Upload
truongnhu
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Patent Information
What are the Users’ Expectations?
Dr. Peter Kallas
Chairman Working Group IMPACT
Patent Documentation Group
SIPO Patent Data Forum
Beijing - September 21, 2016
Introduction: What is the Challenge?
Introduction of PDG and the Working Group
IMPACT
Results of a Survey among PDG Member
Companies
The Information Workflow of Industrial Information
Professionals
5 Requirements to the Offices
Conclusion
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Agenda
Page 2
Today, we need global patent data including utility models
Offices and users suffer from huge amount of documents
Languages barriers become a determining factor in accessing
patent information
Users are confronted with various data formats, numbering
systems, codes….
Commercial providers rely on the willingness and ability of patent
offices to deliver patent information - at reasonable costs !
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
What is the problem ?
We need an intensified cooperation between offices and users because we have similar needs !
Page 3
Non-profit European advocacy group for patent
information with 38 corporate members
4 PDG members among the top 10 EPO
applicants in 2015
Presidency currently held by BASF
Regular high-level meetings with EPO, WIPO, IP5
and national patent offices
ABB Lanxess
Agfa Graphics L'Oreal
Akzo Nobel Lundbeck
ASML Merck KGaA
AstraZeneca MSD
BASF Nestec
Bayer Novartis
Beiersdorf Pfizer
BMS Philips
Boehringer Ingelheim Procter & Gamble
BP International Robert Bosch
Clariant International Sanofi
DMS Shell International
Eli Lilly SIEMENS
Evonik Solvay
Hoffmann-La Roche Syngenta
GlaxoSmithKline Total Research
Henkel Thyssen.Krupp
IFPEN Unilever
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
What is PDG?
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
PDG Mission
Exchanging of knowledge and experience among PDG member companies
Debating, discussing and encouraging improvements and new developments in patent information services with third parties active in the field of patent information
Sharing searching practices among PDG-members to enhance professional skills
Exploring future services (semantic searching, etc.)
Striving to ensure that comprehensive patent information is made available and can be used by PDG member
companies in an effective and efficient manner.
Page 5
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The PDG Working Group IMPACT
Mission
Comprehensive patent information is available and
usable to support PDG members reaching their
business goals
Goal
Clarify and fulfill the requirements of all relevant parties
regarding raw data quality, availability, reliability,
consistency and its effective use in business processes
Round Table Structure
IMPACT is working as a Round Table with PDG
members, the EPO, WIPO, national patent offices,
commercial providers, national user groups and the
European Patent Institute (epi, patent attorneys)
71st IMPACT Meeting
April 14-15, 2016 in The Hague, NL
Host: Shell (46 participants)Page 6
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Results of a PDG survey – Status 2009
Do you see the need for improvement with respect to
Asian patent information ?
Availability of detailed legal status in English
Searchable English full text (CN, KR)
Images of documents
Added value abstracts (from commercial providers)
High quality machine translation
Standardized applicants' names
96 %
96 %
100 %
68 %
92 %
86 %
96 %
Status 2009
Page 8%: amount of companies which see need for improvement
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Results of a PDG survey – How we see it today
Status 2016 Do you see the need for improvement with respect to
Asian patent information ?
Availability of detailed legal status in English
Searchable English full text (CN, KR)
Images of documents
Added value abstracts (from commercial providers)
High quality machine translation
Standardized applicants' names
96 %
96 %
100 %
68 %
92 %
86 %
96 %
Page 9%: amount of companies which see need for improvement
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The industrial user’s workflow
Page 10
Output
Legal
Status
Data
Trans-
lation
Assignee
Name
Standardization
Classi-
fication
Utility
Models
Request for Information
Search in Fulltext DB
Abstract DB
Analysis&
VisualizationEvaluation
Patentability searches
State-of-the-art searches
Opposition / invalidation searches
Freedom-to-operate searches (FTO)
Monitoring and current awareness searches
Patent landscapes and patent portfolio analyses
... and more.
Our needs go beyond those of the patent
offices.
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
What professional searchers in industry are doing
Page 11
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The industrial user’s workflow
Page 12
Output
Legal
Status
Data
Trans-
lation
Assignee
Name
Standardization
Classi-
fication
Utility
Models
Request for Information
Search in Fulltext DB
Abstract DB
Analysis&
VisualizationEvaluation
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Classification
Worldwide standard hosted by WIPO: International Patent
Classification IPC
De facto standard hosted by EPO and USPTO: Cooperative
Patent Classification CPC
One classification with one philosophy: that is great! But: a lot of
people like to have additional classifications
Important: is the classification reliably assigned by offices?
What about utility models? When will they be included in the
CPC?
As a leading voice in the patent information community,
the PDG offers feedback on classification issues.
Cooperative
Patent
Classification
European Patent Office
United States Patent and
Trademark Office
Page 13
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The industrial user’s workflow
Page 14
Output
Legal
Status
Data
Trans-
lation
Assignee
Name
Standardization
Utility
Models
Classi-
fication
Request for Information
Search in Fulltext DB
Abstract DB
Analysis&
VisualizationEvaluation
Analysis showed that up to 20% of relevant hits in FTO searches
are UM
In 2016, SIPO stopped delivery of human translations of UM to
the EPO
UM are a major challenge for providers: patents come first!
Dual filing of patents and UM poses major problems for patent
searches
PDG proposal: inclusion of UM into PCT minimum documentation
and to use CPC for classifying
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Utility Models as part of the state-of-the-art
PDG would greatly appreciate a discussion with SIPO e.g. during one of its PDG IMPACT meetings.
Page 15
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The industrial user’s workflow
Page 16
Output
Assignee
Name
Standardization
Classi-
fication
Utility
Models
Request for Information
Search in Fulltext DB
Abstract DB
Analysis&
VisualizationEvaluation
Legal
Status
Data
Trans-
lation
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Applicant name standardization - Processes in the IP department
Patent filing
and drafting
Freedom-to-
operate
analyses
Legal status
evaluation
Technology
analysis
Competitor
watching
Portfolio
benchmarkingM&A activities
Licensing
in/out
Patent
Landscapes
White Space
analysis
Applicant names are a key element in searching
and analyzing patent information
Transliterations and the use of multiple names for
an applicant lead to large numbers of name
differentiations
There are a lot of efforts to standardize applicant
names
Nevertheless, a break-through is still missing
PDG is prepared to support joint activities e.g.
within the IP5
Page 17
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The industrial user’s workflow
Page 18
Output
Assignee
Name
Standardization
Classi-
fication
Utility
Models
Request for Information
Search in Fulltext DB
Abstract DB
Analysis&
VisualizationEvaluation
Legal
Status
Data
Trans-
lation
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Language barriers – Translation is the key!
High quality Machine Translation (MT)
is the key: >50% patent applications in non-Latin
texts!
EPO-Google project in 2011: patents of all major
offices are machine translated.
Many offices make MT available for free,
others want to earn money.
Users and providers as well as examiners are relying
on appropriate translations: for reading and
searching!
MT has progressed a good way since 2007 - in those days, the current progress was far away!
PDG is monitoring quality and offers feedback to all parties involved.Page 17
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
The industrial user’s workflow
Page 20
Output
Assignee
Name
Standardization
Request for Information
Search in Fulltext DB
Abstract DB
Analysis&
VisualizationEvaluation
Legal
Status
Data
Trans-
lation
Classi-
fication
Utility
Models
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Global Legal Status Data - Industrial Users’ Needs
These data need to be in time, reliable, comprehensive and
understandable
PDG is an active partner within the WIPO legal status task
force, IP5 Industry and EPO advisory groups (INPADOC etc.)
Discussions with SIPO on legal status data are greatly
appreciated (e.g. at PIAC or East meets West/EPO)
The patenting system encourages further innovation and investment in technology for the benefit of society
and its people
It is essential that all organizations participating in business activities are
made aware of monopoly rights arising from IP rights held by others
In real life, industry needs a range of legal status data from
nearly all patent offices
The user community greatly appreciates the opportunity to discuss
issues of common interest with SIPO
Quote from Bettina de Jong, Shell, VP PDG:
“In general I am amazed how quickly developments have been
and how well we can already search Chinese publications.”
We are convinced that meetings like this workshop will improve
the cooperation between the user community and the Asian
Patent Offices
Therefore, let us go on and improve quality, reliability, timeliness
and consistency of patent information for mutual benefit !
Patent Information – What are the Users’ Expectations?
Summary
Page 22