Trend of utility model patent filings considering the income level of countries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i8.30767Keywords:
Economy; Innovation; Technologies.Abstract
The economic importance of patent protection has been increasing and more recognized, especially in less technologically developed economies. For these countries, capital-intensive activities, which characterize most technological innovations, are less common, with their innovation production systems heavily based on derived innovation products, such as utility models. The purpose of this article was to discuss the global trend in the behavior of utility model patents according to income levels defined by the World Bank in the period between 2000 and 2018. The main results confirmed strong direct relationships between the demand for utility model patents and lower-middle-income economies. In addition, these economies are also positively impacted by the parallel increase of this type of industrial protection in medium-high economies and are also responsible for the highest productivity rates of MU patent applications. In this context, the importance of a protection system suited to the reality of each country emerges, as a mechanism to guarantee economic progress. In this sense, the utility model patent protection regime, as an alternative for patent protection aimed at smaller and incremental innovations, was, and is being used, a useful tool to promote innovation and economic prosperity in countries.
References
Acordo sobre Aspectos dos Direitos de Propriedade Intelectual Relacionados ao Comércio (TRIPS). (1994). https://www.gov.br/inpi/pt-br/backup/legislacao-1/27-trips-portugues1.pdf
Archibugi, D. & Pianta, M. (1996). Innovation surveys and patents as technology indicators: the state of the art, in OECD. Innovation, Patents and Technological Strategies, Paris, OECD.
Banco Mundial. (2020). New World Bank country classifications by income level: 2020-2021: World Bank (2020). https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-world-bank-country-classifications-income-level-2020-2021
Brack, H. P. (2009). Utility models and their comparison with patents and implications for the US intellectual property law system. In: Boston College Intellectual Property and Technology Forum. pp. 1-15.
Bruch, K. L., Areas, P. O. & Vieira, A C. P. (2019). Acordos internacionais relacionados à propriedade intelectual. Santos, Wagna Piler Carvalho dos (org.). Conceitos e aplicações de propriedade intelectual. IFBA. pp. 59-208.
Chaves, C. C., Oliveira, M. A., Hasenclever, L. & Melo, L. M. (2007). A evolução do sistema internacional de propriedade intelectual: proteção patentária para o setor farmacêutico e acesso a medicamentos. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 23, pp. 257-267.
Convenção de Paris para proteção para a Proteção da Propriedade Industrial. (1883). 1929, revisão de Estocolmo. https://www.gov.br/inpi/pt-br/backup/legislacao-1/cup.pdf
Coyle, P. (2012). Patent litigation in the European Union: an analysis of the viability of recent proposals aimed at unifying the European patent litigation system. Wash. U. Global Stud. L. 11, 171.
Di-Biasi, G., Garcia, M. S. & Mendes, P. P. M. (2002). A propriedade industrial: os sistemas de marcas, patentes e desenhos industriais analisados a partir da Lei número 9.279, de 14 de maio de 1996. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária.
Dutra, P. H. (2007). Breve história das negociações internacionais em propriedade intelectual. Inovação Uniemp, 3(6), 40-41.
Evenson, R. E. & Westphal, L. E. (1995). Technological change and technology strategy. Handbook of development economics 3, 2209-2299.
Gama, S. C. S., Braga, E. J. & Rodrigues, R. C. (2016). A patente de modelo de utilidade como ferramenta de estímulo ao desenvolvimento tecnológico nacional. Cadernos de Prospecção, 9(4), 417.
Hauser, E. (1987). Utility models: The Experience of the Federal Republic of Germany. Industral Property–July/August.
Heikkilã, Jussi. (2014). Does utility model protection substitute or complement patent protection?
Huang, Z. & Yu, P. (2007). The effects of technical innovation to economic growth of our country in recent years: An empirical study based on panel data models. Science and technology management research, 8, 74-77.
Kardam, K. S. (2007). Utility model–a tool for economic and technological development: A case study of Japan. World intellectual property organization and Japanese patent office.
Kim, Y. K., Lee K., Park W. G. & Choo K. (2012). Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Research policy, 41(2), 358-375
Kranakis, E. (2007). Patents and power: European patent-system integration in the context of globalization. Technology and Culture, 48(4), 689-728.
Kumar, N. (2003). Intellectual property rights, technology and economic development: Experiences of Asian countries. Economic and Political Weekly, 209-226.
Ladas, S. P. (1975). Patent Cooperation Treaty and the European Patent Convention. PTC J. Res. & Ed., 17, 37.
Lakshmikumaran, M. & Bhattacharya, S. (2004). Utility Models: Protection for Small Innovations. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 46(2), 322-332.
Li, W. (2012). Analysis of impact of different types of patents on technological advancement in China. African Journal of Business Management, 6(10), 3623-3629.
LIU, H. (2002). Patent System and Economic Development: Theory & Reality---Analysis on the Dynamic Utility of China's Patent System. China Soft Science, 12, pp. 26-30.
Maskus, K. E. & Penubarti, M. (1995). How trade-related are intellectual property rights?. Journal of International economics, 39(3-4), 227-248.
Mwiya, B. (2012). Trends of patent and utility model activities in Asia and Africa: A comparison of regional innovation, FDI and economic activity. The WIPO, 3(2), 257-279.
Odman Boztosun, N. (2010). Ayse. Exploring the Utility of Utility Models to Foster Innovation. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights,15, 429-439.
Organização Mundial Da Propriedade Intelectual (OMPI). https://www.wipo.int/patents/en/topics/utility_models.html
Patel, Pari; Pavitt, Keith. (1995). Technological competencies in the world's largest firms: Characteristics, constraints and scope for managerial choice.
Patel, Surendra J. (1974). The patent system and the third world. World Development, 2(9), 3-14.
Prud'homme, Dan. (2015). 'Soft Spots' in China's Utility Model Patent System: Perceptions, Assessment and Reform. European Intellectual Property Review, 37(5).
Prud'homme, D. (2017). Utility model patent regime “strength” and technological development: Experiences of China and other East Asian latecomers. China Economic Review, 42, 50-73.
Richards, J. (2010). Utility model protection throughout the world. Boletim Ladas & Parry LLP.
Sharma, Gautam & Kumar, Hemant. (2018). Exploring the Possibilities of Utility Models Patent Regime for Grassroots Innovations in India. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 23, 119-130.
Sobrinho, Débora Farah & D’oliveira, Bruno Loureiro Bossi. (2014). Os efeitos do acordo trips no direito brasileiro: uma abordagem crítica. Revista Direito e Inovação. 2(2).
Sui, G., Shen, G. & Song, J. (2005). The industrialization of China’s high-tech industry based on the region regional differences of patent level. Management World, 8, 87-93.
Suthersanen, Uma et al. (2006). Utility models and innovation in developing countries. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), 2006.
Suthersanen, Uma. (2019). Utility models: do they really serve national innovation strategies?. In: The Innovation Society and Intellectual Property. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Tratado de Cooperação em Patentes (PCT) (1970). https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/pct/pt/texts/pdf/pct.pdf
Yang, Y. (2014). Reforming the Utility Model System in China: Time to Limit Utility Model Patents' Scope of Protection and Improve the Quality of Chinese Utility Model Patents. AIPLA QJ, 42, 393.
Zhao, Y. & Liu, S. (2011). Effect of China’s domestic patents on total factor productivity: 1988-2009. School of Statistics, Renmin University of China.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Bruno Ramos Eloy; Sílvio Sobral Garcez Júnior; Fábio Oliveira Uchôa; José Carlos dos Santos Correia Júnior; João Antonio Belmino dos Santos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
