Q&A Adam Williams
Susie Winter, the Publishers Association’s director of policy and communications, meets Adam Williams, director of the Intellectual Propert Office’s International Policy Directorate
The direct line susie winter
Can you explain what the role is of the International Policy Directorate of the IPO? adam williams
IPD, as we are commonly known, is respon- sible for the strategy and co-ordination of the IPO’s international work. The office as a whole has policy teams responsible for the rights we grant (such as patents and trademarks) and, of course, for copyright issues. IPD brings the work of those teams together to ensure our European and international approach and engagement is consistent with wider UK government aims. We also work with foreign governments to try to ensure that companies have a fair and efficient IP system to operate in when doing business abroad. Finally, my team also has a key role in educating and supporting (on their IP issues) UK businesses who are plan- ning to or who are already exporting abroad.
The IPO has a network of IP attachés around the world. What is their main role? The IP atachés (currently based in Brazil, India, Southeast Asia and Beijing) help to fulfil several of the roles I have just high- lighted. They help provide IP information and awareness to businesses who are enter- ing the market, and in some cases direct support to businesses who are having IP issues in the market where they are already operating. Most importantly, they work with the governments of those nations to atain a fair and efficient IP system for creators and users. It’s important to understand that in the case of those businesses facing in-market issues, we do not ask for special favours, but the atachés may know of busi- nesses who have had similar issues and, therefore, the ways to resolve them. Alter- natively, they might point out inconsisten- cies of approach taken by the IP decision- makers when compared to previous cases and support their review. I would like to emphasise that we do not seek to replace a good IP legal advisor, but can provide complementary advice and strategies for dealing with a specific issue.
www.thebookseller.com
The IPO has a number of Memorandums of Understanding on Intellectual Property with other countries, the latest one with India. What do these MOUs set out to achieve? The MOUs relate to my point about work- ing towards a fair and efficient system. IP is important across the business globe so there is a lot to be gained from collabora- tion and sharing best practice. We might collaborate on efficient ways of examining a patent, discuss new challenges or advances in technology that relate to trademarks, or share best practice on managing copyright. Some countries prefer to do this in a more formal way and agree an MOU that lists the topics to be discussed and the param- eters around those discussions. However, some discussions do not require a formal MOU and will occur around meetings of the global IP communit, such as the World Intellectual Propert Organisation (WIPO).
There is a great deal of focus on what will happen after Brexit and the new international trade deals the UK will be seeking to sign. What is the IPO doing to ensure that the UK’s IP-rich industries don’t get sidelined in deals to protect its financial services industries and car manufacturing sector? That focus is understandable, and correct. Here at the IPO, we rapidly turned our thinking to the impacts of Brexit on the IP
system. Within my team, we are co-ordi- nating the response of the policy teams I mentioned earlier and have forged links with our colleagues both in the Department for Exiting the EU and the Department for International Trade (DIT), as well as across Whitehall.
So on one hand, we are considering the requirements of leaving the EU in terms of what it means for IP, and on the other, we are carefully working through the various issues and providing detailed information to inform discussions around international trade and associated agreements. It would be wrong of me to comment on individual policy options, but we are clear that busi- nesses want stabilit and that they want to be able to operate globally. We are working with DIT and others to enable that in the best way possible.
A number of countries are reviewing their copyright laws, unfortunately with a view to weakening copyright and expanding what people can do with others’ content without permission or payment. Is this of concern to the UK government? What can be done? Copyright is a fast-moving subject, with the boundaries being regularly tested in particular by new digital means. Therefore we shouldn’t be surprised by other coun- tries looking at how copyright operates for businesses and consumers. But I want to be absolutely clear that we do not condone people being able to use others’ copyright without permission or compensation. Importantly, we need to ensure that there is support for business models that enable qualit content to be produced and crea- tors remunerated. As part of our work, the UK will engage with countries to discuss these issues and recommend informed approaches. This can be done through our participation in the EU, within WIPO and in bilateral ways too. ×
Adam Williams addresses delegates at the Patent Prosecution Highway User Seminar in Singapore in August 2015
23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48
