"Businesses built upon other forms of 'intellectual property',
such as copyright, trade marks and designs, have often commented
that the name does not reflect all our responsibilities," said Ron
Marchant, chief executive of the Patent Office. "This has caused
confusion over who is responsible for these other rights, and also
how important we and the Government consider those rights to
be."
Marchant said that the role of the Office would change in the
near future as it took responsibility for a wider range of
intellectual property governance functions.
"The [Gowers Review] report’s main recommendations will help us
to enforce intellectual property rights, and support British
businesses both at home and abroad," said Marchant.
"These are issues we began to deal with in our own reform
programme, 'Patent Office for the 21st Century'. So it is even more
appropriate that these matters will be included in our corporate
plan when we become the UK Intellectual Property Office," said
Marchant. "A number of changes need to be made to the law, but this
does not prevent us from using our new name."
The Gowers Review was ordered by Gordon Brown and investigated
the legal, regulatory and commercial climate for intellectual
property and made a number of recommendations on publication last
December.
The Review considered whether or not a separate Copyright Office
should be established, but decided that the role and name of the
Patent Office should change to reflect all forms of intellectual
property oversight.
"The name of the Patent Office can be misleading to
stakeholders," said the Review. "It suggests that the office is
only concerned with patents while, in fact, it performs a broad
range of functions in relation to all IP. The present name also
contributes to the perception that other forms of IP, for example
copyright, take a lower priority."
"Some stakeholders have suggested that a separate Copyright
Office be established," it said. "However, the Review believes that
there are a greater number of synergies than differences across
different forms of IP. Policy, education, enforcement, business
support, and awareness raising cut across the boundaries of all IP
rights. The Review has therefore decided not to recommend that a
separate Copyright Office be established."
"Instead, the Patent Office should ensure that all stakeholders
are given, and are seen to be given, equal consideration in IP
policy. The Review therefore recommends that the name of the Patent
Office should change to reflect better the functions it carries
out," it said.
Until the body can fully change its legal name it will use the name
as "an operating name of the Patent Office" on its material, said
Marchant.
The body has also changed its logo and changed its slogan, which
forms part of the logo. Instead of saying 'for innovation' it now
says 'for creativity and innovation'.
