A vote against IP rights
At the same time a number of motions were filed by groups of members of the parliament. The motions focused on intellectual property in Sweden and how to secure IP rights and expand the possibility, especially for small and medium entities, of developing new IP rights for the Swedish and international markets. Here are some examples.
Strengthen Swedish support systems for innovation (motion 2013/14:N209)
Sweden is well placed in international comparisons in terms of innovation. For Sweden to be able to take responsibility for the global environmental and climate challenges and maintain its competitiveness and prosperity in the future, innovations are needed that lead to new jobs and companies in Sweden.
Support entrepreneurs in patent litigation (motion 2013/14:N347)
When a small business ends up in a patent dispute with a major international company, it often happens that the small company chooses not to pursue the case due to a lack of resources, either in terms of money or expertise. The motion suggests that the state should “guarantee support to small and medium-sized firms in international patent litigation”.
Politics for research (motion 2013/14:Ub570)
The goal is for Sweden to be a leading knowledge and research nation. It is crucial for the country’s development. There is a need to establish a national innovation council, which is directly subordinate to the prime minister. The council brings together representatives from industry, academia and the social partners.
"There is an urgent need for inventors and IP attorneys to educate politicians about the importance of safe and strong IP protection."
Measures to protect patents (motion 2013/14:N288)
This motion noted that “it is expensive to pursue patent litigation”, suggested a governmental patent protection insurance, and called for the state to become more active when it comes to prosecuting the crime of patent infringement.
Enhanced IP protection (motion 2013/14:N270)
The motion compared patent and design protection, and suggested the government consider the possibility of strengthening IP and design protection.
Special support for individual innovators (motion 2013/14:N314)
The motion suggests that the opportunities for special support for individual innovators, in terms of patent protection, should be reviewed. It concluded that: “A patent is not stronger than the money you have to defend it in court.”
Measures to protect patents (motion 2013/14:N288)
This motion pointed to the fact that the Swedish government has increased spending on Swedish research by “billions of dollars”. There are also many brilliant Swedish inventors who operate outside the academic sphere.
The patent system is there to protect the large commercial value located in innovations and inventions. However, there are indications that the patent system in some cases does not serve its purpose. The motion suggests a review of the extent to which Swedish patents are infringed in other countries, as well as increased opportunities to sue for patent infringement.
These motions show that some Swedish politicians have an interest in strengthening IP rights. That’s the good news.
The bad news is that all motions were voted down in parliament, by the same cross-political parties whose members had created and proposed them.
It shows that there is an urgent need for inventors and IP attorneys to educate politicians about the importance of safe and strong IP protection. The reason for the parliament to vote against the motions is possibly that politicians in general do not understand the importance of IP rights when they discuss topics such as export trade, unemployment, healthcare, the environment, and energy.
Let’s hope that the politicians who submitted the motions (one of them now the Swedish energy minister) have not given up hope of convincing their party members.
Maria Zamkova is chief executive of Fenix Legal. She can be contacted at: maria.zamkova@fenixlegal.eu
