InternationalUSRemember you can easily switch between MIP US and MIP International at any time

World IP Survey List - Intro

Managing IP's exclusive survey of the world IP market, now in its 14th year of publication, provides a unique perspective on IP practice - based on the experiences of hundreds of clients and practitioners worldwide. The 2010 survey is the largest ever, covering 75 jurisdictions and arranged in four geographical areas - Africa & Middle East, Americas, Asia and Europe.

Over the past five months, our researchers in London, New York and Hong Kong have spoken to hundreds of practitioners and in-house counsel to gather information about the IP market. Many more lawyers and attorneys have completed detailed questionnaires providing information on their own practice, other firms and the overall trends in the market.

The results of this research are detailed rankings of the leading firms practising intellectual property in each country. The lists of the leading firms are presented in the form of tiers. The total number of firms listed in each jurisdiction varies according to the size of the market.

This means that the survey is not an exhaustive list of every firm in each jurisdiction; even firms listed in the lower tiers have been recommended by a number of practitioners and deserve congratulations on their inclusion. Those in the top tiers received the most recommendations for the quality and depth of their practice.

The World IP Survey is not simply a list of the biggest firms, or a list of those that have the biggest caseload or are the oldest. Instead, it is a qualitative ranking of the leading firms in each category and reveals which firms are rated by their peers for the strength of their expertise and the depth of their ability to service clients.

For the first time this year, the World IP Survey is being published in its entirety online from February 1: subscribers can access all countries and all categories from this date. The results are also published in the February, March and April issues of Managing IP, and will be re-published, together with detailed analysis of the market trends in each country and information about the listed firms, in the annual IP Contacts Handbook (available online and in hard copy in May). This also has detailed analysis of the tables and the trends in each jurisdiction, relevant data and information and comments from rivals and clients.

Methodology
The results of Managing IP's survey are based on extensive research and interviews with practitioners worldwide.

A team of researchers based in London, Hong Kong and New York contacted firms in 75 jurisdictions to ask them for information and feedback on the rankings. Client feedback was also sought.

Based on this research, firms are ranked in tiers in each jurisdiction. In most jurisdictions, there are separate tables for prosecution and contentious work.

Prosecution work includes filing of patents or trade marks and associated work. Note that the survey does not distinguish between firms that draft patents themselves and firms that derive a large part of their prosecution work from re-filing patents originally drafted in other jurisdictions.

Contentious work includes all other legal work, such as enforcement and licensing.

Firms that handle both prosecution and contentious work are eligible to appear in both tables.

The tiers reflect the perception of the leading firms in each market, with the top tier listing those firms regarded as having the strongest practices in each category. Within each tier, firms are listed alphabetically.

All firms included, in all tiers, will have received several recommendations and endorsements in order to be included in the rankings.

No one outside of Managing IP has seen the final rankings before publication.

No firm can vote for its own inclusion, or recommend an associated or sister firm in another jurisdiction.

The rankings reflect the state of the market when the research was conducted, between September 2009 and January 2010.

Managing IP itself does not recommend or endorse any particular firms.
profile

Managing IP

ManagingIP

ManagingIP profile

"The recent proposal of automatically granting pending applications without examination is nothing but a desperate… https://t.co/9lE4RD00Rz

Nov 20 2017 09:17 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

New speakers announced at our NY https://t.co/sCxge69xRz and CA https://t.co/BGVnkVWSpC European Patent Events. F… https://t.co/3MlekFfPZR

Nov 20 2017 03:33 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

India’s Supreme Court pushes for faster IPR suits https://t.co/G0vmxWOc5g Delhi High Court has been given until mid… https://t.co/W576LiUGCF

Nov 20 2017 10:05 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
More from the Managing IP blog


null null null

null null null

October 2017

Courts grapple with scope of patent protection

The Supreme Court’s decision in Actavis v Eli Lilly introduced a doctrine of equivalents and arguably also established a doctrine of prosecution history estoppel in the UK. We look at the law across Europe, and the impact the decision might have. Kingsley Egbuonu, Michael Loney and James Nurton set the scene



Most read articles

Supplements