[cc-community] UK Gowers Review

David Berry d.berry at sussex.ac.uk
Wed Dec 6 08:55:02 EST 2006


On first look seems very positive and well thought out. Key  
recommendations below with my highlighted ones most of interest to  
free culture in underline.  Of course, this doesn't beat RTFA. ;-)

David

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pre_budget_report/prebud_pbr06/ 
other_docs/prebud_pbr06_odgowers.cfm
--


List of recommendations in the Gower Review

Instruments

Balance

Recommendation 1: Amend section 60(5) of the Patents Act 1977 to  
clarify the research exception to facilitate
experimentation, innovation and education.
Recommendation 2: Enable educational provisions to cover distance  
learning and interactive whiteboards by
2008 by amending sections 35 and 36 of the Copyright, Designs and  
Patents Act, 1988 (CDPA).
Recommendation 3: The European Commission should retain the length of  
protection on sound recordings and
performers’ rights at 50 years.
Recommendation 4: Policy makers should adopt the principle that the  
term and scope of protection for IP
rights should not be altered retrospectively.

Coherence

Recommendation 5: UKPO should undertake joint working with African  
patent offices from mid-2007, with the
aim of:
• helping them to take advantage of the flexibilities currently  
existing in the WTO/TRIPS architecture
where appropriate; and
• encouraging them to make positive use of IP rights through  
dissemination of information in patents.
Recommendation 6: Encourage the international community under the  
auspices of the WTO to review the
TRIPS status of the least developed countries prior to 2016 and  
consider whether further extension for
reaching TRIPS compliance would be appropriate.
Recommendation 7: Government should encourage WTO members to ratify  
the amendments to TRIPS to
make importation of drugs easier and cheaper.

Flexibility

Recommendation 8: Introduce a limited private copying exception by  
2008 for format shifting for works
published after the date that the law comes into effect. There should  
be no accompanying levies for consumers.
Recommendation 9: Allow private copying for research to cover all  
forms of content. This relates to the
copying, not the distribution, of media.
Recommendation 10a: Amend s.42 of the CDPA by 2008 to permit  
libraries to copy the master copy of all
classes of work in permanent collection for archival purposes and to  
allow further copies to be made from the
archived copy to mitigate against subsequent wear and tear.
Recommendation 10b: Enable libraries to format shift archival copies  
by 2008 to ensure records do not become
obsolete.
Recommendation 11: Propose that Directive 2001/29/EC be amended to  
allow for an exception for creative,
transformative or derivative works, within the parameters of the  
Berne Three Step Test.
Recommendation 12: Create an exception to copyright for the purpose  
of caricature, parody or pastiche by
2008.
Recommendation 13: Propose a provision for orphan works to the  
European Commission, amending Directive
2001/29/EC.
Recommendation 14a: The Patent Office should issue clear guidance on  
the parameters of a ‘reasonable
search’ for orphan works, in consultation with rights holders,  
collecting societies, rights owners and archives,
when an orphan works exception comes into being.
Recommendation 14b: The Patent Office should establish a voluntary  
register of copyright; either on its own,
or through partnerships with database holders, by 2008.
Recommendation 15: Make it easier for users to file notice of  
complaints procedures relating to Digital Rights
Management tools by providing an accessible web interface on the  
Patent Office website by 2008.
Recommendation 16: DTI should investigate the possibility of  
providing consumer guidance on DRM systems
through a labelling convention without imposing unnecessary  
regulatory burdens.
Recommendation 17: Maintain policy of not extending patent rights  
beyond their present limits within the
areas of software, business methods and genes.

Operations

Award

Recommendation 18: The Government should encourage the EPO to pursue  
work sharing with the USPTO
and JPO.
Recommendation 19: The Patent Office should pursue work sharing  
arrangements with EPC member States,
and trilaterally with the USA and Japan to reduce cross-national  
duplication of effort.
Recommendation 20: Continue to support and expedite the establishment  
of a single Community Patent
through negotiations in Europe.
Recommendation 21: Government should support the London Agreement as  
an interim step towards
COMPAT, and as an improvement in its own right.
Recommendation 22: Maintain a high quality of patents awarded by  
increasing the use of ‘section 21’
observations: streamlining procedures and raising awareness.
Recommendation 23: The Patent Office should conduct a pilot of Beth  
Noveck’s Community Patent Review in
2007 in the UK to determine whether this would have a positive impact  
on the quality of the patent stock.
Recommendation 24: The Patent Office should develop stronger links  
with universities and other research
institutions, including through short placements, to ensure that IP  
examiners are aware of recent
developments in technology.
Recommendation 25a: Introduce accelerated grant process for patents  
to complement the accelerated
examination and combined patent search and examination procedures.
Recommendation 25b: Introduce fast track registration for trade marks.

Use

Recommendation 26: The Patent Office should provide comprehensive  
information on how to register and use
IP rights for firms registering with Companies House.
Recommendation 27: Improve SME business IP support by establishing  
formal collaboration between the
Patent Office and Business Link and by conducting a pilot replicating  
the French ‘IP Genesis’ scheme.
Recommendation 28: Investigate how best to provide practical IP  
advice to UK firms operating in foreign
markets, in coordination with industry bodies, the Patent Office and  
UK Trade and Investment.
Recommendation 29: The Patent Office should develop ‘Business-to- 
Business’ model IP licences through
industry consultation, and assessment of the Lambert model licences.
Recommendation 30a: The Patent Office should publish and maintain an  
open standards web database, linked
to the EPO’s esp at cenet web database, containing all patents issued  
under licence of right.
Recommendation 30b: The Patent Office should publish and maintain an  
open standards web database, linked
to esp at cenet containing all expired patents.
Recommendation 31: DTI should consider whether guidance for firms on  
reporting of intangible assets could
be improved, including the provision of model IP reports.
Recommendation 32: Form a working group with Patent Office, RDA and  
Business Link representation, to
identify and promote best practice to maximise the use of effective  
schemes nationwide.
Recommendation 33: The Review invites the OFT to consider conducting  
a market survey into the UK
collecting societies to ensure the needs of all stakeholders are  
being met.
Recommendation 34: Increase cooperation between the UK Patent Office,  
the Office of Fair Trading and the
Competition Commission to ensure that competition and IP policy  
together foster competitive and innovative
markets for the benefit of consumers.

Enforcement

Recommendation 35: The Patent Office should continue to raise public  
awareness, focussing in particular on
the wider impacts of IP crime, and the exceptions to rights.
Recommendation 36: Match penalties for online and physical copyright  
infringement by amending section 107
of the CDPA by 2008.
Recommendation 37: Monitor success of current measures to combat  
unfair competition in cases relating to
IP, and if changes are found to be ineffective, Government should  
consult on appropriate changes.
Recommendation 38: DCA should review the issues raised in its  
forthcoming consultation paper on damages
and seek further evidence to ensure that an effective and dissuasive  
system of damages exists for civil IP cases
and that it is operating effectively. It should bring forward any  
proposals for change by the end of 2007.
Recommendation 39: Observe the industry agreement of protocols for  
sharing data between ISPs and rights
holders to remove and disbar users engaged in ‘piracy’. If this has  
not proved operationally successful by the
end of 2007, Government should consider whether to legislate.
Recommendation 40: DTI should consult on measures to tighten  
regulation of occasional sales and markets by
2007.
Recommendation 41: The Home Office should recognise IP crime as an  
area for Police action as a component
of organised crime within the updated National Community Safety Plan.
Recommendation 42: Give Trading Standards the power to enforce  
copyright infringement by enacting section
107A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 by 2007.
Recommendation 43: Strengthen Practice Directions, to provide greater  
encouragement for parties to
mediate, in particular this should raise the profile of mediation  
with judges.
Recommendation 44: The Patent Office should consult with the Judicial  
Studies Board to determine the extent
to which the complexity of IP law may give rise to a training need  
for judges and magistrates and their legal
advisers.
Recommendation 45: Support the establishment of a single EU court to  
adjudicate cross-border IP disputes by
promoting the European Patent Litigation Agreement.

Governance

Recommendation 46: Establish a new Strategic Advisory Board for IP  
policy (SABIP), covering the full range
of IP rights, reporting to the minister responsible, by 2007. The  
Board should be drawn from a wide range of
external experts as well as key senior policy officials from relevant  
government departments, and should be
based in London. £150,000 should be allocated to fund the secretariat  
by the Patent Office.
Recommendation 47: The Patent Office should provide an annual IP  
strategic analysis fund of £500,000
managed by the policy advisory board in consultation with the IP  
Policy Directorate.
Recommendation 48: Patent Office should introduce a clear split of  
responsibility between delivery and policy
directorates.
Recommendation 49: Encourage IP policy officials to obtain policy  
experience outside the IP Policy Branch, and
support short industry placement schemes for policy staff.
Recommendation 50: Realign UK Patent Office administrative fees to  
cover costs more closely on Patent Office
administrative operations (e.g. granting patents).
Recommendation 51: Increase the transparency of Patent Office  
financial reporting.
Recommendation 52: Ensure that under current arrangements in the  
Patent Office, there is a clear internal
separation of responsibility between the granting of rights and  
disputes over their ownership or validity. This
should be achieved by clearly separating the line management structures.
Recommendation 53: Change the name of the UK Patent Office to the UK  
Intellectual Property Office (UK-
IPO) to reflect the breadth of functions the office has, and to  
dispel confusion.
Recommendation 54: DCA should review the issues raised in relation to  
IP cases and the fast track, and seek
views in the context of its forthcoming consultation paper, which  
will consider the case track limits, and how
the claims process can be made more timely, proportionate and cost- 
effective. It should bring forward any
proposals for change by the end of 2007.






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20061206/417d16aa/attachment-0001.htm 


More information about the cc-community mailing list