WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OFFICE OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC WIPO’s Support in Development of Intellectual Property (IP) Strategies in Countries in Transition International Conference on Intellectual Property Rights’ (IPRs) Protection in Europe Prague, Czech Republic, May, 21 to 22, 2009 Michal Svantner, Director, Division for Certain Countries in Europe and Asia

One of the priorities of our activities is to provide support to our Member States to enable them to assess the case for creating a national Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy and how to relate that to the Government’s economic and cultural strategy in relation to creativity and innovation.

Background Economies in Central European and Baltic States, Caucasian, Central Asian and Eastern European countries, as well as in some Mediterranean countries are attracted to the notion of a structured and planned approach to maximizing the benefits to be gained from the innovative and creative activities of citizens and from attracting inward investment and business partnerships with companies from more developed market economies. Even well developed economies recognize the need to adopt a more strategic approach to the use of IP in the innovation process. WIPO / DCEA : Promotion of the use of IP System by stimulating innovation and creativity for their economic development with particular focus on the need to establish a market order and respect for Intellectual Property in an effective way.

Specific issues: Support by WIPO for the development of national IP Strategies is being designed by taking into consideration the following:  differences at levels of economic and social development and;  different levels of IP infrastructure  country specific identifying strategic issues and their identification;  opportunities and risks;  promoting the implementation of such strategies to accomplish development objectives;  supporting national economic analysis;  introducing modern management methods for the use of IP assets for economic growth.

European Context For the countries of Europe, the European Union dimension is particularly important in relation to the current and future relationships with the European Union, its member states, and the EPO. Equally, it may be appropriate for countries, which are members of the Eurasian Patent Organization, to consider the impact of this entity and relationships with its member states, as well as the legislative advice offered by model laws adopted by the Inter-parliamentary Assembly of countries participating in the CIS. However, only an individual country itself can design a complete strategy to meet its own circumstances, allocate the right resources to what can realistically be achieved, and then take the practical steps to implement the strategy.

National (IP) Strategy An IP strategy cannot be conceived and developed narrowly within the IP community alone. It needs to recognize the priorities and challenges of the stakeholders who will be affected by it. A cross section of government departments need to be involved in addition to the IP Office (or Offices if Copyright and Industrial Property are dealt with separately), including the Ministries that deal with Science and Technology, Trade and Services, Culture, Justice, Education and Finance …………….etc., all of which play an important part in the economic and social life of the country.

The Start-Up Phase Very often the issues are addressed by the way of conferences and seminars, e.g. “Seminar on Methodologies, Best Practices and Lessons Learned for the Development of a National Intellectual Property Strategy”, held in Belgrade on November 18 and 19, However it is important to go beyond such events and identify and carry out the practical steps needed to achieve results efficiently and effectively. This means using the strategy to generate a program of action. An active leader for the program, a government minister or prime minister to champion the program, a small core team to provide the detailed proposals, and a body of interested stakeholders to oversee and monitor the program on behalf of the Government and people.

Strategic Partnerships It is important and helpful to identify a strategic partner or partners to provide expert input as appropriate and required. WIPO has a number of programs to maximize the opportunities and access to skilled resources. Regional bodies and national IP offices may also offer such partnership.

Tools to support the development of national IP Strategies The Division for Certain Countries in Europe and Asia (DCEA) has been developing a new series of tools for experts and practitioners, as well as policy makers in countries in transition: 1.Management of Academic Intellectual Property and Early Stage Innovation (technology transfer, licensing…) 2.Special Features of the Copyright Systems 3.Nation Branding in Countries in Transition 4.Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights 5.Recommendations on Strengthening the Role of Innovative SMEs in CIS countries 6.Guidance for Elaboration of IP Strategies

What is the Desired Outcome To create an environment in which Intellectual Property enables innovators and creators to lever economic value from their work and enhance the economic success of the country to the benefit of its businesses, researchers, creators, and society as a whole and to strengthen economic competitiveness.

What is to Be Done Once the core program team, forming a good collaborative platform, has been created, the work falls into a numbers of phases: Assessment of needs and current situation: economy, human dimensions, development strategies, government structures, the private sector, international aspects, IP disputes, enforcement of IP rights, technology transfer, local characteristics Consultation with key stakeholders Policy decisions Implementation

Risks The creation and implementation of an IP Strategy is a large undertaking and will not achieve its intended outcome unless properly resourced and managed. Some of the major risks are indicated below and the chosen program management system must be adequate to address them. –Lack of commitment from the top –Over-ambitious objectives and timescales –Lack of focused resources to lead the process / core team –Lack of focus in decision making –Unrealistic perception of abilities and intentions for future development –Lack of active participation by stakeholders / conflict between interests –Lack of compatibility with international obligations

An Outline Action Plan Initial decision by appropriate lead Minister Creation of Core Program Team Training of Core Team in project management techniques and selection of Program Manager Creation of Program Board Production and approval of detailed Action Plan Needs assessment and its approval by Program Board Implementation of changes with periodic review by Program Board IP Program and Strategy

Thank you for your attention.