Conceptions and Misconceptions: How we get IP wrong Richard Gold Director, CIPP Intellectual Property Reform: Innovation and the Economy Public Policy Forum April 28, 2008

Basic argument The public, government and industry generally has poor understanding of IP In the past, this ignorance drove IP rights beyond what evidence could reasonable support While ignorance continues, increasing capacity in IP is leading to a more nuanced and productive discussion of the role of IP

Public attitudes Public generally has shallow understanding of IP –Easily swayed –In Nanos poll, after being told that IP helps companies recoup costs and obtain benefit, 79.7% positive –But when asked about each class of innovation, approval falls progressively the greater the distance from the positive statement about IP Focus groups tell us that the more they learn about gene patents, the less they like them

Industry and Government Public policy long based on assumption that IP is necessary to increase investment in creativity The evidence does not support this –Econometric studies have always shown that IP only explains a fraction of why innovation occurs –Business models based on proprietary models of IP have been failing in several industries Lobby groups out of touch with these developments, slowing down progress

Change of approach The signs are clear that IP changing gears: –WIPO Development Agenda –WHO IGWG –OECD Noordwijk Access to Medicines Agenda –UNITAID patent pool for ARVs –Increasing number of PPPs and nonprofits in the field More emphasis on collaboration, sharing of basic knowledge and non-proprietary IP

Conclusion Industry, government and civil society need to better understand what IP is, how it functions and the ecosystem in which it operates Developing new business models based on sharing and collaboration rather than on exclusivity