Two international IP conferences in June and July provided a stage for our colleague Lorenz Kaiser to inform about the acivities of our quality initiative in IP Management. This is his short report:
This event took place in Delhi on 30th of June and mainly was about IP litigation. The Economic Times celebrated – inter alia – the opening of Indian markets including the opening of its market for foreign law firms and attorneys. The speakers list was primarily Indian, but also international and included various well recommended experts in IPR. A special note was made by the highest judge of Delhi High Court Mrs. Prathiba M. Singh, who had broad knowledge on IPR, probably based on cases she dealt with. The Attorney General of India, R. Venkataramani spoke the keynote.
The panels were about international arbitration and protecting IPR through international arbitration, where I contributed. It became clear that all over the world the peculiarities o IP litigation are similar and are determined by the special needs of IPR disputes. Many experts found and regretted that the IPR competence of Ordinary Courts could be better and parties should more orient on arbitration and there to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures, as it is offered e.g. by WIPO arbitration. The Indian courts and arbitration courts also offer the whole range of litigation opportunities and do not a make a big difference to the situation of other countries – except the significant regional facts.
Based on a few actual cases studies I draw the attention of the audience to the changes in industrial IPR practice and the statistics which show a clear increase of CIP (Computer Integrated Patents) and other changes as well as in litigation procedures. The comments and questions opened the view to other countries, also outside Europe and showed a very similar situation all over the world. Once more the discussion lead to the questions of how to handle this and showed in parts a kind of helplessness how to make things better and avoid conflicts. I could open the view to our situation in Germany with the new DIN standard 77006 about Quality Management in IP, which is not a “one fits it all”, but a tremendous help for practitioners and anyway a big step in the right direction to avoid litigation by qualified IP Management. I also mentioned the care about it of the QIMIP organization in Germany and the International Institute for IP Management also in international dimensions and invited the audience to make themselves familiar with principles of such qualification for IP Mgt. which was very welcome .
Gorilla is an American organizer of conferences, including the increasing “IPR Gorilla” section. The 2 days conference in Dubai was an interesting mixture of international speakers and attracted a broad and international audience. It was about the general IPR topics, but also specials like enforcement of IPR in Gulf and around the world, the role of open innovation, of Artificial Intelligence and others
The discussions reminded very much on the always present need of qualified IPR Management in any phase of IPR work, also in entrepreneurship. Companies basing on innovative products are in high danger to lose their position in the market, if something works wrong with the IPR. So again, very general spoken “prevention is better than cure” which I am emphasizing repeatedly, also and especially for such Start Ups. I submitted some real examples, which made it hopefully clear. The speakers and audience in the conference recognized the need of the qualified IPR Mgt as a “matter of course”. By insisting on information of the local facts it became clear, that the same deficits are existing as everywhere. The only way to improve this, are often described and demonstrated by IP for business – I do not need to repeat.
Another interesting aspect of the conference was the meaning of the South Asian markets for the world by its “almost exploding” activities in any respect– also concerning IPR, which becomes more and more obvious. The Indian markets seem to play a significant role for Start ups worldwide and should be observed with attention. This is not only by their high engagement but also the quantity of activities in place and worldwide.
Dr. Lorenz Kaiser
Senior Legal Counsel, GE Aerospace