Foreign IP strategy for manufacturing executives
By Michael Bielski
Globalization has created significant opportunities for manufacturing companies in the outsource contract manufacturing sector -- across various end-market segments and industries. However, along with these opportunities has surfaced an unwanted risk against one of a company's most valuable assets - its intellectual property (IP), including patents and trade secrets.
The increase in a company's IP risk profile warrants placing ever more importance on foreign patent filing IP strategies developed and implemented by companies and, the growing role that business, product marketing, and technical executives must play in developing company IP strategy in conjunction with sound legal counsel.
Foreign patent filing IP strategies have significant implications regarding the scope of patent rights afforded to a company. Business, marketing, and technical executives don't necessarily have to understand the minutia of patent prosecution, however, these executives should be intimately involved in strategic decisions regarding which jurisdictions companies should pursue product patent protection.
This decision process should not be ad-hoc. IP strategy and foreign patent filing decisions must be aligned with a company's business priorities, objectives, and goals.
Foreign patent filing diversity
As an example of how diverse and comprehensive foreign patent filing IP strategies can be, let's look at jurisdictional patent family members for patents filed -- whose primary US Class is 600/300 - for medical surgery, diagnostic testing products.
Table 1 displays foreign and domestic applications from 1997 to 2007. Note: PCT refers to Patent Cooperation Treaty.
| Table 1 |
| |
|
United States Class 600/300 Filing Jurisdictions
|
Medical Surgery & Diagnostic Testing Products |
| |
|
|
|
| |
Country |
Original Patents |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Slovakia |
1 |
|
| |
Singapore |
2 |
|
| |
Turkey |
2 |
|
| |
Argentina |
3 |
|
| |
Greece |
4 |
|
| |
Latvia |
4 |
|
| |
Indonesia |
5 |
|
| |
Netherlands |
5 |
|
| |
Italy |
6 |
|
| |
Czech Republic |
8 |
|
| |
Finland |
9 |
|
| |
Switzerland |
15 |
|
| |
Hong Kong |
16 |
|
| |
Poland |
18 |
|
| |
South Africa |
19 |
|
| |
Portugal |
20 |
|
| |
Hungary |
21 |
|
| |
Urasian |
24 |
|
| |
France |
25 |
|
| |
Ukraine |
26 |
|
| |
Denmark |
36 |
|
| |
Sweden |
42 |
|
| |
Taiwan |
45 |
|
| |
Russia |
59 |
|
| |
Norway |
75 |
|
| |
United Kingdom |
84 |
|
| |
Spain |
104 |
|
| |
South Korea |
114 |
|
| |
Mexico |
148 |
|
| |
New Zealand |
149 |
|
| |
Israel |
188 |
|
| |
Brazil |
192 |
|
| |
Austria |
273 |
|
| |
China |
343 |
|
| |
Germany |
684 |
|
| |
Japan |
1,029 |
|
| |
Canada |
1,109 |
|
| |
Australia |
1,971 |
|
| |
European |
2,505 |
|
| |
PCT |
3,025 |
|
| |
United States |
10,457 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Total |
22,865 |
|
As illustrated above, companies in this particular medical technology space filed foreign patent filings in more than 35 jurisdictions -- at tremendous cost. Although the United States is the dominant jurisdiction, many other jurisdictions have also been integral to the foreign patent filing IP strategies for the organizations filing.
Foreign patent filing IP strategy considerations
How do executives choose which jurisdictions to file patents in? How can executives align their foreign patent filing IP strategy with their company's strategic business objectives in a cost-effective manner?
Post new comment
Comments are reviewed by the administrator and published after approval. Please keep your comments appropriate and on topic.