o UTLINE… Publicly financed research: policy issues around IPR 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 Publicly financed research: policy issues around IPR DST Presentation to the Portfolio Committee 7 September 2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 o UTLINE…

B ackground National R&D Strategy (approved July 2002) Section 7.6 considers intellectual property issues Public discourse has increased Intellectual Capital Forum SARIMA Framework under development for policy

G lobal “re-investment” in S&T 1980s: Efficiency - science systems must become more productive and connected – linear “output” model (the customer era): IPR focused on customer requirements 1990s: National systems of innovation essential to sustainable economic growth – multiple sources of value, leads to increased investment mainly human capital and innovation (the stakeholder era): IPR seen more holistically 2000s: S&T a basis for regional performance, e.g. ERA, Euro-Med, North America (the geo-political era): IPR seen as a competitive advantage

G lobal context IPR dynamics are changing Feature of the knowledge economy Increased “intangible” content in patents Patents and life forms, genetics and bioresources Patents and software, business methods, etc Geopolitical issues I (WIPO, WTO, etc) Geopolitical issues II (poverty and IPR) Geopolitical issues III (a global patent system?)

(Improvement and Innovation) National R&D Strategy Indicator Framework Future R&D Capacity Technical progress (Improvement and Innovation) SET Human Capital Business Performance Current R&D Capacity Wealth Creation Imported Know-how Quality of Life

Public Financing Domain Business performance Technical progress Quality of life IPR Domain Wealth Creation Public Financing Domain Business performance Technical progress (Improvement and Innovation) SET Human Capital Imported know-how Current R&D Capacity Future R&D capacity National R&D Strategy

Technology Achievement Index: Component view Source:UNDP 2001

Life Sciences Patenting South African Inventors Source: CBI

A pproach Consistent approach required to ensure protection of intellectual property developed with public financing Frameworks and legislation benchmarked against good practice globally and contextualised for national and regional efficacy Key functions identified and responsibilities allocated

Responsibilities in SA Patents, copyright, designs, trademarks (legislation) and international negotiations: DTI Public financing approach for research: DST (consults DTI and DoE) Plant breeders rights (NDA) IPR and indigenous knowledge (DST lead with dti, DoH, NDA, DEAT, DoE)

Approach: National R&D Strategy It should be legislated; It should draw on the enabling frameworks of global best practice; It should not place South African institutions at a disadvantage relative to international practice; It should create a context for benefit sharing by inventors and innovators; The obligation of institutions to protect intellectual property developed from publicly financed research should be established;[continues]

Approach: National R&D strategy (continued) The right of the state to acquire the right to use such IP in the public interest should be established; An acceptable framework for the sale of rights should be established including the conditions under which the rights can be acquired internationally; There should be powers granted to make regulations in respect of recognition of inventors, designers and authors who develop intellectual property when financed with public funds in respect of benefit sharing by institutions; Institutional practices in respect of benefit sharing, invention disclosure and minimum standards for institutional intellectual property management, should be standardised.

Approach: Current interventions Innovation Fund (IFCO): “wholesale” joint financing of patent costs IPR services for IF, SMMEs and BEEs Training and capacity development Policy engagement: Intellectual Capital Forum (NACI) SARIMA Framework for publicly financed IPR under development Ongoing consultation with stakeholders

Policy Issues under Discussion Intellectual property should be secured on the outputs of publicly financed research Preference for non-exclusive licensing Preference for local licensing Preference for SMMEs and BEEs as licensors Benefit sharing with inventors defined

Policy Issues Under Discussion Government to have walk-in rights on IP in the national interest – free licence Government could secure IP if institution does not Obligations and benefits to accrue to the institution that is publicly financed Revenue to institutions will grow but it is not expected to be a major source of finance at the system level

Issues under discussion Agency An agency (or agencies) for managing the disclosure process and for reporting may be required Employees, students, contactors An obligation to disclose potential IP developed in the course of publicly financed research could be established

Objectives of proposed policy Clarity, transparency and consistency will lead to enhanced activity Obligations and benefits are linked Individuals and institutions have defined rights Revenue opportunities for institutions Government has defined relationship to innovators and institutions it finances

Global Practice Developed country approaches Economies in transition Developing world

Thank you