Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Intellectual Capital

Piotr Wisniewski
suspected <strong>of</strong> violating IP rights (“detained at EU borders”) soared by 126% in 2008 (in year-over-year
terms). Some 54% <strong>of</strong> such infringements were attributable to China, however, o<strong>the</strong>r Far Eastern
economies, e.g. India (pharmaceuticals) and Indonesia (foodstuffs and beverages) figured
prominently on <strong>the</strong> watch list (IPR Enforcement 2009). Figure 5 displays <strong>the</strong> EU’s concern over IP
violations by category in 2009. Interestingly, <strong>the</strong> priority watch list <strong>of</strong> compiled by <strong>the</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
United States Trade Representative (USTR) does not lay similar emphasis on East Asia (China in
particular) (Cf. USTR 2010).
Figure 5: “Priority countries” (detrimental to EU intellectual property rights) by category in 2009
China
Indonesia, <strong>the</strong> Philippines,
Thailand, Turkey
Argentina*, Brazil*, Canada, India, Israel, Korea, Malaysia,
Russia*, Ukraine*, <strong>the</strong> USA, Vietnam
Figure 4: Percentage share <strong>of</strong> five largest patent <strong>of</strong>fices worldwide in total patent applications (filed in
1985-2008)
Source: Commission <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>European</strong> Communities, Commission Staff Working Document,
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Enforcement Report 2009, SEC (2009) 1360, Brussels. In each
category countries listed in alphabetical order. (*)Substantial improvements noted in <strong>the</strong>se countries
(according to <strong>the</strong> Commission).
Given <strong>the</strong> mass migration <strong>of</strong> modern goods and services to cyberspace and limitations to IC
registration through IP (discussed in this paper), <strong>the</strong> potential scale <strong>of</strong> IC abuse by emerging
economies is likely to be colossal. More information on <strong>the</strong> scale <strong>of</strong> IC rights infringement can only be
gained as a result <strong>of</strong> rising transparency within and cooperation among individual EU member
jurisdictions, as well as fur<strong>the</strong>r international surveys focused on diverse classes <strong>of</strong> intangibles.
4. The diffusion <strong>of</strong> intellectual property – <strong>the</strong> patenting perspective and
limitations
Patents can be successfully used to monitor global flows <strong>of</strong> innovation among economic areas,
countries, regions, industries and individual enterprises. The reasons why patents serve as a handy
benchmark <strong>of</strong> intellectual capital diffusion are manifold:
Tradition: patenting is almost as old as humankind (it had been mentioned in ancient Greek
scripture), while modern patents originated in Venice in <strong>the</strong> 15 th century AC;
Breadth: patent registration data are available and comparable for most worldwide economies
(which is not <strong>the</strong> case for o<strong>the</strong>r forms <strong>of</strong> IP);
Depth: an average patent application is an abundant source <strong>of</strong> information on <strong>the</strong> inventor,
innovation character and potential claims <strong>the</strong>reto;
Ties to innovation: most high-pr<strong>of</strong>ile inventions have empirically been protected through patenting.
Patents are both measures <strong>of</strong> innovation outputs and inputs. After all, <strong>the</strong>y embody human
inventiveness, yet at <strong>the</strong> same time <strong>the</strong>y produce a powerful signaling effect for would-be inventors
contemplating future commitments to innovation.
492