerably over theyears as the CSIR harvests the re-turn on the IP it has created;
� Importance of an IP managementstrategy: for example, the filing ofa patent application through thePCT (see footnote 1) for technol-ogy and products potentially prof-itable in the global market. In thiscase, the international applicationunder the PCT has already re-sulted in patents in several coun-tries, which allowed the CSIR toensure the maximum benefit fromthe technology, covering the mostpromising markets for the endproduct, and contributing to thesuccessful conclusion of a patentlicensing agreement with a UK-based company;
� Partnership building between thepublic and private sectors as wellas with foreign companies, usingpatents as a catalyst;
� Expertise in creatively leveragingIP– here, negotiating the licens-ing agreement, although thiscould also involve joint ventures,outright sale, etc.;
� Benefit-sharing for all those con-tributing to the creation of the IPasset – in this case, helping to ce-ment a partnership with theknowledge asset holders to en-sure further collaboration;
� Spin-off benefits, such as job cre-ation (potential Hoodia farmingby the San), enhanced respect for
the collective knowledge of tra-ditional communities, and the en-couragement of innovation on awider national level, which helpscontribute to the creation of anIP culture.
The Hoodia example shows how anindigenous knowledge asset can bedeveloped and commercialized inthe interests of national wealth cre-ation. It also underscores the role ofIP rights – in this case, patents – inthe benefit-sharing process. It is thisdevelopment of an economicallyexploitable asset that allows the cre-ation of an income stream to be dis-tributed among beneficiaries such asthe San.
Sharing the riches of culturalheritage
Using patents to give economic valueto national innovation and inventionis only one means of exploiting the IPsystem; copyright, performers’ rights,designs, trademarks and geographicalindications can also be extremely ef-fective means of leveraging a finan-cial return on intellectual assets, par-ticularly in relation to cultural heri-tage. Using these IP tools, Africanmusicians, performers, craftsmakersand designers can contribute to eco-nomic development in the form of jobcreation, skills training, tourism andforeign exchange earnings. The mar-keting of cultural products and ser-vices is also a way for communitiesto reduce poverty and to strengthentheir cultural identity. This also con-tributes to cultural diversity and en-riching the lives of those outside the
traditional communities themselves.These themes underpin WIPO’s on-going program on the IP protectionof traditional cultural expression/ex-pressions of folklore.
Many African countries’ copyrightlaws provide for the protection ofexpressions of folklore in recognitionthat traditional creations merit pro-tection as intellectual assets. TheBangui Agreement of the Orga-nisation africaine de la propriétéintellectuelle (OAPI) provides a re-gional system for folklore protection.African countries and organizationsare leading participants in the workof the WIPO IntergovernmentalCommittee (see page 18) exploringhow to effectively protect, amongother things, expressions of folkloreand traditional or cultural expressions.
Governments are increasingly awareof the importance of the IP system inrelation to the cultural industries andas a revenue-generating tool, and areconstructing the necessary nationalinfrastructure to enable the benefitsof the system to be realized. For ex-ample, the Copyright Society ofMalawi (COSOMA) – which, amongother things, collects and distributesroyalties to its membership of over
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
9
1,000 authors and composers – wasfunded by the government from itscreation in 1992 until 1998, when itwas able to become self-financing.Using its distribution figures for thebanderole stickers (see WIPO Maga-zine July-September 2002) used todistinguish between genuine and pi-rated music cassettes as a basis foran estimate on domestic music sales,COSOMA calculates that, between1999 and 2001, over three-quarterof a million US dollars was distrib-uted to rightsholders in this sector.
Targeting partnerships
Partnerships are a major element inthe successful leveraging of IP inmany developing countries. Collabo-ration can be between the public andprivate sectors (see article page 10),such as government support for R&Dand assistance to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in their ef-forts to commercialize national in-novation, as well as with interna-tional and regional bodies. This in-cludes support from internationalgovernmental organizations for na-
tional initiatives as well as joint ven-tures, licensing agreements and otherforms of collaboration with interna-tional private sector companies.
Other activities designed to create afavorable environment for innovationto flourish, include such initiatives asthe Fond d’aide à la promotion del’invention et de l’innovation (FAPI)set up by OAPI to promote innova-tion among African SMEs and to as-sist them in the protection of their IPassets. FAPI currently operates withinOAPI and caters to SMEs and inven-tors from the 16 OAPI memberStates. It seeks to contribute to theeconomic development of OAPIMember States by supporting thecommercialization of innovation andproviding specialized services, bothtechnical and financial, for potentialinvestors, inventors, researchers andstart-ups. FAPI is now fully functionalwith national focal points in each ofthe OAPI Member States (seewww.oapi.wipo.net.projetfapi.html).
Similar organizations, concernedwith creating a fertile environmentfor the economic exploitation of IPassets, have also been set up on anational basis; Senegal’s Agencesénégalaise pour l’inventiontechnologique (ASIT), is a notableexample.
Conclusion
Throughout the African region, inno-vation and invention are receivingincreasing recognition for their abil-ity not only to ease and enhance dailyliving but also to function as an effi-
Public outreach – explaining the “why”and the “how”
Public outreach to increase awareness of the potential of the IP sys-tem, allied to an infrastructure that provides a user-friendly system –plus a good dose of individual determination – can help innovatorsthemselves bring their products to market.
Mr. Abdellahi Ally, a Mauritanian inventor, did just that. Mr. Ally askedfor information on how to protect and commercialize his invention,a novel procedure for making date preserve, and received assis-tance from the Mauritanian Ministry of Industry, OAPI and profes-sional advisors that enabled him to patent his invention.
Patent protection boosted the confidence of potential investors andhelped him to obtain financial support from banks and find partnersinterested in marketing his product. This led to a continuous increasein production, as well as his receipt of several prizes, including thefirst prize in the National Invention Fair in 2000, a gold medal fromthe Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)on World Food Day that same year and the prize for the “best in-vention likely to interest the international market” at the secondAfrican Invention and Technological Innovation Fair. Mr. Ally is nowplanning to market his product abroad, in particular in date-produc-ing countries such as Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. He is consider-ing granting licenses to allow production to be undertaken by com-panies already established in these countries. He is currently work-ing on creating a suitable trademark for his product.
10W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
cient tool for economic growth. Froma pilot silk project based on the co-coons of various subspecies ofGonometa worms, which has trig-gered a return to the dying art of handspinning, to production of a pumppowered by children at play, via theinvention of an efficient cost-effectiveway of obtaining accurate CD4 whiteT cell counts – the people of this vastcontinent are leveraging ancientknowledge and skills to create andinnovate in new fields.
In looking with “new eyes” at theirintellectual assets, which often havebeen left untapped for commercial-ization, African countries are in-creasingly recognizing why and howit is important for them to protect andexploit these assets through the IPsystem.
The case studies in this article indi-cate that the mere existence of an IPsystem does not bring immediate re-sults. Economic growth through thestrategic use of the IP system will hap-pen only if governments, partners andother stakeholders work together withcreators and innovators to integrate IPinto development policies and intoindividual business and economicactivities. WIPO, along with its ownpartners and stakeholders, seeks toensure that, through informed andskilful use of the IP system, its ben-efits are made available to all.
♦
Technological innovation, fueled bygovernment-led research and devel-opment (R&D), is a driving force forindustrial growth and enhances anation’s competitive advantage. Uni-versities are among major players inthe innovation system – both in re-search and in training skilled person-nel. They have the potential to act asstrong drivers of growth in the knowl-edge economy. Consider one ex-ample: in the United States ofAmerica (U.S.) 73 percent of the re-search papers cited in bio-industrypatent applications were written byscientists working in universities orgovernment or non-profit organiza-tions (source www.bio.org/laws/impact.html).
To enhance economic growth, it iscrucial to transfer the knowledgegenerated in universities and govern-ment-funded research institutions tobusiness and industry for commer-cial exploitation. Such transfer usu-
UNIVERSITY-INDUSTRYPARTNERSHIPS: FINDINGTHE RIGHT BALANCE
ally requires industry to license thepatents granted to universities andresearch institutions. The resultinguniversity-industry partnershipthrough the transfer of intellectualproperty (IP) rights can result in sig-nificant economic benefit for coun-tries and their people.
Governments are increasingly recog-nizing that it is not enough to fundpublic research organizations (PROs)and allow the research to be placedin the public domain. Private own-ership and commercial interests pro-vide a strong incentive to research.Technology transfer from universitiesto industry is encouraged when uni-versities are allowed to patent andlicense the results of their researchto industry. This results in a “win-win” situation for both PROs andgovernments. For PROs such trans-actions yield licensing and royaltyrevenues, more resources for re-search, and greater exchanges be-
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
11
tween industry and academic insti-tutions. For government, the benefitsinclude better use of research forsocial benefit and expanded employ-ment in industry and start-up com-panies.
Legal Framework
The primary business of universitiesis teaching and research, but the ex-tent to which the rich intellectualactivity at universities and researchcenters is also applied to solvingpractical problems supports andfeeds the cycle of creation and eco-nomic development.1 As an incen-tive to universities, government mustset up the necessary legal frameworkfor the ownership and transfer oftechnology.
The U.S. Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 re-shaped university-private sector part-nership and promoted a substantialincrease in technology transfer fromuniversities to industry, and ulti-mately to the public. The Act allowsU.S. universities to patent inventionsfunded by federal grants and retainthe royalties that these patents gen-erate. This has become a significantincentive for the commercializationof the results of public sector R&Dactivities, and has led to a tremen-dous acceleration in the introductionof new products through universitytechnology transfer activities. Be-tween 1986 and 2000, the increasein U.S. university patents was phe-nomenal. In 1986 only 619 univer-sity patents were granted, by 2000the figure had jumped to 3,661. Be-tween 1993 and 2000, U.S. univer-
sities were granted some 20,000 pat-ents. In 1999 alone, some US$ 862million in royalties was earned frompatents and licensing activities atuniversities and the research institu-tions connected to them. In the sameyear 344 new companies wereformed based on licenses from aca-demic institutions.2 In 1997, US$27.8 billion of the country’s eco-nomic activity could be attributed toacademic licensing, supporting245,930 jobs.3
Encouraged by the success of theBayh-Dole Act, the Japanese Govern-ment in 1998 enacted the Law forPromoting University-Industry Tech-nology Transfer. Japan has includedsignificant measures to encouragepatent activity in universities in de-veloping recent IP strategies on thenational level.
A number of academic institutionsin others countries are also pursuingIP strategies. Oxford University usesIsis Technology Innovation as its tech-nology transfer company. CambridgeUniversity has a Technology Trans-fer Office (TTO) to manage all of itsIP. The TTO formed six companiesand consultancies from August 2001to July 2002 and earned some US$5.90 million through royalties andsoftware sales during that period.
Options for DevelopingCountries
What are the policy options availablefor developing countries? TurningScience into Business, a study onpatenting and licensing at PROs by
the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD), has documented differentpractices in 13 member countriesand highlighted the policy optionsavailable to developing countries.These include emulation of Bayh-Dole (Germany, Japan and Korea),reform of employment laws (Austria,Denmark, Germany and Norway) orissuance of national codes of prac-tice or IP guidelines (Canada and Ire-land).
The experience of the developed coun-tries has revealed that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ policy approach to man-age the IP assets generated by PROs.Such IP management should be tai-lored to the kind of research engagedin, the type of institutional structuresexisting, the overall amounts availablefor R&D, and the country’s culture andthe type of specialization. These are allcountry-specific factors that need to betaken into account by policymakers.The policy framework should alsochannel public resources towardsgovernment’s policy priorities for sci-ence, technology, education and de-velopment of indigenous technologi-cal capacity in priority areas. Therefore,the OECD study shows that import-ing policy solutions without adaptingthem to the national context wouldresult in sub-optimal policy outcomes.Broadly, the policy framework should:
���Maximize the social benefits fromgovernment investment in R&D andensure that the commercialization ofthat R&D generates economicgrowth. The imperative for policy-
1 Intellectual Property A Power Tool for Economic Growth, Page 94.2 http://nasulgc.org/cott/bayh-dohl/bremer_speech.htm.3 Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM).
>>>
12W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
makers is to create a policy space,which would balance support forcommercially-funded research andentrepreneurship at PROs, on theone hand, and the protection of pub-lic access to IP generated with pub-lic research funds on the other.Policymakers need to ensure that theentrepreneurial spirit of PROs doesnot compromise the fundamentalresearch and the academic obliga-tions of researchers. There are legiti-mate concerns that universities mayshift from fundamental science tomore applied work, which woulddamage and distort the educationaland research missions of the univer-sities and their role in the develop-ment of research talent. The rightbalance is needed for the propermanagement of IP generated withgovernment funding.
���Create a coherent and consistentpolicy on publicly-funded research.There is an urgent need for govern-ments to create the legal frameworkthat will allow the ownership of IPby publicly-funded research organi-zations. Generally, ownership shouldnot belong to the government agencywhich funded the research as lackof market exclusivity and uncertain-ties of ownership (danger that com-petitors could acquire licenses andmanufacture similar products) wouldmake industry reluctant to invest inand develop new products from fed-erally-owned research. Governmentinterests could be preserved througha provision to reserve certain rightsfor the funding agency.
���Allow each university or researchinstitution to develop its own policyon commercialization of researchand distribution of benefits from pat-enting within the larger nationalpolicy framework. A model that per-mits these institutions to own patentscould be an optimal way to addressthe question of ownership. Countriesthat follow this model have severalavailable alternatives regarding theownership of patents and the shar-ing of royalties between the PROsand inventors. One could argue acase for individual ownership of pat-ents in a system that recognizes in-centives, but this could also lead toexcessive fragmentation of IP rightsand the danger of licensing to a for-eign entity for personal profit. As sev-eral models of ownership exist,policymakers should consider spe-cific national situations while mak-ing a determination.
���Reconcile the “publication versusprotection” dilemma. The universityresearcher’s priority to publish resultsas soon as possible, motivated by thefact that publications are generallyperceived as the main measure of per-formance and scientific credibility foracademic researchers, often results inearly disclosure of the invention, thuscompromising its patentability. To ad-dress this issue, governments need toaddress the question of the grace pe-riod for filing of a patent.
Technology Transfer Offices
An equally important role of IP man-agement in PROs is the support ofspin-offs, taking equity in start-ups,supporting SMEs and steering re-search to key competitive areas.
A direct consequence of deliberatepolicies in this direction is the cre-ation of technology transfer offices(TTOs) – such as those at Oxford andCambridge Universities (mentionedabove) – in public research institu-tions with knowledgeable IP assetmanagement professionals. The na-ture of the TTO, whether on-site orregional, would depend on the kindof research undertaken and the totalfinancial support available.
Experience with TTOs, even in de-veloped countries, has been rela-tively brief. The OECD study showsthat most TTOs are less than ten yearsold, have less than five staff mem-bers and are integrated into the uni-versity.
Initiatives fromDeveloping Countries
Overall government expenditure onR&D in developing countries –around one percent of GDP – is lim-ited when compared with that ofdeveloped countries, which allocatesome three percent of GDP. Yet, inspite of limited resources, develop-ing countries have been quick to re-alize the critical role of R&D invest-ment and adopt policies designed toconvert the innovative capacities of
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
13
their research organizations intocommercially viable inventions.
Realizing the potential, the Councilof Scientific and Industrial Research(CSIR) of India created Patestate, acollaborative effort between its Intel-lectual Property Management Divi-sion and the Department of Biotech-nology, Government of India, to fa-cilitate the process of licensing andto help laboratories leverage fullvalue of their IP. Patestate assists CSIRwith the commercialization of tech-nology, by deriving income from itsR&D and by finding industrial part-ners that can improve their products,processes and business through useof CSIR patented technologies. Cur-rently, there are some 6,000 CSIRpatents worldwide.
Significant scientific knowledge andinnovation in Uganda lies in the handsof public research institutions and in-dividuals. Extensive potential to de-sign and generate products and pro-cesses remains unexploited, becausethe research capacities of the highly-skilled manpower in these scientific,research and academic institutions isnot adequately linked to the produc-tive industrial sector. The mission ofthe Scientific and Industrial Researchand Development (SIRD) Unit, estab-lished by the Uganda National Coun-cil for Science & Technology, is “tocreate an enabling policy environ-ment for the conduct of research andexperimental development of socialand economic significance to Ugandaso as to improve the quality of life andgenerate wealth.”
In Jamaica the National Council onScience and Technology (NCST) ispromoting national networking ofscience and technology institutionsthrough the coordination of bi-monthly meetings with Jamaica’sR&D and testing institutions. Thesemeetings facilitate dialogue amongthe academic and public and privatesector science and technology insti-tutions to solve problems, share in-formation on work programs anddevelop collaborative programs fornational development.
The University of Stellenbosch inSouth Africa has created an Officeof Intellectual Property responsiblefor the protection and commercialapplication of IP developed by thestaff and students. The office has beensuccessful to date in encouragingcommercial exploitation through theoutright sale of IP, licensing or jointventures. The university has alsostarted Unistel Holdings as a hold-ing company for spin-offs. It has acombined turnover of around US$11.14 million a year and has led tothe creation of 138 jobs. The Uni-versity of Cape Town (UCT) recentlystarted UCT Innovation as a wholly-owned company and the commer-cializing of UCT’s research has al-ready earned about US$ 1.78 mil-lion. The University of theWitwatersrand has started an officialcommercialization channel calledWits Enterprise, owned by the uni-versity and staff.
The South African Council for Sci-entific and Industrial Research (CSIR)(see article on page 6) is backed, andpartially funded, by the government.The South African framework policypermits CSIR to own and license pat-ents, such as for medical applicationsderived from the Hoodia plant. CSIRis “the premier technology and re-search organization in Africa com-mitted to innovation, sustainabledevelopment and economic growthand creating value for clients, part-ners and stakeholders.”
Conclusion
It is now widely accepted that tech-nological progress contributes toeconomic growth. The rapid devel-opment of some economies in the1990s through knowledge creation,R&D investment and the building ofhuman capital shows that promotionof university and public research in-stitution partnerships with industry isa critical policy tool available forgovernments.
♦
14W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
Importance of Franchising to the Economy
Many leading international businesses have grown through franchis-ing. The franchise model enables business owners to expand theirbusiness in partnership with independent entrepreneurs while re-taining control of the business model. It is estimated that franchisesaccount for 14 percent of the world’s total retail sales. In Europe,there are some 170,000 franchising units, providing employment toapproximately 1.5 million people and accounting for a total turn-over of approximately 160 billion Euros. In the U.S. approximatelyone in every twelve new businesses is founded on a franchising agree-ment. In developing countries, over the last decade, the expansionof franchising has also been significant. For example in Malaysia thetotal franchise sales were recently estimated at about US$ 5 billionproviding employment to 80,000 people and creating over 6,000franchisees.
On entering a shopping mall or com-mercial district almost anywhere inthe world, one encounters many fa-miliar shops, fast-food restaurants,clothing retail stores, and serviceproviders of different kinds, all withfamiliar brand names that have at-tained worldwide recognition. Manyof these enterprises are not part oflarge multinational chains but are, infact, independently owned busi-nesses of local entrepreneurs. So,how is it that small entrepreneursaround the world are able to sell thesame products, use the same trade-marks, have the same shop decora-tion and have employees dressed al-most identically? How are these lo-cal entrepreneurs legally allowed todo this? The answer is through thefranchising system.
What is franchising?
Franchising may be defined as a con-tractual arrangement under which anentrepreneur or enterprise (thefranchisor), who has developed asystem for conducting a particularbusiness, allows other entrepreneursor enterprises (the franchisee) to usethat system in accordance with theprescriptions of the franchisor, inexchange for a fee or other monetaryconsideration.
Franchising, as we know it today,came into the economic scene in theUnited States after World War II. Ithas now spread internationally, andin the last 10 years particularly todeveloping countries and countriesin transition to a market economy.
The franchise system is essentially apackage comprised of intellectualproperty (IP) rights relating to oneor more trademarks, trade names,industrial designs, inventions andworks protected by copyright, to-gether with relevant know-how andtrade secrets, to be exploited for thesale of goods or the provision of ser-vices to customers. The trade secretsmay also include the franchisor’sdocumentation on operating proce-dures, technical assistance, market-ing set-ups, training systems, man-agement policies, accounting prac-tices or even packaging techniquesand all other relevant informationthat helps a franchisee to run thebusiness. The franchisor may alsotrain the franchisees before the startsof the franchise operations and alsoon an ongoing basis, as the key tosuccess in franchising is successfulfranchisees.
IP A
ND
BUSI
NES
SSTARTING A NEW COMPANY:CONSIDER FRANCHISING
AS AN OPTION
Franchising is often referred to as arelationship business, or as a mecha-nism for growing a business throughpartnership alliances between afranchisor and a number of franchi-sees. As such, a synergetic relation-ship between the franchisor and fran-chisee is one of the key elements ofany successful franchise system. Animportant aspect of any franchisecontract is the maintenance of a deli-cate balance for ensuring that thefranchisor’s business structure is pro-tected while providing the franchi-see enough room for maneuver toexploit the local market.
Types of Franchises
Business format franchises, the mostcommon type of franchise, may beclassified into three categories:
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
15
� Processing franchises. Often re-ferred to as “manufacturing” fran-chise, the franchisor suppliestechnical knowledge to a proces-sor or manufacturer. Thefranchisor grants the franchiseeauthorization to manufacture andsell products under the trade-mark(s) of the franchisor and of-ten provides training and informa-tion on marketing, distributionand servicing of the product. Thistype of franchise is most commonin the restaurant and fast-food in-dustry.
� Service franchises. Here thefranchisor develops a certain ser-vice that is then provided by thefranchisee, under the terms of thefranchise agreement, to the cus-tomer. The most common ex-ample is the provision of after-saleautomobile repair services.
� Distribution franchises. In thiscase the franchisor manufacturesa product and then sells it to thefranchisees. The franchisees inturn sell these products to custom-ers, under the franchisor’s trade-mark, in their respective geo-graphical sales territories. The saleof electronic goods of variousbrands by specialized retail out-lets is a good example of this typeof franchise.
terms and conditions of the license(franchise) agreement is crucial. Un-derstanding the legal language of theagreement can be daunting, so theadvice of an experienced franchiseattorney should be sought by a pro-spective franchisee to fully grasp thelegal issues and to avoid makingcostly mistakes.
IP Issues in Franchising
IP rights are at the heart of any fran-chising agreement. Therefore, it isnecessary to clearly identify and listall types of IP, for example the trade-mark, trade names, copyright, patent,trade secrets or know-how, which thefranchisor will be licensing to thefranchisee. The most vital part of IPin a franchise is the trademark, sincethe whole idea is to manufacture,deliver or distribute a product or ser-vice under a certain brand, whichhas already proved to be successfulin the marketplace. Before enteringinto a franchising agreement, a pro-spective franchisee must ensure thatany IP rights being licensed under theagreement exist, are owned by thefranchisor, and that the franchisor iscompetent to license the IP rights.Equally, the franchisor has to ensurethat the IP will not be misused by thefranchisee.
As the success of a franchise systemoften depends on know-how andconfidential information, the fran-chise agreements often includeclauses stipulating that the franchi-see take all reasonable measures to
The Franchise Agreement
At the core of the franchising ar-rangement is a license agreement,granted by the franchisor to the fran-chisee, to use the franchised system.Amongst other things, the licenseagreement requires that the franchi-see conducts the business in themanner prescribed by the franchisor.
In a franchising relationship, the par-ties (franchisor and generally manyfranchisees) have a close workingrelationship defined by the terms ofthe franchise agreement. The incomeof each party is dependent on thecombined efforts of both parties. Themore successful the franchisee’s busi-ness becomes, the greater the in-come for all parties. The franchisee’ssuccess is also dependent on thefranchisor’s ability to develop a prof-itable system, train the franchisee inthe proper operation of the system,improve or promote the system, andsupport the franchisee throughoutthe life of the franchise agreement toachieve continued success.
Franchising establishes a businessrelationship between the franchisorand the franchisee lasting for a num-ber of years. Therefore, it must bebuilt on a solid foundation, for whichhaving a clear understanding of the >>>
16W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
prevent the loss or theft of any of theknow-how or trade secrets of thefranchisor.
Business Issues
Before entering into a franchisingrelationship, an entrepreneur (a pro-spective franchisee) should take intoaccount the benefits and costs ofentering into such an arrangement.The franchisee should consider thedeal from every possible angle, tak-ing into account, for example, per-sonal expectations, financial capac-ity and local circumstances. An en-trepreneur has to decide whether thisis the right approach for his businessaspirations.
Some potential benefits for the fran-chisee include the following:
� Lower risk of failure. The mostvulnerable phase for a businessis the start-up phase during whichthe failure rate is high. A franchi-see, however, benefits from a sys-tem with a proven track record forproducts and services that havealready done well in the market-place.
� Benefit from brand reputation.The franchisee benefits from theimage, reputation and goodwillalready attached to the brand,thus the cost of advertising will besignificantly lower. In addition,the franchisee may benefit fromthe collective advertising effort ofall franchisees (as well as thefranchisor).
� Collective purchasing power.Franchisees may sometimes ben-efit from the collective purchas-ing power of all franchisees, ob-taining supplies at a lower costthus increasing the profit margins.However, it is not uncommon thatfranchisees are contractually lim-ited to buying their suppliesthrough the sources authorized bythe franchisor.
� Training and technical support.Franchisees often benefit fromtraining and technical support on,for example, how to conduct theirbusiness successfully and ensurethat it conforms to the standardoperating procedures of the fran-chising system. This may includesupport on accounting proce-
dures, management of human re-sources, and marketing and finan-cial administration.
� Easier to obtain financing. Afranchisor may support the re-quest of a franchisee for fundingfrom lending institutions, thus in-creasing the likelihood of obtain-ing funds for developing the busi-ness.
� Research and development. Asthe franchisor develops new orbetter techniques for the opera-tion of the franchised units, thisinformation is shared with thefranchisees. This gives the franchi-sees access to the results of re-search and development that theymay not be able to afford on theirown.
Franchisable Businesses
Franchises are common in a wide variety of sectors. The best knownare probably fast-food restaurants; however, franchising is commonin accounting and tax services, business and managementconsultancies, education and training, fashion, clothing and shoestores, drug stores, hotels, insurance companies, leisure and sports,travel agents and even laundry and dry-cleaning businesses. For abusiness to be franchisable, it must be a credible business, with anidentity that is clearly differentiated from that of its competitors (brandimage), a standardized operating system which is properly docu-mented, and which can be learnt by a new franchisee within a shortperiod of time and, above all, it must be capable of providing amuch above average return on the franchisee’s investment.
Many countries have national franchising associations, which pro-vide information about franchising opportunities.
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
17
On the other hand, some of thedrawbacks of franchising for an en-trepreneur may include:
� IP rights. All IP rights relating tothe franchising agreement areowned by the franchisor regard-less of how much the franchiseehas contributed, for example, toincrease the value and enhancethe reputation of a mark.
� Payment of franchising fee androyalties. On entering into a fran-chising relationship the franchi-see is required, invariably, to payan initial fee for the grant of thefranchise. Thereafter, royalty feesare to be paid at a rate stipulatedin the franchising agreement. Forthe franchisee, these amountsmay represent significant coststhat it may not be able to affordor that may limit its ability to ob-tain sufficient returns on its initialinvestments. In addition, the per-manent liability of making pay-ments often brings with it a feel-ing that the franchisee does notown the business but is merelyrenting it.
� Limited freedom to operate thebusiness. The standard operatingprocedures generally provide theblueprint of how things must bedone by franchising units; there-fore the franchisee is very limitedin his actions. A franchisor may,for example, limit the franchiseeto selling only the products orservices that he has approved.Sometimes, the standard operat-ing procedures may prove to beinadequate in international fran-chises where foreign methodsmay not be suitable for local cir-cumstances and the overall localbusiness environment. The fran-chisee is often unable to vary,modify, adapt or improve the sys-tem to suit local conditions.
� Innovations often assigned to thefranchisor. If the franchisee devel-ops certain innovations, withinthe limited freedom to operate, afranchise agreement would gen-erally require the innovation to becontractually assigned to thefranchisor so that it may be madeavailable to all other franchisees.
� Dependence on franchisor’s suc-cess. If the franchisor is success-ful, it is likely - though by nomeans certain - that the franchi-sees will also prosper and benefitfrom the success of the franchisor.However, if the franchisor is notsuccessful or encounters anyproblem it is more than likely tohave a negative effect on the fran-chisees.
Look Before You Leap
Bearing in mind the factors men-tioned above, an entrepreneur hasto decide whether franchising is re-ally the right form of business for himbefore entering into a franchisingagreement. Once an entrepreneurhas decided that a franchise arrange-ment is the most suitable form ofbusiness for him, a careful examina-tion and study must be made to con-sider the entire franchise agreement,in the light of business trends, per-sonal considerations and local cir-cumstances. Franchisees should takespecial care in deciding whether theoverall “system” recommended bythe franchiser is suitable for their lo-cal market conditions.
♦
For more information on variouspractical aspects of the IP system ofinterest to business and industry,please visit the website of the SMEsDivision at www.wipo.int/sme/.The next article in the IP for Businessseries will discuss enforcement of IPrights.
18W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
The questions above can be best ap-proached and illustrated through anexample: In South India the tribalmedicinal knowledge of the Kanitribe led to the development of asports drug named Jeevani. Jeevaniis an anti-stress and anti-fatigueagent, based on the herbal medici-
nal plant arogyapaacha. Indian sci-entists at the Tropical Botanic Gar-den and Research Institute (TBGRI)used the tribal know-how to developthe drug. The knowledge was di-
should access to the genetic resourcearogyapaacha have been subject toregulation? How should such accessbe regulated and what should be therole of the community and the state?What might be the role of the cus-tomary laws of the Kani?
Similar kinds of research and accessto TK and associated genetic re-sources often occur across nationalboundaries. Thus questions like theseare frequently raised in internationaldiscussions about the appropriatepolicy concerning research activitiesinvolving TK and genetic resources.
Definitions and use of Terms
The term ‘traditional knowledge’ isgenerally used at two levels. In thebroad sense TK includes both theideas and the expressions of the ideaswhich were developed by indig-enous and local communities in atraditional way. In the narrow sense,TK refers only to knowledge as such,that is only to the ideas and not totheir expression. For example, theKani know-how of using thearogyapaacha plant would be con-sidered TK in the narrow sense, irre-spective of whether it is expressedin a folksong, a ritual practice, or awritten story. In the narrow sense TKtherefore describes those elementsthat may be protected by IP rightswhich focus on the use of the knowl-edge, rather than the expressions ofthe knowledge. Some traditionalknowledge touches simultaneouslyupon both these aspects, howeverthis article will deal only with tradi-
At a time when the wealth of nations lies increasingly in the knowledgewhich their peoples hold, legal protection is frequently being claimed forresources such as traditional knowledge and associated genetic resources.However, what do we mean by “traditional knowledge”? How should it beprotected? How is it linked to genetic resources and other components ofbiodiversity? How should appropriate forms of protection be developed?This third in a series of articles on the work of the Intergovernmental Com-mittee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowl-edge and Folklore (IGC) addresses some of these questions and summarizescurrent debates on traditional knowledge and associated genetic resources.
vulged by three tribal members,while the customary rights to thepractice and transfer of certain tra-ditional medicinal knowledge withinthe Kani tribe is held by tribal heal-ers, known as Plathis. The scientistsisolated 12 active compounds fromarogyapaacha, developed the drugJeevani, and filed two patent appli-cations on the drug. The technologywas then licensed to the Arya VaidyaPharmacy, Ltd., an Indian pharma-ceutical manufacturer pursuing thecommercialization of Ayurvedicherbal formulations. A trust fund wasestablished to share the benefits aris-ing from the commercialization ofthe TK-based drug.
This example illustrates several intel-lectual property (IP) issues in the fieldof TK and genetic resources: Whatkind of legal protection should begiven to the Kanis for their TK? Howshould benefit sharing be structuredbetween the company that devel-oped the product and the Kani tribewhich conserved and cultivates theplant and held the knowledge aboutit? If the Arya Vaidya company hadbeen located in another jurisdiction
Kani tribal memberidentifies components ofthe arogyapaacha plant
PROTECTION OF TRADITIONALKNOWLEDGE
AND GENETIC RESOURCESA Bottom-up Approach to Development
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
19
>>>
tional knowledge in the narrow senseas well as the related genetic re-sources.
Those elements of TK which are mostintensely debated are often linked tothe use of biological diversity and itscomponents, such as medicinalplants, traditional agricultural crops,animal breeds, extracted substances,etc. Such genetic and biological re-sources are linked to the knowledgeand traditional practices through theutilization and conservation of theresource, which has often occurredover generations, and through theircommon use in modern scientificresearch (such as in the Kani case).In the example from India, the tradi-tional know-how of the tribal mem-bers was linked to the use of a me-dicinal plant as well as the use ofcertain other organic compounds. Inthis context, the term “biological re-sources” means genetic resources,organisms, their parts, or any otherbiotic component of ecosystems ofuse or value. Genetic resources thusform one category of biological re-sources. Genetic resources are de-fined as any material of plant, ani-mal, microbial or other origin whichcontains functional units of heredityand is of value. For example, theplant arogyapaacha is a genetic re-source, whereas the 12 active mol-ecules are biological resources butnot genetic resources.
In the case of the Kani, these re-sources and certain TK elementswere referred to in the patent appli-cation and in the benefit-sharing ar-
rangements based on the grantedpatent. The question then arises, whatkind of protection should be avail-able for the TK and what role shouldIP rights have in benefit-sharing ar-rangements for the genetic resourcesassociated with TK?
TK in the narrow sense - knowledgesuch as traditional technical know-how, or traditional ecological, scien-tific or medical knowledge - is to bedistinguished from expressions offolklore or traditional expressions ofculture (TCEs). Distinct, but comple-mentary legal tools can be used toprotect these distinct elements, andthis choice has been made in somecases. But the traditional linkagesbetween these elements should berecognized by policymakers and re-spected as far as possible in the de-sign and implementation of new le-gal mechanisms. For example, manyhandicrafts have a utilitarian func-tion, which gives effect to a techni-cal idea, but they also have impor-tant aesthetic aspects, which expressa certain culture. In this vein, handi-crafts may embody both TK in thenarrow sense and a traditional cul-tural expression. This lack of a cleardistinction about the application ofdifferent legal regimes to the sameunderlying subject matter is not newin IP law. For example, designs maybe protected under the law of indus-trial property, the law of copyright,or both.
A fundamentally important aspect ofTK is that it is “traditional” only tothe extent that its creation and use
are part of the traditions of commu-nities or nations. Traditional, there-fore, does not necessarily mean thatthe knowledge is ancient. Traditionalknowledge is being created everyday, it is evolving as a response ofindividuals and communities to thechallenges posed by their social en-vironment. In its use, TK is also con-temporary knowledge. This aspect isfurther justification for legal protec-tion. It is not only desirable to de-velop a protection system that docu-ments and preserves TK created inthe past, which may be on the brinkof disappearance, it is also importantto envisage a system that contributesto the promotion and disseminationof innovations that are based on con-tinuing use of tradition.
What kind of legal protectionfor TK?
Protection of TK should be primarilyundertaken for the benefit of its hold-ers. In our example this would be theKani tribe and its members. It shouldrespect their cultural and communityvalues, and should be based on con-sultations with the tribe(s) con-cerned.
In past discussions a distinction hasbeen made between two types ofprotection for TK: positive protectionwhich describes the protection of TKthrough the recognition of rights inTK and defensive protection whichrefers to the safeguarding against il-legitimate third party IP rights overTK. In most cases, in order to be ef-
20W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
fective, TK protection would have tobe practically feasible and easily ac-cessible to the traditional communi-ties in both these aspects of protec-tion.
A comprehensive strategy for theprotection of TK might have dimen-sions pertaining to the community,national, regional and internationallevels. The stronger the integrationand coordination between these di-mensions, the more likely the over-all effectiveness. Many communities,countries and regional organizationsare working to address these levelsrespectively. National laws are cur-rently the prime mechanism forachieving practical benefits for TKprotection. For example, the AfricanUnion, Brazil, Costa Rica, India,Peru, Portugal and Thailand have alladopted sui generis measures whichaddress TK and associated geneticresources (sui generis measures arespecialized measures aimed exclu-sively at addressing the characteris-tics of specific subject matter, suchas TK and associated genetic re-sources). In addition, a number ofregional organizations, such as in theSouth Pacific and in Africa, are work-ing on defining the specific rights inTK and how they are administered.In cases such as the Kani example,various TK holders and other stake-holders in different countries havealready found existing IP rights use-ful and their TK protection strategiesfocus on the IP system.
The protection of TK is important forcommunities in all countries, par-ticularly in developing and least de-veloped countries. First, TK plays animportant role in the economic andsocial organization of those coun-tries, and placing value on suchknowledge is a viable means of pro-moting a sense of national cohesionand identity. Second, developing andleast developed countries are en-gaged in implementing internationalagreements that may affect the man-ner in which knowledge associatedwith the use of genetic resources is
protected and disseminated.1 In theagricultural area existing instrumentsalready recognize farmers’ rights andinternational instruments that willprovide for certain genetic resourcesin the agricultural sector to be man-aged through a multilateral systemmay soon enter into force.2 The in-ternational instrument establishingthis system will be the InternationalTreaty on Plant Genetic Resourcesfor Food and Agriculture.
Agricultural Innovation
The wealth and diversity of local knowledge systems surroundingtraditional agriculture includes traditional knowledge about the usesof plants, plant conservation strategies, pest and disease manage-ment, environmental monitoring for ecological change, and tradi-tional selection and breeding methods. For example, such methodsallowed Dhularam Mondal, a small innovative farmer from India, todevelop a new broad bean variety with larger pods than the previ-ous varieties. Furthermore, the UN Food and Agriculture Organiza-tion (FAO) has documented that women cultivators of the AguarunoJivaro community in northern Peru identify and select the cassavacultivars on the basis of characteristics that show the greatest phe-notypic variation. Panicle harvesting by Mende farmers in SierraLeone has allowed them to select rice varieties of short, mediumand long duration. The same FAO Report found that differencesbetween Cuban and Mexican maize are linked to maize being pre-pared and eaten in different ways in the two countries, which hasled farmers to select varieties for different properties in the twocountries.
Compiled from: “Farmer breeds a broad bean variety.” Honey Bee Vol. 9 No. 1.Jan-March 1998; and FAO, The State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food andAgriculture., FAO, 1997.
1 For example the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement).
2 Relevant instruments in the agricultural sector include the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (2001)and the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources (1983).
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
21
Challenges ConfrontingTK Holders
TK holders are currently facing vari-ous difficulties. A serious problem isthe reluctance of the younger gen-eration to learn the “old ways.” Therejection of traditions by the youngand the encroachment of modernlifestyles often result in the declineof TK and practices. Either throughacculturation or diffusion, many tra-ditional practices are lost. Thus, aprimary need is to document andpreserve the knowledge that is heldby elders and communities through-out the world. While such documen-tation raises important IP questions,which should be decided and man-aged by TK holders, documentationof TK in itself is an issue that goesbeyond IP policy and cannot be fullyaddressed through IP mechanisms.
Another difficulty facing TK holdersis the lack of respect and apprecia-tion for such knowledge. For ex-ample, when a traditional healer pro-vides a mixture of herbs to cure amalady, the healer may not describethe effects on the body as molecularinteractions in the terms of modernbiochemistry, but the healer bases his“prescription” upon generations of“clinical” trials undertaken by heal-ers before him. Thus, sometimes thetrue understanding of the value of TKmay be overlooked within a purelyscientific approach to natural re-source utilization and management.
Yet another problem confronting TKholders is the commercial exploita-tion of their knowledge by others,which raises the question of legalprotection of TK. Cases involvingnatural products all bear evidence to
the value of TK in the moderneconomy. A lack of experience withexisting formal systems, economicdependency, lack of a unified voice,and, in many cases, a lack of clearnational policy concerning the utili-zation of TK, results in these popula-tions often being placed at a decideddisadvantage in using existing IPmechanisms. At the same time, thelack of clear rules protecting TK cre-ates risks for companies, which pre-fer closing deals under well-estab-lished, reliable and enforceablerules.
For all these reasons, WIPO is un-dertaking extensive work on IP as-pects pertaining to the protection ofTK and access and benefit-sharingfor associated genetic resources. Ex-tensive documentation on this workcan be obtained from WIPO and canbe found on the WIPO website(www.wipo.int/globalissues). Theimmediate work ahead requires thatthe international dimension of theprotection of TK and benefit-sharingfor associated genetic resources beaddressed, learning from existingnational experiences. Only throughthe participation of communities andcountries from all regions can thiswork go forward to produce effec-tive and equitable outcomes that areacceptable to all stakeholders.
Conclusion
Traditional knowledge is naturallycherished as an important part of thecultural heritage and historical iden-tity of many local and indigenouscommunities, as well as many na-tions and regions with a shared cul-tural history. It is also increasinglyrecognized as a key element for thefuture well-being as well as the in-tellectual and cultural vitality ofthose traditional communities thathave developed, nurtured, andpassed knowledge on to their de-scendants, and whose way of life andcultural and legal values are rootedin their traditional knowledge heri-tage. The challenge for policymakersis to find ways of strengthening andnurturing the roots – cultural and le-gal – of traditional knowledge.
It has been argued that genetic re-sources, and the TK associated withusing them in a sustainable manner,are a comparative advantage of thosecountries that are biodiversity-rich,enabling them to participate moreeffectively in global markets and thusrise above current levels of povertyand deprivation. If this is so, thenprotection of TK at the national andthe international levels can be seenas a potentially powerful tool for ad-vancing a bottom-up approach todevelopment.
♦
22W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
A modified Patent Cooperation Treaty(PCT) request form will be madeavailable for use as of January 1,2004. The new form will reflect someof the changes to the Rules of the PCTthat will enter into effect on that date.Further, to accommodate thesechanges, PCT-EASY will be upgradedinto WIPO’s PCT electronic filingsoftware, PCT-SAFE, which will bemade available before January 1,2004.
As PCT-SAFE incorporates full PCT-EASY functionality – allowing for thecreation and printing of the validatedPCT-EASY request form and the PCT-EASY diskette –the distribution ofPCT-EASY as separate software willbe discontinued. Consequently, as ofJanuary 1, 2004, all PCT-EASY usersare requested to upgrade their cur-rent software to the new PCT-SAFEsoftware.
The PCT-SAFE software will be madeavailable for download from the PCT-SAFE website (www.wipo.int/PCT-SAFE) and as a CD installation. If youwould like to order a copy of thePCT-SAFE, please send an e-mail([email protected]) or fax (+41-22 338 80 40) to the PCT-EASY HelpDesk, indicating clearly your name,full postal address and the mention“Request for PCT-SAFE CD”.
PCT-SAFEMOVES AHEAD
Fully Electronic PCTApplications
Earlier this year Koninklijke PhilipsElectronics N.V. became the first tofile a fully electronic internationalapplication under the PCT with theWIPO Receiving Office (RO/IB) us-ing PCT-SAFE software. The availabil-ity of the upgraded PCT -SAFE secureelectronic filing facility means thatall PCT users will soon be able to filetheir international applications withRO/IB either online or using physi-cal media such as CD-R.
PCT-SAFE allows for applicants toprepare fully electronic applicationsas well as PCT-EASY applications.The possibility to file fully electronicapplications is expected to be avail-able to all users of the PCT in early2004 and will offer PCT applicantssignificant benefits. Users will beable to submit validated applicationswithout the printing, copying andmailing normally associated withsuch a transaction. PCT-SAFE willalso allow users to receive almostimmediate notification that their ap-plication has been received and isbeing processed. The PCT-SAFE de-velopment was made possiblethrough the adoption by the indus-trial property offices of the PCT Con-tracting States of a legal frameworkand technical standard necessary forthe implementation of electronic fil-ing and processing of internationalapplications, and their subsequentpromulgation.
Sustained growth in the use of thePCT system, which is now handlingover 100,000 international applica-tions per year, and the increasingcomplexity of applications, in par-ticular, from the biotechnology sec-tor, prompted WIPO to look for busi-ness solutions to handle such largeamounts of data while still provid-ing a value for money, quality ser-vice to users. PCT-SAFE will play akey role in ensuring the timely re-ceipt and processing of internationalapplications filed under the PCT.
WIPO will continue to provide in-formation about developments in thePCT-SAFE project through theInternet at www.wipo.int/PCT-SAFE,the PCT Newsletter and the WIPOMagazine. A WIPO publication en-titled “What is PCT-SAFE?” (publica-tion number 496) is also available atthe address indicated on the backcover of the magazine.
♦
Further information on the January 2004PCT Rule changes can be found on thePCT website under the section PCTMeetings, in particular the PCT Assem-blies 2002 (www.wipo.int/documents/en/document/govbody/wo_pct/index_31.htm), PCT Assemblies 2003(www.wipo.int/documents/en/docu-ment/govbody/wo_pct/index_32.htm),and in the PCT Newsletters 10/2002 and10/2003 (www.wipo.int/pct/en/newslett/index.htm).
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
23
WIPO Director General Kamil Idriswelcomed the accession by Spain tothe Hague Agreement Concerningthe International Deposit of IndustrialDesigns, a landmark agreement thatwill enhance and broaden the geo-graphical scope of the existing sys-tem for the international registrationof industrial designs. On September23 Spain became the 11th country tojoin the Geneva Act of the HagueAgreement, triggering its entry intoforce on December 23.
“Entry into force of this importantmultilateral agreement paves the wayfor wider use of the Hague systemfor the international registration ofindustrial designs by introducing fea-tures which will make the systemmore attractive to those countrieswhich have so far remained outsidethe system,” said Dr. Idris. He ex-pressed confidence that it will helpfulfill the tremendous potential of theHague system by offering an evenmore flexible, cost-effective and user-friendly means for companies andindividuals across the globe to pro-tect their industrial designs.
The Geneva Act will enter into forceon December 23 for the followingcountries which have, so far, accededto it: Estonia, Georgia, Iceland,Kyrgystan, Liechtenstein, Republic ofMoldova, Romania, Slovenia, Spain,Switzerland, and Ukraine.
REGISTRATION SYSTEMFOR INDUSTRIAL DESIGNSSET TO EXPAND
Benefits of the System
The Hague system offers users asimple and cost-effective way to ob-tain protection for their industrialdesigns in any or all of the stateswhich are party to the agreement bymaking a single international de-posit. Without the system, separateapplications would have to be filedin each of the countries in which pro-tection was sought. This is because,as a general rule, industrial designprotection is limited to the territoryof the country where protection issought and granted.
The new Act introduces a number ofimportant changes to the Hague sys-tem for the registration of industrialdesigns. To date, this has been gov-erned by the Hague Act (1960) andthe London Act (1934) concerningthe International Deposit of IndustrialDesigns. The Geneva Act enhancesthe existing system by making it morecompatible with the registration sys-tem in countries such as the UnitedStates and Japan where protection ofindustrial designs is contingent onexamination to determine the ac-ceptability of an application. TheGeneva Act seeks to broaden thegeographical scope of internationaldesign registrations.
Under the new Act, contracting par-ties have a period of six months toexamine whether a new internationalregistration can be granted protec-tion in their territory. This period maybe extended by a further six monthsfor those contracting parties whose
law requires examination of the nov-elty of the registered design. It alsointroduces a modified fee system, thepossibility of deferring publication ofa design for up to 30 months and theability to file samples of the designrather than photographs or othergraphic reproductions. The latter fea-tures are of particular interest to thetextile and fashion industries.
The number of international appli-cations for industrial design protec-tion has increased progressively inrecent years. One of the main advan-tages of using the Hague system isthat users are able to include up toas many as 100 designs in each in-ternational application. In 2002,WIPO received about 4,300 appli-cations containing some 20,700 de-signs. Each application covered onaverage 11 countries. This is equiva-lent to about 47,000 national appli-cations having the effect of protect-ing a total of some 230,000 designs.In spite of this positive trend, the sys-tem is still under-utilized, particularlycompared with the large number ofsuch designs that are created andused globally. At present, only 34States are party to the Hague Agree-ment.
♦
24W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
On being innovative
I create watches because gears, mo-biles and mechanisms fascinate me.I make them the way I imagine them,the way I feel they should look. Youhave to innovate, not just re-do – ina mechanical way, I’d say – what’salready been done by others. Inwatch-making, it’s not always easyto innovate or create specific things,but you have to come up with yourown ideas, something which will beremembered for years to come.
I think it’s necessary, as in any workor activity, to be able to live off yourideas. If you can’t afford to live offyour job – because coming up withideas IS a job – then your ability tocome up with new ideas won’t lastlong.
In my world, I find it hard to be sur-rounded by copies. I’d rather bearound original models, things I’d beextremely happy to live with, thingsthat remain unique. If I were to comeacross copies of a watch, identicalto the original model, but lacking itsquality and contrary to the goalswe’re pursuing here, then I wouldtend to become aggressive and tryto get rid of those copies.
CREATIVE PLANET -HALTER VIANNEY,
WATCHMAKER
A key element of WIPO’s outreach program is the Organization’s work increating a broader awareness among the general public of the value ofintellectual property and the role played by the IP system in encouragingand rewarding creativity. As part of this effort, WIPO is producing a seriesof short films for television called Creative Planet. The series explores,through portraits of artists, musicians, inventors, designers, and other cre-ators, how the creative process works for them, how they view their owncreative efforts, and how the intellectual property system has helped themachieve success.
Several pilot films have been produced in six-minute versions for broad-cast on national and international television networks. Shorter one-minuteversions will be produced as well. The subjects include, among others, amedical doctor in Nigeria who has invented and patented a blood transfu-sion device used in local hospitals, a Tunisian glass artist, and a Peruviansinger-songwriter. This issue introduces Halter Vianney, a Swiss watch-maker, the subject of the final of the four pilot films in the Creative Planetseries.
Watches have become an integral part of our lives. Finely-crafted wrist-watches have been collectors’ items since Patek Philippe first inventedthem in 1868. Many appreciate the precision work and creative designthat goes into these miniature works of art. They are viewed as jewelrywith a function. From graduation to retirement the finely-crafted watch isa valued gift to show appreciation.
Halter Vianney is a maker of such highly-valued, creative watches. Eachwatch produced in his workshop in Switzerland is a precise instrumentfor measuring time and is a creative achievement. The quality of his work– the imagination of the design, the perfect balance and timing – are tes-timony to his dedication. His words reflect his devotion to his work.
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
25
On his passion
I’ve been a watchmaker, or workingexclusively as such, for just over 28years. I’ll retire when they bury me.
Passionate people are everywhere:cinema, computing, literature, mu-sic… I believe that people whosework is moved by passion, [as] in anyfield, share the same feelings or sen-sations. Every now and then, it makesyou feverish, because it’s a very de-manding job, in terms of effort andwork. But at the end of the day, it’svery soothing and relaxing to live offone’s creations.
On his inspiration
Certain films and novels made medream of a world where living be-ings no longer existed. Machines hadtaken over instead. So I imagined asci-fi object which wouldn’t be or-ganic, but completely mechanicaland mineral, or even metallic. Mygoal is to create… violent objects, interms of feelings. I create them theway I imagine them, the way I feelthey should look, and I hardly evercompromise.
I consider myself to be the heir tothe history of technological develop-ment in watch-making. As such, Iwanted to perpetuate some of thiscollective memory and knowledgein my own life. I create watches be-cause gears, mobiles and mecha-nisms fascinate me. My creations arethe witnesses of what humankind hasdeveloped so far. They are made ofwhat others have passed on to us:their pain and their suffering, theirjoys and their laughter. My watchesare a historical legacy.
In the future, we might all have anintegrated circuit in our brain, thanksto which we won’t have to rely onwatches to know the time or get in-formation about it. But wearing awatch on your wrist, for the pleasureof it, I don’t think that will ever dis-appear, since I believe that kind ofpleasure should be eternal.
On intellectual property
Intellectual property means recog-nizing that a specific invention, cre-ation or idea comes from somebodyin particular. Thanks to the currentsystem, any inventor can file a patent,which will be made accessible toeverybody, and which should enablehim to make the most of his discov-ery while enjoying protection. How-ever, if you are mistrustful and wor-ried about your invention, then youconceal the technology you havediscovered, and your knowledge. Infact, you lessen the ability otherpeople have to develop new ideas.
On creativity in general
Creativity is fundamental for human-kind to go forward. It’s the essenceof our development, our past and ourfuture. I would say that our societiesare based on creativity, and it’s veryhard to imagine living without it to-day. We would be leading unbear-ably motionless lives…
Our existence is powered by creativ-ity, as is everything else in the Uni-verse.
♦
26W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
Women constitute approximately55 percent of the world’s population.More and more women are also fur-thering their education, contributingto the arts and sciences and startingtheir own businesses. But what roleare women playing in the world ofintellectual property (IP)?
One very visible sign of progress forwomen is their increasing number inIP administrations, within both thepublic and private sectors, and at thenational, regional and internationallevels. This development is reflectedin the growing number of womenrepresentatives who participate inWIPO meetings and other events aswell as in the high proportion ofwomen who benefit from variousWIPO training and other educationalprograms.
SPOTLIGHT ONWOMEN AND IP
Targeting Women
It is widely acknowledged that smalland medium-sized enterprises(SMEs) form a robust business sectorthat provides economic growth, in-creased productivity and employ-ment. What is less known is thatmany such enterprises are ownedand run by women – women whoare actual or potential owners oftrademarks, service marks, tradenames as well as of industrial de-signs, patents and copyright. It is criti-cal that women are targeted throughoutreach programs to build aware-ness about the importance of IP andits protection, especially in develop-ing countries.
Women make important contribu-tions in the visual and performingarts, in music and in literature. Incertain areas of traditional knowl-edge and folklore, such as health andnutrition, it is frequently women who
have been and continue to be en-trusted with safeguarding and trans-mitting the knowledge from one gen-eration to the next. It is important thatthese contributions be recognizedand protected where appropriate.
New Web Page
WIPO has created a new web page(www.wipo.int/women-and-ip) in-tended primarily to provide informa-tion about IP issues and WIPO ac-tivities of interest and concern towomen. The new web page also linksto other related websites and isaimed at facilitating networkingamong women in the IP field. The sitegives tribute to some of the numer-ous women around the world, of allnationalities, races, religions, agesand social backgrounds, who have,are, and hopefully will continue tomake significant contributions in theIP field.
♦
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
27
NEWSROUNDUP
The strategic importance of intellectual property (IP) as a tool for economic, social andcultural development was the focus of discussions between Bulgarian President GeorgiParvanov and WIPO Director General Kamil Idris during an official visit to Sofia on Octo-ber 13. In the course of their discussions, President Parvanov expressed his appreciation ofWIPO’s work in promoting the protection of IP in Bulgaria and said that he looked forwardto his country’s continued cooperation with WIPO. Dr. Idris applauded the Bulgarian au-thorities for their progress in bolstering the Bulgarian IP system and pledged WIPO’s con-tinued support in promoting full use of the IP system in Bulgaria.
President Parvanov and Dr. Idris inaugurated a new center on IP in the National University of National and WorldEconomy. Dr. Idris called it an historic occasion that reflected Bulgaria’s commitment to the use of IP to promotethe country’s wider economic development goals. He also expressed his commitment to further assist Bulgaria inthis respect. The new center will have close links with WIPO’s Worldwide Academy. Following the inaugurationceremony, the University awarded both Dr. Idris and President Parvanov with a medal, symbolizing an honor of thefirst degree, in recognition of their efforts in promoting economic development and social well-being in Bulgaria.
WIPO and the Trilateral Offices - the European PatentOffice (EPO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), and the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) - have agreed toreinforce collaboration to ensure delivery of more effi-cient services to users and to promote the benefits of thepatent system. WIPO Director General Kamil Idris, meet-ing in Geneva on September 25 with EPO President IngoKober, JPO Commissioner Yasuo Imai, and US DeputyUnder-Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Propertyand Deputy Director of the USPTO Jonathan Dudas,stressed the need to move ahead with international ef-forts to promote reform of the patent system to ensureeasier access for all users and to ensure that the systemcontinues to serve the public interest.
WIPO and Trilateral OfficesAgree to Reinforce Ties
WIPO Director General Meetswith President of Bulgaria
Participants agreed on the important role of patents instimulating technological progress, economic develop-ment and wealth creation. They noted that the growingnumber of patent filings around the world was indica-tive of the vital role of patents in stimulating growth anddevelopment. The meeting participants also expressedconcern over efforts by some interest groups to under-mine the patent system. Such efforts, they noted, im-pede constructive debate on how to best reform thepatent system so that it continues to serve the publicinterest while preserving the rights of inventors and act-ing as an incentive for research and development.
The meeting participants also suggested that WIPO fur-ther engage Member States in a policy dialogue on the
>>>
Bulgarian President GeorgiParvanov and WIPO DirectorGeneral Kamil Idris (seated)
28W
IPO
Mag
azin
e/N
ov.-D
ec. 2
003
At the conclusion on September 17of the first public conference on theuse of patent statistics to analyze eco-nomic and technological trendshosted by WIPO, the Organizationpledged to boost its activities relat-ing to patent statistics. WIPO alsoannounced the development of aweb portal for patent statistics withlinks to institutions with long-stand-ing experience in generating infor-mation in this area. The conference,attended by some 200 specialistsfrom 35 countries and designed tofoster communication amongpolicymakers, national and regionalintellectual property (IP) offices,patent attorneys, statisticians and re-search institutions, sought to identifyways to more effectively use IP sta-tistics as indicators of technologicaldevelopment and economic growth.
WIPO Assistant Director GeneralFrancis Gurry said that the increasedcentrality of IP within the knowledgeeconomy had fuelled a variety of
well-established values of the patent system. In this re-gard, Dr. Idris briefed the participants on the latest de-velopments regarding the WIPO Patent Agenda, whichaims to coordinate future work, while not underminingor replacing existing initiatives such as harmonizationof substantive patent law and reform of the Patent Coop-eration Treaty (PCT). The goal is to achieve an interna-tional patent system that is more user-friendly, coherentand accessible.
Dr. Idris noted the invaluable contribution of the Trilat-eral Offices - the three offices process over 90 percentof all applications submitted through the PCT. In addi-tion, these three offices grant most of the world’s pat-ents. Dr. Idris pledged WIPO’s continued close coop-eration with the three offices to ensure delivery of moreefficient services to the PCT user community.
♦
WIPO Pledges to Boost its PatentStatistics Activities
claims about the role of IP in gen-eral. The conference, he said, was animportant step towards establishingan empirically-based understandingof the role of the IP system generallyand patents, in particular. “We thinkit is particularly important to moveaway from anecdote and rhetoric to-wards empirical data to properly un-derstand the role of intellectual prop-erty and the purpose of this confer-ence is to gain insights into this ques-tion,” said Mr. Gurry. WIPO is com-mitted to collecting clearer, moreaccurate and more complete interna-tional industrial property statistics.
The Conference covered three prin-cipal uses of patent statistics - by IPoffices for strategic planning, by pri-vate sector companies in performingcompetitive market analyses and for-mulating patenting strategy and byeconomists and governmentpolicymakers in understanding inno-vation, economic growth and in ana-lyzing potential changes to the legalsystem. Users of patent statisticsstressed the need for data that is ac-curate, uniform, easily accessible andavailable in a timely manner. Theconference further called for greatercoordination between patent infor-mation specialists and professionalsfrom the business, IP and economic
spheres to establish, for example,best practices in categorizing andanalyzing data.
The conference was followed by atwo-day technical workshop on sta-tistics in the patent field co-organizedby WIPO and the Organisation forEconomic and Co-operation Devel-opment (OECD) on September 18and 19.
♦
WIP
O M
agaz
ine/
Nov
.-Dec
. 200
3
29
WIPO Launches Cyber-Learning Course in ArabicWIPO has extended access to its flagship distance-learning course on intellectual property (IP) to Arabic-speakingstudents. The course is currently available in Chinese, English, French, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish.
This innovative online IP teaching technique, which is in its fifth year, has enabled some 20,000 studentsfrom 179 countries to learn about copyright and related rights, patents, trademarks, geographical indica-tions, industrial designs, WIPO-administered international registration systems, unfair competition andthe protection of plant varieties. It has brought teachers specializing in IP issues closer to students andother interested parties in all corners of the world through virtual means.
The distance-learning initiative offers new teaching methodologies, customized course materials, evalu-ation tools, and mechanisms for tutor-student interaction. The “General Course on Intellectual Property”takes about 50 hours of study time spanning a six-week period. It includes self-assessment questions, tests, aglossary with links to the 23 WIPO-administered treaties, and a full range of other IP information materials. Stu-dents who successfully complete the course are awarded a WIPO certificate. Regular sessions are held twice a yearand registrations are made online at the Academy website (academy.wipo.int).
In recent years the course has been integrated in the official academic curriculum of a number of universities,including in Chile, Italy, Slovenia, and Uruguay. Translation of the general course into a range of other languages,including Bulgarian, Hindi nd Ukrainian is also planned.
♦
CALENDARof meetings
JANUARY 26 TO 30GENEVAStanding Committee on InformationTechnologies (SCIT) - Standards andDocumentations Working Group(SDWG) (Fourth session)The Working Group will continue itswork in the revision of WIPO stan-dards and will receive reports fromthe different SDWG task forces thathave been established for that pur-pose.Invitations: As members, the Statesmembers of WIPO and/or the ParisUnion; as observers, certain orga-nizations.
FEBRUARY 23 TO 27GENEVAStanding Committee on InformationTechnologies (SCIT) (Eighth Plenarysession)The Plenary will receive reports fromits Working Groups on Standards andDocumentation and Information
Technology Projects, and will reviewother activities related to the IT pro-gram.Invitations: As members, the Statesmembers of WIPO and/or the ParisUnion; as observers, certain organi-zations.
MARCH 1 TO 5GENEVACommittee of Experts of the IPCUnionThe Committee will consider amend-ments to the seventh edition of theIPC proposed by the IPC RevisionWorking Group and will discuss re-maining tasks of the IPC reform inpreparation for the publication of thenext edition of the IPC.Invitations: As members, the Statesmembers of the IPC Union; as ob-servers, States members of the ParisUnion, which are not members of theIPC Union, and certain organiza-tions.
MARCH 4 AND 5GENEVASeminar on the Madrid System ofInternational Registration of MarksThis Seminar, in English, aims to in-crease awareness and practicalknowledge of the Madrid systemamongst trademark agents who useor will use the system, whether inindustry or in private practice. TheseSeminars are held regularly everyyear, both in English and in French.Invitations: Registration is open toall interested persons, subject to thepayment of a registration fee.
Fore more information contact WIPO at:
Address:34, chemin des ColombettesP.O. Box 18CH-1211 GENEVA 20SWITZERLAND
TELEPHONE:41 22 338 91 11FAX:41 22 740 18 12e-mail:[email protected]
or its New York Coordination Office at:
Address:2, United Nations PlazaSuite 2525New York, N.Y. 10017United States of America
Telephone:1 212 963 6813Fax:1 212 963 4801e-mail:[email protected]
Visit the WIPO website at:http://www.wipo.intand order from the WIPO Electronic Bookshop at:http://www.wipo.int/ebookshop
WIPO Publication No. 121(E)
ISSN 1020-7074
The WIPO Magazine is publishedbimonthly by the Office of GlobalCommunications and Public Diplomacy,World Intellectual Property Organization(WIPO). It is not an official record and theviews expressed in individual articles arenot necessarily those of WIPO.
The WIPO Magazine is distributed freeof charge.
If you are interested in receiving copies,contact:
Marketing and Distribution SectionWIPO34, chemin des ColombettesP.O. Box 18CH-1211 Geneva 20,SwitzerlandFax: 41 22 740 18 12e-mail: [email protected]
For comments or questions,contact:The EditorWIPO Magazine (at the above address)
Copyright © 2003 World IntellectualProperty Organization
All rights reserved. Articles contained herein may be repro-duced for educational purposes. No part may, however, bereproduced for commercial purposes without the expresswritten consent of the Office of Global Communications andPublic Diplomacy, World Intellectual Property Organization,P.O. Box 18, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland.
