Thu, January 22, 2015
Professor Randall Rader (George Washington University School of Law), former Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, who is now busy working as an arbitrator gave the keynote speech “US Patent System and the Lessons to Hong Kong”.
Professor Rader gave example of the blessings of the patent system by pointing to cancer research. Not only one cannot map the genome of healthy cells but also of cancerous cells. In the latter case there are many anomalies in the cell. Because there are so many, not one single inventor can come up with all medical solutions. Professor Rader argued that the patent system is crucial not only because it is a way for inventors to get a loan at a bank or be rewarded and continue their research, but because of the disclosures intrinsic to the patent system it is the way for other researchers to learn about the research and to collaborate and be linked to other scientists. Therefore the Hong Kong patent system can be a conduit for facilitating this international collaboration.
Most learning, Professor Rader, asserted goes incrementally, little by little. Unlike insights by people like Einstein, who happened to be a patent examiner at the Swiss patent office. Professor Rader pointed out the relation between Einstein’s work to examine the transmission of electric signals and electrical-mechanical synchronization of time, and his thought experiments that led him to his conclusion about the nature of light and the fundamental connection between space and time.
“Maybe the next Einstein was born in Manila or Hong Kong and can be identified by the patent system.”
Professor Rader argued that successful corporations can be identified by their IP. From idle ideas to profit via the patent.
According to Professor Rader Hong Kong is well positioned to a centre for adjudication, since the special administrative region has one foot in common law and one foot in the civil law.
Professor Rader argued that the grant of a patent to the inventor was a fundamental human right: dignity to the inventor for a valuable contribution to society, in many times a life’s endeavour.
For Professor Rader the question whether patents are stimulating or stifling innovation is unequivocally clear: each patent that is granted should by definition be an advance over the prior art. Professor Rader asserted that there is no such thing as the tragedy of the anti-commons in regard to inventions in biomedical research, and, referring to an article by Michael Heller and Rebecca Eisenberg “Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research” Science 280, 698 (1998), https://www.cornellcollege.edu/dimensions/workshops/reading-group-resources/science-280.pdf, said that it could not be proofed. However, I think it was Heller and Eisenberg’s goal to signal potential problems with the patent system. Therefore, one can argue that there is also no conclusive proof that the patent system is only beneficial for the creation of innovation.
See more of the Worldwide Patent Law Reform and Hong Kong’s Response HKU Workshop here: http://www.ipdragon.org/2015/01/17/worldwide-patent-law-reform-and-hong-kongs-response-hku-worksop/
Thu, September 12, 2013
During the IP HK-EU Series 2013 Expert Conference, which was entitled “Hong Kong – European Union Cooperation in Protecting and Developing Intellectual Property and Brands: Current Situation and Future Trend”, September 2 at the Hong Kong Baptist University, Albert Ho, Assistant Commissioner, Intelligence and Investigation Branch, Hong Kong Customs and Excise, shared some great ideas that would help right holders worldwide enforce their rights in Hong Kong.
Innovative rights holders can stay one step ahead the producers of counterfeits, but they have to inform the customs of how to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit products. The practice was that a representative of the rights holders goes to the customs and checks whether the products are genuine or not, or gives the customs training to be able to do this by themselves. Hong Kong Customs and Excise has been thinking outside of the box about ways that rights holders outside Kong Kong can help determine Hong Kong Customs what is counterfeit.
Hong Kong Customs and Excise is developing electronic recordation of the goods;
A video-link could be established between Hong Kong Customs and the rights holder, so that the latter can virtually examine whether the goods are counterfeit;
The rights holder can send the design file of their product which includes some indicators that distinguish genuine from counterfeit to Hong Kong Customs, which they subsequently can print out via a 3D printer.
“New at IP Dragon: HK Customs will experiment with 3D printing to enforce” http://clicktotweet.com/ vBdTq
Wed, June 6, 2012
“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you”… “Read slogans and you shall innovate.” The last sentence it not according to the Gospel of Matthew, but according to the Gospel of the Beijing Municipal government. If you have been in […]
Tue, October 4, 2011
The Journal of Technology Management in China (Vol. 6 No. 3, 2011, p 257-266) has an interesting article A study of the evolutionary path of technological innovation modes in the equipment manufacturingindustry of China written by Yuan Yi-jun and Lv Cui-jie (Department of Economics, Dalian University of Technology). Yuan and Lv use evolutionary game theory to research what hinders the transition […]
Thu, September 15, 2011
Richard Jun Lin, Xavier Xie (analysers), Zhuo Zhang, Jerold Wang and Chris Hartshorn (data contributors) have worked on a project to inventorise China’s 1,531 provincial and national-level industry parks: ‘Seeing the Forest and the Trees: Navigating China’s Industry Park Innovation Engine’. It “reveals the need for a specific focus on 87 university science parks and […]
Thu, July 28, 2011
In the graphical perspective,things become smaller if the distancefrom the observer increases Professor Anil Gupta and Haiyan Wang, writers of the book ‘Getting China and India right‘, put China’s innovation statistics into perspective. Patent filings in 2008 U.S.A. 400,769 filings Japan 502,054 filings China 203,481 filings Gupta and Wang have a point when they argue […]
Fri, July 15, 2011
Google and China have found each other in a marriage of convenience, in order to serve the one god they both live by: innovation. This article deals with censorship and intellectual property. Two of the biggest challenges that the internet present to the legal community. The main characters are two of the biggest actors on […]
Mon, December 6, 2010
3 articles to go: IP Dragon on its way to its 1,000th article Adam Smith of World Trademark Review wrote a column about China’s Vice Minister of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) Yang Xueshan, who made a controversial remark: that the innovative elements of copycat products should be protected and encouraged. Mr […]
Wed, November 17, 2010
China Hearsay’s Stan Abrams takes a critical look at statistics about trademark registrations in China. He is rightly filleting the alleged relationship between increased trademark registrations and a growing awareness of trademark protection among Chinese entreprises, read more here. However it could be said that the growth of trademark registrations in China would indicate two […]
Tue, May 12, 2009
Today the UK will start fast-tracking green patent applications, and China will follow suit. IAM Magazine ‘s Joff Wild has a very interesting blog about it called ‘China and UK to fast-track green patent applications, according to British IP Minister‘. That could be the best news since the WIPO chose “promoting green innovation” as its theme […]
Wed, February 28, 2007
BusinessWeek runs an article of Associated Press about the ‘Study on the Future Opportunities and Challenges in EU-China Trade and Investment Relations 2006-2010’ prepared by Philip Bartley of the Emerging Markets Group consultancy, for the European Commission. Bartley said that China would also benefit from opening up its market, mentioning EU and U.S. concerns over […]
Tue, December 5, 2006
Stan Abrams, Lehman, Lee and Xu lawyer and writer of China Hearsay, wrote an article about China’s newest milestone: that it outspends Japan in research and development. It is expected IP protection and enforcement in China will profit most. Rightly so, because self interest is one of the best motivators. Read Abrams article here.