adminAleck Ncube
IN most countries, the national Intellectual Property Offices (IPOs) have been historically perceived as being responsible for the IP system at the national level. The IP system was traditionally detached from innovation policy, SME policy, entrepreneurship policy or science and technology policy.
It was generally seen as a separate legal sphere of little direct relevance to the broader innovation promotion or competitiveness strategy of a country. As such, IP offices dealt almost exclusively with the registration and grant of IP rights and were generally not involved in debates on how to stimulate innovation, notably among entrepreneurs and SMEs.
In recent years, the increasing importance of IP rights in a knowledge-based economy has begun to change the way national, regional and local governments view intellectual property rights and the IP system as a whole.
In many countries, there has been a shift in the focus of national IPOs. While the traditional functions of IPOs in the area of examination, registration and grant of IP rights (mostly limited to patents, trademarks and industrial designs) still remains the central element of their day-to-day work, IPOs are increasingly devoting resources to a range of additional services aimed at facilitating the access to, and reaping the benefit from, the IP system by various users of the IP system, including researchers, entrepreneurs and SMEs.
The information gathered by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) on the basis of a survey of IP offices and SME support institutions shows that activities for facilitating a wider and more effective use of the IP system by SMEs generally fall into five main categories: awareness-raising and training on IP, technological information services, financial assistance, customised advisory services on IP and assistance for IP exploitation and technology transfer.
The bulk of activities specifically targeted at the SME sector have focused on awareness-raising and advice on procedural matters concerning the application for IP rights.
These activities take into account that low awareness and limited knowledge of the IP system by SMEs is perceived in many countries to be one of the main challenges that needs to be addressed.
The range of awareness-raising and training activities in which IP offices have been active in other countries include the following: organisation of seminars, conferences and campaigns on IP for entrepreneurs and SMEs, IP guides and other information material on various aspects of IP for entrepreneurs and SMEs, web sites with practical information on IP issues for entrepreneurs and SMEs, collection and dissemination of case studies illustrating the success stories of SMEs in leveraging IP assets, building IP content into customised training manuals for entrepreneurs and enterprises operating in specific sectors (eg bio-technology, software, agriculture, multimedia etc.), general advice to applicants on administrative issues relating to the application process (e.g. help desks within IP offices); multi-media products with information and advice on management of IP assets; IPO participation in business fairs, contribution of articles on IP issues to business magazines targeting entrepreneurs, researchers and SMEs; regular radio and/or television programmes on issues relating to intellectual property and innovation; integrating IP issues into the national/institutional teaching and training curricula andcourse material for entrepreneurs, engineering and management students and proactive visits to SMEs.
It is increasingly clear that Government institutions, in order to be successful in their activities for promoting a wider and more effective use of the IP system by SMEs must seek to target not just the entrepreneurs themselves but also their business advisors, whether they be private sector consultants, or employees of chambers of commerce and industry or investors and employees of financial institutions, who are more likely to be listened to by the entrepreneur and managers/owners of SMEs.
In addition, promotion activities on IP have generally proved to be more effective when included in other activities seeking to meet some of the most immediate needs of SMEs, such as marketing, new product development, exporting, financing, etc. For IP to be included in the business strategy of enterprises it must also be integrated into the overall framework of business support services of those seeking to promote it.
In developed countries, IP offices have sought to go beyond the awareness-raising and training phase by providing a wide range of technological information services to their clients.
The technological information provided in patent documents provides a point of departure for understanding the technological trends in specific fields or in monitoring the activities of competitors. However, the raw information contained in patent databases may be of limited use.
This is why a number of IP offices provide value-added technological information services, turning the raw information provided by patent databases into more workable knowledge that can be of practical use to firms in developing new and improved products and services for improving the chances of success of their business strategy.
Initiatives aiming at supporting enterprises in using the technological information contained in patent documents may include: regular workshops for entrepreneurs and managers/owners of SMEs on how to use patent information; free on-line access to patent databases; provision of a range of technological information services for SMEs at a reduced price; establishment of Technology Innovation Support Centers (TISCs) with specialised staff within universities, technology parks, business incubators, research centres and chambers of commerce and industry; regular provision of information on recent patents in a given technical field or “technology alerts”;
To overcome the barrier of limited access to relevant legal information on IP rights, IP offices can venture into providing customised legal and technical support in the field of IP to their clients.
In a number of cases this can be done through the establishment of decentralized sub-offices of the IP office in order to reach out to entrepreneurs and enterprises located far from the national capital, which is usually the headquarters of the national IP office.
This has generally had a strong impact in terms of bringing such IP offices closer to their users. In some countries, IP offices have contributed to the establishment of patent libraries or other new types of institutional structures, often in partnership with universities, chambers of commerce and industry, science parks or other newtypes of institutional structures for improving access of entrepreneurs and SMEs to basic legal and procedural advice on how to go about applying for IP protection.
For IP offices involved in the direct provision oflegal advice or value-added technological information services on IP, it is important to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest (given that IPOs are also in charge of processing and examining the IP applications) or that the IP office is not perceived to be taking over activities that should ultimately be provided by the private sector on a full-fee recovery basis.
The objective of any such activities should be to address a “market failure”, and to awaken a latent demand for such services.
This should be done in such a manner that facilitates the development of a market sector that is capable of providing such services to entrepreneurs and SMEs at an affordable price. In the next article, I will continue to look at further measures, which government can do to assist SMEs.
-Aleck Ncube is an Intellectual Property scholar based in Bulawayo. He can be contacted on [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or 0712 374408
Londile Moyo
Bongani Ndlovu