Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 1
Panel 2: Panel 2:
Global DatabasesGlobal Databases
Service provider viewpointService provider viewpoint
WIPO Symposium of Intellectual Property Authorities
Geneva, September 22-23, 2011
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 2
Global databasesGlobal databasesAgendaAgenda
• What do we need?
• Legacy
• Current situation
• Commonly agreed aspects
• Some consequences
• Facilitators
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 3
Global databasesGlobal databasesWhat do we need?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
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 4
Global databasesGlobal databasesLegacy - PatentsLegacy - 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)
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 5
Legacy – Trademarks, Legacy – Trademarks, Brands, Industrial designsBrands, Industrial designs
• Trademarks
• Trademark offices
– Nothing similar to INPADOC
• Compu-Mark
– Cooperation Compu-Mark / INPI / Questel
– Saegis
• Industrial designs
• The orphan of IP information
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 6
Global databasesGlobal databasesCurrent situation - PatentsCurrent 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
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 7
Current situation –TMs, Current situation –TMs, Brands, Industrial designsBrands, 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
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 8
Global databasesGlobal databasesCommonly agreed aspectsCommonly 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
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 9
Global databasesGlobal databasesSome consequencesSome consequences
• Access to information• Expand multi-lingual availability
• Move toward classification of concepts (F-terms, ICO?)
• Global databases versus Global servicesKeith 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
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 10
Global databasesGlobal databasesFacilitatorsFacilitators
Through working groups involving:
• IPOs• WIPO
• Regional Offices
• IP5
• Applicants• PDG: Patent Documentation Group
• PIUG: Patent Information User Group
• Service providers• PATCOM: Patent Commitee
© Questel – WIPO Symposium, Session 2, 2011-09-22 – Buffet 11
Thank youThank you
www.questel.com
