PATENT OFFICES AND THEIR SERVICE TO INVENTORS
VIEW POINT OF INVENTORS

by Dr. Farag Moussa
President of the International Federation of Inventors' Associations (IFIA)

Lecture given at a workshop
Lecture at a WIPO and ARIPO Regional Seminar

(Harare, Zimbabwe, 1992)

INTRODUCTION

There are patents only because there are inventions. And there are inventions only because there are inventors! No inventors, no patent offices. That is my credo.

But inventors must also recognize that without patent offices there would be no patents! Of course there would still be inventors, but their creations would not be protected.

Conclusion: patent offices and inventors must live together. They must learn to live together. Sure it 's not a love marriage, it's a marriage of necessity. But that's the way it is.

* * *

We, in IFIA, initiated a study in 1992, so as to better know - and make known - the point of view of inventors concerning this marriage of necessity, that is to say the relations between inventors and patent offices. We were happy to see that the preliminary results of this IFIA study (which were presented at the WIPO-IFIA Symposium in April 1992) had encouraged some patent offices to look into the subject in turn. We have here today in Harare an excellent example of this common effort to better understand each other. The Zimbabwe Patent Office was asked to give the view point of a patent administration on the services rendered by patent offices to inventors, while I was asked to give you the view point of inventors.

First of all, let me tell you that our 1992 IFIA preliminary study was based on the answers we received after we sent a questionnaire to all national inventor associations. 30 associations answered the questionnaire. Two of them - Ghana and Tanzania - belong to the countries invited here in Harare. Unfortunately we did not receive answers from the three other countries invited to this Regional seminar and which have national inventor associations: Nigeria, Sudan and Zimbabwe.

Let me stress that IFIA's objective in finding out the view point of inventors was not to lament or criticize the patent offices. We just wanted to find out about the state of relations; so that these relations could be improved. When answering to our questionnaire some inventor associations requested that the patent office do what other government administrations are doing or should be doing for them. In my view, these associations were definitely asking too much from their patent offices.

* * *

The inventor's point of view on patent offices (POs hereafter) simply reflects the answers to our questionnaire. We shall first examine the relationship between the patent offices and the inventors associations, and then we'll deal with the relationship between the patent offices and the inventors themselves as individuals.

Before getting into details, let me add a few general remarks. Traditionally the patent offices were only concerned with granting patents - whether this was done with or without examination. The patent office staff dealt with papers and files, and the only persons they usually met were patent agents acting on behalf of the inventor or the owner of the invention, most of the time a firm or a company.

In brief the staff of the PO had very little to do with the inventor himself, whose name they often did not even know. In fact, in many countries the patent law does not require that the name of the inventor be identified in the patent application - only that of the applicant who may well not be the inventor. Fortunately, things are changing today. I don't want to brag, but it is definitely one of IFIA's success if the name of the inventor will soon have to be mentioned in the application and in the patent and that in every country of the world.

Today, examining inventions and granting patents is no more the only function of the patent office. Governments have at last understood something that should go without saying: that is that there can be no inventive activity without inventors. A country really interested in encouraging inventive activity among its people must never forget that it must first address the person behind the creation.

I am glad to say that nowadays many governments are very much aware of all this and have thus decided to add a new function to their patent offices: that is to encourage and help the inventor, the creator in his activities.

PART I

THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE PATENT OFFICES AND THEIR INVENTOR ASSOCIATIONS

A. HOW IS THE GENERAL QUALITY OF THOSE RELATIONS ?

The vast majority of associations consider those relations to be "good", "very good", or "excellent". We therefore are faced with the happy task of making generally good relations even better.

B. WHAT KINDS OF SUPPORT ARE RECEIVED BY THE ASSOCIATIONS FROM THEIR POs ?

1. Creation of the Association
   Many associations - the majority of which are from developing countries - responded that the PO did in fact participate in the creation of the association. This response is again an encouraging sign, because it indicates that the POs have recognized the need for a support organization for inventors and have taken steps to bring it about.

2. Premises and/or Administrative Support
   Many associations indicated that their POs provide them with material support in the form of premises for association headquarters or support facilities, or help in administrative duties (typing, printing, etc.)

3. Financial
   A very small number of associations responded that their POs give them direct financial support; the vast majority of POs do not.
   The lack of direct financial support is understandable to an extent since POs are generally limited in the amount budgeted to them by the government.
   Associations might more profitably seek support from their POs in areas which do not involve the direct transfer of money. It appears to be easier for the POs to lend support in the form of direct materials or services instead of money which is more closely watched in the budget.

4. Presence and/or Speakers at Association Meetings
   A large majority of associations responded that their POs attend their meetings and provide speakers therefor.
   It stands to reason that if a PO is willing to send a representative to an association public meeting, the PO would be cooperative in providing speakers if invited to do so. Those associations which do not have representatives of their POs attending or speaking at their conventions probably lack these things simply because the association has not invited the PO.
   Another reason may be that some associations just do not hold conventions and other public meetings of the kind. Unlike financial support, attending or speaking at a meeting is not a hard thing for a PO to do, and most likely it would be happy to attend.

5. Jury Members at Exhibitions
   A large minority of POs provide jury members at association exhibitions. This smaller number (as compared to attendance at meetings) should not be seen as a lessening of interest on the part of the PO. Few associations organize exhibitions themselves. We are certain that most POs would, if requested, provide jury members at associations exhibitions.

6. Awards at Association Exhibitions
   A significant minority of POs provide awards for association exhibitions. This small number may be due to two factors not related to the attitude of the PO, and already mentioned. This kind of moral support requires a very small expenditure and is something that is easy for the PO to do. Perhaps those associations which do not have PO awards should encourage their POs to do so since it requires a minimum of expense and effort.

7. General Comments Regarding Services Rendered by POs to Associations
   The responses indicate a desire on the part of the POs that the inventor association should be essentially self-supporting once it is up and rolling with primarily non-financial support from the POs. This view is confirmed by the fact that, while few associations responded that their PO lent them financial or material support, a majority responded that their POs participated in their conventions and exhibitions. The POs therefore appear willing to provide limited material support at the creation of the association and thereafter largely moral support.
   
   A number of associations indicated that their PO gives them support apart from the listed category in the IFIA questionnaire:
   -Giving General and procedural information (Argentina and the Philippines).
   -Providing lists of inventors to the association, which would be very helpful in getting the word out to them that an association exists (France).
   -Organizing training courses for the employees of the association (China).
   -Conducting patent searches for the association invention competition entries, which is a good incentive for entering an invention in the competition (Malaysia).
   -Providing articles for the association's periodical (Finland).

C. HOW CAN RELATIONS BETWEEN ASSOCIATIONS AND POs BE IMPROVED ?

In general, the associations of developing countries want financial assistance from their PO or assistance from WIPO and/or IFIA in improving relations. The associations of developed countries are generally concerned with more and improved personal contacts with PO staff.

I noted that at least two associations (Norway and Bulgaria) stated that improving relations is not only the responsibility of the PO, but of the association as well.

Positive involvement of the PO in association activities would surely have a beneficial effect on relations between the two.

Hereafter are some other concrete suggestions to increase the services to be rendered to the association.

1. Furnishing more funds to the association by :
   (i) Giving to the association a certain amount of the fees received by the PO from foreign applications (Egypt, France).
   (ii) Assisting in financing equipment, personnel, and publications (Argentina).
   (iii) Financing the association's membership fee in IFIA (Hungary)

2. Giving more general assistance to the associations' members:
   Publicizing local inventor activities, holding periodical exhibition fairs, and fostering closer ties with local inventors to better match foreign inventive capabilities (Tanzania).

3. Improving communication
   (i) More exchanges of experience and information (Sweden)
   (ii) More personal contacts with PO staff (Finland & Denmark)
   (iii) More interest of the PO in the affairs of the association (Cyprus).
   (iv) Inviting PO staff members to association activities, and to become members of the association (Norway).
   (v) Requesting the help of WIPO and/or IFIA in improving relations with the PO (Zaire, Bangladesh, Malaysia).
   (vi) More dissemination of public information from the PO to enlighten the public on the role of inventors and inventions in society (Romania, Senegal, China).

PART II

PATENT OFFICE SERVICES TO INDIVIDUAL INVENTORS

A. WHAT IS THE GENERAL ATTITUDE OF POs TOWARDS INVENTORS?

A fairly small number of associations considered their POs to be supportive of inventors. We have seen that a large number of associations consider their POs to be supportive of the association, so it appears that there is room for improvement of the inventors themselves in their individual dealing with the POs.

The association can therefore be a great help in encouraging change in the POs in their dealings with inventors.

B. WHAT ASSISTANCE AND INCENTIVES DO THE POs PROVIDE TO INVENTORS?

1. Address Lists: (a) Patent Attorneys (b) Invention Brokers (c) Institutions Promoting Invention (d) Industrial Enterprises and Financial Institutions.
   
   A slight minority of POs gives out lists of patent attorneys to inventors. A substantially smaller minority gives out lists of invention brokers or industrial enterprises, respectively. This would appear to stand to reason, since in most countries patent attorneys must be registered with the PO and therefore such a list is easy to obtain. On the other hand, independent invention brokers are not as easy to find, and industrial enterprises even more so, since each invention will concern different areas of industry.
   Other lists which a few associations noted that their POs provide are lists of inventors.

2. Funding or Subsidizing Application Filing
   (a) Exemption of Fees for Low Income Inventors
   (b) Lower Filing Fees for Independent Inventors/Small Business
   (c) Deferment of Annual Fees
   
   Very few associations indicated that their POs provide direct financial assistance to patent applicants who have low income or are otherwise under circumstances that would deserve a lessening of fees.
   
   A few POs provide for exemption or reduction of fees for low income inventors, i.e.. Austria (students and low income inventors), Togo, China (students), and Egypt (students and members of the armed forces). The POs of China and the United States of America also lower filing fees for independent inventors or small entities. The vast majority of POs, however do not.
   
   The POs of two countries, Egypt and Norway, provide for deferred fees, if the inventor is having severe financial problems. It appears that the laws governing POs in general do not exempt, reduce, or defer fees to inventors no matter the state of their financial situation. Though some changes may be made by lobbying from strong associations, more creative assistance may be needed. For example, the United State of America association has suggested that its PO accept a royalty on the revenues received from the inventions in place of fees, which potentially may benefit the PO more.
   
   The question of fees is an important one, because the higher the fees, the fewer inventors will have the means to meet them. Thus fewer inventors will be encouraged to innovate, causing society to suffer for lack of innovation and frustrating the public policy behind the patent system. It is submitted that a lowering of fees for low income inventors is a reasonable compromise, making it possible for the PO to recoup their administrative expenses, by slightly raising fees for inventors with the means to pay them, while making it possible for all worthy inventions to gain patent protection, which is the whole purpose of industrial property.

3. General and legal Advisory Services
   
   A substantial number of associations indicated that their POs provide general and legal advisory services. A large majority provide general counseling, and about half provide some legal counseling.
   
   A good example of such counseling is in Japan's PO, where a consultation center located at the PO can be used free of charge for general and legal advice.
   
   Substantially fewer POs give advice as to the drafting of patent applications, probably deeming that to be the province of industrial property agents and patent attorneys. Perhaps the POs could, instead of giving labor-intensive individualized advice regarding application drafting, publish general guidelines to follow - just as several POs in fact do.

4. Patent Information Services
   
   Most associations indicated that their PO had patent information services, and a majority of those are available to the inventor free of charge. Most are used by inventors. Those inventors who do not use the services usually cannot meet the expensive usage charge or travel long distances to the PO. Additionally, there is a lack of knowledge in some cases that the services exist, which can be remedied both by the PO publicity and word through the inventor association.
   
   It would appear to be beneficial to every PO to have these services free of charge so that some inventors would use them. If an inventor finds out through a prior search that his idea is not protectible, he will not file an application in the PO and tie up its resources, which can then be used for more worthy inventions.

5. Do the POs Provide Patent Information to industry, and is this Service considered Useful by Local Inventors?
   
   A majority of POs provide patent information to local industries. A surprising small number of inventors, however, find this to be useful. This may be because the information is slight and superficial, and does not give the industry the information it needs to act on a new idea. Nevertheless, it is encouraging that so many POs would undertake dissemination since they themselves are not in the business of commercializing inventions.
   
   It would not appear to be difficult for a PO to send issued patents to the relevant industries to see if they are interested in pursuing further development with the inventor. This furthers the public policy of conferring a benefit upon society with ideas of creative individuals. If no one knows about an idea, it obviously will do no one any good.

6. Do POs Provide Prizes and Awards to Inventors?
   
   Though most associations noted that their POs do not provide awards to inventors, a significant minority of POs, about the same number that provide speakers for association symposiums and conventions, do. This is an encouraging sign that the POs are doing what they can to promote the well-being of inventors. Again, this would appear to be an inexpensive way for the PO to encourage innovation and support inventors.

C.WHAT DO INVENTORS EXPECT MOST FROM THEIR POs?

A large number of associations consider that the most important thing to the inventors of their country is that the PO conduct fast, efficient, and accurate examination of patent applications. This comports with the primary purpose of the PO.

Several associations answered that most inventors want to see lower application fees, while some noted specifically that their inventors want exemption for low income or independent inventors. As discussed above, this appears to be a reasonable compromise pursuant to public policy.

A small number of associations indicate that their inventors want help from the PO in marketing and commercializing their inventions. IFIA is of the opinion that a PO's ability to do this is limited, and inventors should not be overly counting on their POs to take up this suggestion. POs may perhaps be ill-equipped to give inventor advice as to commercialization of their inventions, since their primary function is the protection of industrial property and not its marketing. Nevertheless, this response reflects a need for help to the inventors in marketing and commercializing their inventions that is met by other national institutions, whether governmental or not, in several countries.

Some associations expressed concern over equitable patent laws.

CONCLUSION

IFIA is convinced that the POs can render greater services to local inventors than they actually do. Of course we are aware that for that the relations between the inventor associations and their POs must be strengthened, if not very much improved. Be sure that IFIA will do its utmost to encourage its member associations to make the first step towards this.

We know from experience that if you don't give you get nothing back. If you lament or spend your time criticizing your PO - which is a potential ally of the inventor - it might well become even less supportive one day. Moreover your association will be shrinking, it will get isolated, and eventually it will die.

The excellent relations which exist at the international level between IFIA and WIPO should be an example to follow at the national level by inventor associations and POs.

When IFIA was founded in 1968, it was fortunate enough to have leaders of great ideal and wisdom who knew how to approach WIPO. The founders of IFIA for their part were also fortunate as they found in WIPO a man who understood the utmost importance of inventors. In one of his addresses to an audience composed of patent office officials, patent agents, and industrialists, Dr. Bogsch, Director General of WIPO, said: "Don't ever loose sight of the inventor, the source of everything your work is concerned with".

These words should be the motto of all heads of patent offices!