1. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 1 Panel 2: Global Databases Service provider viewpoint WIPO Symposium of Intellectual Property Authorities Geneva, September 22-23, 2011

2. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 2 Global databases Agenda What do we need? Legacy Current situation Commonly agreed aspects Some consequences Facilitators

3. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 3 Global databases What do we need? IPOs Examination:Worldwide information Legal aspect:National & Regional information Governements Support economic development:Worldwide information Industry: Worldwide information Prior art Validity, freedom to operate Alerts Competitive intelligence

4. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 4 Global databases Legacy - Patents INPADOC (Vienna) Founded by WIPO and Austrian government (1972) Integrated to EPO as a sub-office (early nineties) 2 databases based on patent offices input –PFS, Patent Family Service: biblio –PRS, Patent Register Service: legal status EPO documentation (The Hague) Image of EPO documentation (INVE, ECLA, PRIOR) Evolution: EDOC -> EPODOC -> DOCDB (with PFS) Derwent WPI (London) Consolidation of subject specific files Cooperation Derwent – Orbit (1976)

5. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 5 Legacy – Trademarks, Brands, Industrial designs Trademarks Trademark offices –Nothing similar to INPADOC Compu-Mark –Cooperation Compu-Mark / INPI / Questel –Saegis Industrial designs The orphan of IP information

6. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 6 Global databases Current situation - Patents EPO DOCDB -> espacenet, Patstat, GPI IP5 Common documentation project Latipat Commercial service providers, e.g.: Thomson-Reuters: DWPI Questel: FamPat Minesoft: Patbase LexisNexis: TotalPatent

7. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 7 Current situation –TMs, Brands, Industrial designs Trademarks / Brands OHIM: TM View WIPO: Brand database Commercial service providers –Thomson-CompuMark: Saegis –Corsearch: Edital Industrial designs Commercial service provider –Questel: DesignFinder

8. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 8 Global databases Commonly agreed aspects Improve overall efficiency Improve quality Reduce costs Avoid duplication Focus on each player expertise –Applicants: quality of Applications –IPOs: produce clean "source" information –Service providers: add value

9. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 9 Global databases Some consequences Access to information Expand multi-lingual availability Move toward classification of concepts (F-terms, ICO?) Global databases versus Global services Keith Dilley (GE), WIPO Symposium 2011: Consider a global approach (no longer US-Centric) Looking more at processes than at tools Interoperability Standards are a pre-requisit (Lingua Franca), e.g. –PR N°: family building –PN N°: citations network –Inventors, Assignees, Classifications: statistics, landscaping IP office information available at marginal cost

10. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 10 Global databases Facilitators Through working groups involving: IPOs WIPO Regional Offices IP5 Applicants PDG: Patent Documentation Group PIUG: Patent Information User Group Service providers PATCOM: Patent Commitee

11. © Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 11 Thank you www.questel.com pbuffet@questel.com