INTA: You don’t need a crystal ball
“We don’t have a crystal ball!” was a frequently uttered phrase in 2020. It was the case inside the International Trademark Association (INTA) as we navigated the tremendous uncertainty brought about by COVID-19. In the shadow of the pandemic, our desire to understand the future has become even more acute. We want to be prepared for the unknown. We want to remain relevant. We want to be innovative and a force for positive change.
Yet, while we don’t have a crystal ball, we can—and should—ask big questions about the future and map a path forward. No doubt, the IP landscape is evolving quickly, and stakeholders of all types must embrace change and adapt or be left behind, so what does the future hold for IP?
IP offices (IPOs) offer a good indicator. INTA convened the IP Office of the Future Think Tank in early 2019. It brought together 14 current and former heads of IPOs from around the world (Australia, Canada, Chile, Europe, France, India, Mexico, the Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Uganda, and the US) to ask the big questions and to envision what the IPO might look like in ten to 20 years’ time.
While INTA facilitated their interactions, the participants developed the report independently. Indeed, the thank tank was a very deliberate choice for the format for this research project—INTA supported the analysis, but the opinions are from independent experts. Likewise, the geographical diversity of those involved ensured that the views of the think tank represented all types of IPOs, of varying sizes and facing different challenges.
Realising the opportunity to reach a more holistic view of the future of the IP industry, and drawing on our global membership, the Association subsequently convened two additional think tanks to look at in-house teams and law firms.
INTA published “The IP Office of the Future” think tank report in November 2020, along with “The In-House Practice of the Future” and “IP Law Firms of the Future” think tank reports. Their findings are insightful, presenting the future challenges and opportunities for the IP field.
The IPO’s non-traditional future
The experts considering the IPO of the future focused on three interconnected topics: the evolution of the IP system, future challenges and opportunities (including the game-changers IPOs face, such as the fourth industrial revolution, the rise of private rights, and informal IP protection), and the IPO’s traditional and non-traditional future roles.
The report acknowledges that there is no one-size-fits-all approach for IPOs when it comes to anticipating and responding to future challenges and opportunities. Indeed, every IPO faces different challenges, opportunities, mandates, historical contexts, and social and economic imperatives.
Nevertheless, one clear conclusion that builds throughout the report is that the IPO of the future cannot remain strictly focused on its traditional roles. To remain relevant and to continue serving the needs of its users, the IPO of the future must embrace a variety of untraditional roles.
“Governments that have proved most effective in developing their IPOs are those that recognised the need for an effective IP system and appropriately elevated IP in their legislative agendas.” - Etienne Sanz de Acedo, INTA
The think tank experts agreed that most IPOs have shifted from what is generally considered to be the traditional roles of an IPO (such as administering and registering IP rights; harmonisation of IP law, using new technologies to adapt services, and financial resources and stewardship) to taking on critical roles that influence national economic development.
Their evolution comes in response to the increasingly central role of creativity and innovation in modern-day economic growth. Governments that have proved most effective in developing their IPOs are those that recognised the need for an effective IP system and appropriately elevated IP in their legislative agendas.
“However, with no common understanding about what additional roles IPOs should take on and at what priority, each IPO has decided independently what the nature, implementation pace, and number of its new tasks will be”, the report notes.
The result is considerable diversity of roles among IPOs globally, whether at national, regional, or international level. Non-traditional roles are evolving and specific to each IPO, but tend to include:
