Intellectual Property Rights Regulations in Russia: Case of Government-Supported R

1
Intellectual Property Rights Regulations in
Russia Case of Government-Supported RD

• Irina Dezhina
• Leading Researcher, Ph.D.
• Institute for the Economy in Transition
• Moscow, Russia
• degina_at_iet.ru

2
CONTENTS

• Why the focus is on government-financed results
  of RD?
• Development of legislation during 1992-2005
• Unresolved problems
• Indicators of patenting
• New instruments for commercialization of IP
  technology transfer offices
• Possible options

3
IPR Created Under Budgetary Expense the Scope

• 90 of all IP in Russia was created under
  budgetary expense
• The share of government financing of RD is about
  60 of the total expenditures from all sources
• In particular
• In academic institutes over 80
• In universities 62
• (data for 2003)

4
Development of Legal Basis in 1992-2003

• Patent Law of the Russian Federation (1992) and
  six basic laws in the area of IP Acceptance of
  international practice
• Government Decrees of 1998-1999 Strengthening
  the power of the State
• Government Order of 2001 An attempt to find
  balance of interests (government
  organization-inventor)
• Corrected Patent Law (2003) Clarification of
  terms for government contractual agreements

5
Recent Developments in Legislation

• Government Regulations (November, 2005)
• In case of government contracts IP may belong to
• The State
• Organization where IP was created
• Both
• IP belongs to the state if results are restricted
  in use or government is ready to take
  responsibility for commercialization.
• Both state and RD organization (university) own
  IP in case of defense-related results or if
  results are related to implementation of
  government functions (health protection).

6
Unresolved Problems in Recent Legislation

• What are criteria for identification of RD
  results that government is ready to commercialize
  by itself?
• What are the responsibilities of organization
  that receives ownership?
• How should the amount of payments that
  organization-owner of IP will pay to the federal
  budget be calculated?
• The case of mixed financing from a number of
  sources is not resolved.

7
Other Problems

• Contradictions between legal and sublegislative
  (level of ministries) documents.
• Results received under government contractual
  agreements should be published. This may
  contradict to the intention of organization to
  patent.
• Undeveloped methods to calculate the cost of IP.
  Usually it is calculated as expenditures on RD.
• Problems related to amortization of IP.
• Mistrust towards Russian patent system among
  researchers. Patenting abroad is expensive.
  Result low level of patenting. Preference is
  given to know-how.

8
Some Indicators of Patenting in Russia

• Only 0.4 of RD results are in economic
  turnover. For developed countries this indicator
  is 70.
• Patenting in Russia is often used to secure
  priority in RD, and not as a step towards
  commercialization. From the total number of
  registered patents only 35 are patents in force.
  Usually patent maintenance lasts 4-5 years.
• (data from the Russian Federal Service for
  Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks)

9
Patent Applications Granted by USPTO / Million
population(2003-2004)
10
Technology Transfer Offices in Russia

• First TTO were established in 2003. Two models
  are developing simultaneously.
• First model TTO are independent legal entities
  aimed for economic development of the region.
• This model is supported from the federal budget.
  Total number of TTO created to the date 68.
• Second model TTO are subdivisions of
  universities.
• One of their major functions is educational.
• This model is supported on matching basis from
  the federal budget and foreign (U.S.) sources.
  Number of TTO - 4.

11
Government Financing of TTO
12
Achievements of TTO

• Some TTO managed to establish transparent
  internal structure, conducted partner search,
  technology audits and market assessment studies.
  These TTO proceed with commercialization in three
  directions
• Patenting / licensing
• Establishment of small (spin-off) companies
• RD contracts with industrial enterprises
• TTO became places for training and retraining of
  innovation managers.
• Expert estimation for the number of successful
  TTOs 10 from the total.

13
TTO- Second Model Results to Date

• No royalty income
• 29 new licenses negotiated
• 30 new enterprises launched
• 400 company contacts made
• Training of other university personnel
• Research contracts for host universities

14
Problems (1)

• Need in TTO is not widely accepted in research
  community. Researchers think they may
  commercialize their developments by their own.
• In some TTO leadership sees TTO only as a patent
  office or as training division.
• In many cases industrial enterprises prefer
  outsource RD to teams of researchers without
  contacting TTO or organization (university).
• The RD results are usually not ready for
  commercialization.
• Lack of information about developments in
  organizations other then the one that hosts the
  TTO.

15
Problems (2)

• Government financing of TTO is guaranteed for 1
  year. Support is provided only for RD.
• Legal basis for contractual agreements between
  organization and employee is underdeveloped.
  Employees do not have obligation to report about
  their RD results and potential commercial value
  of these results to employer.
• Legislation in many cases hampers innovation
  activity rather then encourages it. Example
  regulations concerning SME.

16
Possible Actions

• Improvement of government regulations, including
  the one concerning innovative SME, in order to
  create environment friendly to innovations.
• Introduction of the analogous of the US Bayh-Dole
  Act of 1980 with detailed clarification of all
  terms and conditions.
• Support of public-private partnerships in
  innovation joint RD projects, outsourcing of
  RD.
• Establishment of coordination among government
  agencies in order to make innovation policy more
  consistent.