The IPO have recently published their new corporate plan which we are delighted to share with members and the broader community. In it, the IPO Minister Rt. Hon. Chris Skidmore, MP., rightly applauds the UK’s proud history of innovation and points to our position as ranked in the top 4 of the Global Innovation Index and in the top 10 by the World Bank as the best place to start and grow a business.
He also reinforces the point that intellectual property plays a crucial role in encouraging investment into science, technology, the creative industries, brands and designs which, in turn, creates jobs and economic growth helping propel Britain to the forefront of innovation.
Whilst we agree with the Minister and the IPO that the UK already has one of the best IP regimes in the world, according to the Taylor Wessing Global IP index and US Chamber of Commerce International index, this statement should come with a caveat and IP health warning. Sadly, for most of the creative industries (and micro and SME designers) cost and time effective access to justice when IP infringement occurs, is the luxury of the few.
To put this in context, around 1.5 million people work within design or design skills according to the Design Council’s latest Design Economy Research. Out of these 80% have less than 10 employees and 67% have less than 4 employees. With average hourly design earnings of £16.42 pitted against anything from between £175 and £500 per hour to instruct an IP lawyer, it comes as no surprise that IP enforcement is almost impossible for small businesses so whilst we are proud to champion an excellent IP regime, for most it is an inaccessible route to enforcement.
In summary:
The challenges and demands of EU exit
ACID comments: Despite repeated requests for clarity (deal or no deal), the IPO have thus far provided no guidance regarding the potential loss of unregistered design protection which will be lost for UK designers. We believe this will be potentially calamitous for the majority of the UK’s fashion sector and for product designers. The Minister said that individual companies should “It may be beneficial for you to seek independent legal advice from a registered IP attorney on these particular issues”. Whilst we are assured that the IPO will respond to the challenges and demands of EU exit and, in particular will “will work with UK businesses operating in Europe to adjust to a changed IP environment ensuring that they make the most of opportunities to capitalise on those changes”, the current position, which has yet to be clarified, means that the majority of the UK’s designers who rely on unregistered EU design rights will lost protection in 27 EU states. We hope that the IPO and Government will take on the responsibility of negotiating with their EU counterparts and/or through the establishment of legal clarity and sound advice to ensure that UK designers’ positions are not eroded post Brexit. ACID looks forward to further dialogue on this urgent matter.
The current position is that unless there is “simultaneous” publication of unregistered UK designs in the UK and EU, designers will lose out on unregistered designs’ protection in EU 27.
Creating a world leading IP environment
ACID comment: We welcome all these initiatives to develop legislative and policy framework. However, we have noted that there have been no action points following the 4-year Designs Research Infringement research published last year and would urge the IPO to share their plans and how this methodology will be used to guide further policy. It is now 6 moths since this was published at a significant cost to the taxpayer of around £100K.
Planned activities include:
ACID comment: We recently attended an informative and positive meeting where the IP attaches shared intel with stakeholders and support this initiative 100%. They are a fantastic resource for help in countries where UK interests plan to develop their trading opportunities. Further information can be found here.
Enforcement:
– reduce cost of enforcement for rights holders- enforcement framework review underway
– consider evidence for/impact of administrative site blocking (per Creative Industries Sector Deal)
– be a leader in the enforcement space internationally
– complete availability index
– continue to fund PIPCU and two post in Border Force
– share best practice and information with other IP offices
– develop a clear integrated strategy to reduce IP infringement including making it socially unacceptable for all
ACID comments: We welcome all the above initiatives to reduce the cost of enforcement for rights’ holders. Developing a clear integrated strategy to reduce IP infringement is critical and including a real focus on declared and communicated respect, ethics and compliance within CSR would be a good start.
Developing mediation as a real alternative to litigation is also a sound strategy. Finding commercial salutation to legal issues is a much more proactive way to deal with enforcement on some but not all IP issues.
The recent Online Harms White paper, whilst raising real issues about consumer harm did not go nearly far enough. The consequences of lack of regulation in online marketplaces, search engines and within advertising is having serious consequence on businesses and it is time to vocalise this and for action to be taken.
Please see the 2019/2020 Corporate Plan here.
Spread the Word
