Basic IP fundamentals: a recent survey among the IP community

 

On 30 November 2023, the Center for Intellectual Property Understanding (CIPU) published the findings of a survey on “Intellectual Property Principle – What the IP Community regards as important” (executive summary and slides). The survey was conducted by response:AI, an independent market research firm.

The survey

The survey was launched on 14 September 2023 and ended on 27 October 2023 with the goals of assessing the attitudes and beliefs towards IP among inventors, creators, IP lawyers, service providers, educators, IP advisors, investors and government or public policy officials, with a total of 213 respondents. The survey focused on providing an assessment on the perception of the value of IP rights (patents, copyrights and trademarks) also in comparison to other types of property rights and whether IP rights encourage sharing.


Key findings


The four principles identified by IPbasics.org were of help in understanding the survey: IP is property, IP encourage sharing, IP infringement has consequences, good IP behavior is learned.


The key findings of the survey are summarized as follows:

- Creators and IP professionals concur that an invention, name or work of creative expression can have value like any other property: 88% strongly agree with this statement while another 9% agree “somewhat”;

- 96% of those surveyed agree that copyrights, trademarks, patents and trade secrets provide value to both owners and society at large;

- 71% of respondents believe strongly that patents have a positive impact on innovation and 68% on the economy as a whole;

- 73% believe strongly in copyrights’ positive impact on creative expression and 66% on society as a whole;

Difference regarding business, impact;

- 100% of corporate respondents and consultants believe that IP infringement hurts business;

- The view that IP theft, deliberate or not, threatens jobs and compromises consumer safety is held by 98% of those with more than 30 years IP experience but only 85% or those will less than 10 years;

- There is less agreement across the community that IP protections encourage sharing: 71% agree with this statement while 13% have no opinion and 16% disagree;

- Attorneys are the most likely to disagree that IP protections encourage sharing (25%), followed by those in education and government (21%).


Comment


As a general view, we may find a confirmation on the IP community recognises the value of IP and a certain impact on innovation, while there is still disparity of views on IP infringement’s consequences and that IP protection encourages sharing. It is worth noting that only 36% of the respondents strongly agreed on the latter principle, with all this suggesting that the possibility of creating value by sharing IP still looks controversial.

Basic IP fundamentals: a recent survey among the IP community Basic IP fundamentals: a recent survey among the IP community Reviewed by Anna Maria Stein on Friday, December 22, 2023 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. An important point is that accountants are increasingly adding the value of IP and trade secrets to the overall value of company, and a question that no one seems to have looked at is the volatility this brings into the finance markets. IP rights can lose their value very quickly, for example if they are revoked in litigation or renewal fees are not paid, or if the trade secrets are accidentally released. Therefore it does not seem correct to assign them the same monetary value as more tangible assets, but at the same time they clearly cannot be ignored in assessing the value of a company. The area is probably deemed too complex to analyse which is why we don't see any discussion of it

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.