IP Week @ SG: Challenges and developments in tech-savvy Singapore

What are some of the key changes stemming from the patents and registered designs
reviews?

IP policy-making is always about finding the right balance and supporting the larger economic and social needs of the country. As these change over time, IP laws have similarly to evolve, so that they continue being relevant to the country.

Singapore has a small domestic market, so we have to be even more sensitive to these changes, and nimble in adjusting our laws. We have been fortunate that our IP regime has been highly rated by numerous international agencies, and we hope that the recent amendments to the patents and registered design laws will help us continue as an attractive jurisdiction for creators, designers and businesses to establish and grow.

The smaller suite of amendments relate to our patents regime. With effect from October 30, 2017, we are closing the “foreign route” which currently allows foreign patent applications to enter into the Singapore market. This route will no longer be available from January 1, 2020 and all patent applications will have to undergo full search and examination based on Singapore’s laws.

This is an important change as it will significantly strengthen Singapore’s patent regime and bring greater certainty for patent holders, while giving time for current users of the “foreign route” to adjust over a period of time to these changes.

Coupled with our recent patent search and examination fees adjustments, where we reduced upfront filing fees from between 14% to 27%, businesses can leverage on our speed (eg, 60 days for a search and examination report) and networks (eg, global patent prosecution highways [GPPHs], ASEAN Patent Examination Cooperation [ASPEC], Singapore-Cambodia Patent Re-registration System) to expand into key markets confidently.

In relation to registered designs, we will broaden the scope of designs protection. We will allow the registration of handmade articles, such as handcrafted jewellery, under the Registered Designs Act. Virtual designs will also be protected. One example would be a virtual keyboard that is projected on to a surface.

We will also allow for colours to be protected as a design feature, as long as they are part of another design feature. Many readers will know that colour protection under IP law has been controversial, with attempts to do so under trademark being largely unsuccessful. We think that using the designs regime, where the period of protection is shorter, may result in fewer anti-competitive effects.

Across both patents and registered designs, we have also broadened the grace period for disclosures. We will allow any public disclosure of the invention that originates from the inventor to be disregarded if it occurs within 12 months before the patent application was made. This will enable our inventors to disclose information of their inventions for strategic and business purposes (eg, attract investors, assess market demand) even before they file a patent.

Similar amendments are being made for the registered designs grace period. That said, while we discern a trend internationally where grace period is moving towards 12 months, there are different practices across jurisdictions. Applicants filing across multiple countries will have be aware of this and not be inadvertently caught out by these differences.

You’re reviewing the copyright regime. Are you able to share some of your findings so far?

In the past decade, we have seen tremendous changes to the way content is created and consumed, and consequently, in the way we work, communicate and play. Copyright is a key component of the networks that allows content to flow. This means that copyright has become, more than ever, the most impactful IP right on us individually.

Naturally, copyright regimes all over the world have had to react to these changes. In Singapore’s case, the changes have even more impact because we are a city-state with a tech-savvy population (our mobile penetration rate is 140%, and we have one of the fastest broadband speeds in the world). Any review of our copyright regime therefore needed to be consultative and well considered.

We started by getting together stakeholders with an interest in copyright issues, including academics and experts, to help us frame the right issues for the public consultation.

We then moved into our public consultation phase in the second half of last year, where 16 proposals were tabled for views from the public (Table 1).

Table 1: Results of public consultation on copyright issues