The global patent system is in crisis. That was the message that came out of a special conference held by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva between March 25 and March 27.

The Geneva meeting, attended by some 400 delegates from more than 80 countries, brought together representatives from governments and patent offices, as well as industry and non-government organizations, such as Medècin Sans Frontiéres.

The conference was part of the continuing WIPO Patent Agenda, launched in September 2001. Detailed proposals for reforming the international patent system will be drawn up by WIPO later this year.

Many speakers spoke of a crisis in the patent system, caused primarily by the boom in interest in IP, and the expansion of patentable subject matter.

Applications made under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) system have nearly doubled in five years — increasing from 54,422 in 1997 to 103,947 in 2001. This growth has put huge pressure on national patent offices, which are responsible for examining applications.

Ma Lianyuan, deputy commissioner of the State Intellectual Property Office in China, revealed that his Office needed to recruit an extra 700 examiners in the next two years to keep up with demand. Patent applications have been growing at an average of 18% a year in China since 1985.

As applications (for example in biotechnology and software) have become more complicated, the burden on examiners has become greater. In some small countries, the boom in applications has made patent examination unfeasible.

In the larger patent offices, it now takes longer than ever for prior art searches to be conducted and patents to be examined. In the UK, for example, the average search time has increased from two and a half months in 1997 to four and half months in 2001.

Meanwhile, many fees are going up. Obtaining patent protection in the leading markets is now estimated to cost about $400,000 per invention. In practice, this means patent applicants are paying more money for worse service.

One answer to the problem is to encourage greater coordination between patent offices. At the moment, international applications are examined separately in each country where patent protection is sought. This situation leads to enormous duplication of work.

A solution to this problem is for patent offices to share more resources and recognize each other's search and examination results.

Such so-called mutual recognition was discussed at length at the conference, but there remain significant obstacles to its introduction. Not least, patent applicants must have confidence that standards will be applied uniformly and rigorously. And the different systems of national offices have to be reconciled.

Speakers at the conference also discussed issues such as balancing IP rights and public health access, using IT in patent offices, defining what is acceptable as prior art and the role of alternative dispute resolution (ADR).

A number of speakers addressed how to increase confidence in the patent system in developing countries — in particular how to encourage local inventors to file more patent applications. At present, only about 5% of PCT applications come from developing countries.

Former US Patent and Trademark Office commissioner Bruce Lehman suggested that a global fund be set up to finance patenting costs for inventors in developing countries, which could be replenished by a small royalty from any inventions successfully exploited.

Change was definitely in the air in Geneva. Some delegates even called for a true one-stop global patent to be introduced as soon as possible. That is politically unfeasible at the moment, but if WIPO can address at least some of the issues raised at the conference in the coming months, it should be able to produce a blueprint that will eventually lead to stronger, quicker and better value international patent protection.

James Nurton is the editor of Managing Intellectual Property.

LegalMediaGroup.com welcomes your feedback on this or any other story. Please email the author with your comments. Letters may be published online.