Where does the Inventor Trail end?

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Where does the Inventor Trail end?

The European Commission has a new approach to policy making in the IP area. In fact, to call it an approach to IP would be to fall into the silo trap that the Commission says it is trying to escape. The Commission’s approach is far more rounded

trail-450.jpg

The IP team within DG Internal Market is touting its model of the Inventor Trail – a roadmap designed to focus policy makers’ minds on helping companies develop their innovative businesses in a conception-to-export way.

Kerstin Jorna, head of the IP team within DG Internal Market, says the Inventor Trail is not a “disruption but an evolution” in the Commission’s way of thinking, designed to remind policy makers that all rules have a purpose.

“IP is not a purpose in itself. It is a tool for jobs and growth,” she told Managing IP.

The Commission needs to be congratulated for putting IP in the bigger commercial picture. As Jorna says, the goal of the single market is to raise levels of growth in the EU. The Commission’s commitment to evidence-based policy making is also to be welcomed: Jorna says she wants to beef up the Commission’s own expertise in the area of IP economics, as well as facilitating a new network of IP economists across the EU to share information and approaches.

But the Commission needs to ensure that it takes IP users, as well as IP owners, along the Inventor Trail too. Of course in many cases their interests will be the same, and Jorna was clear about the advantages that new rules on collecting societies and pan-EU licensing will have for consumers who want to access cultural material online.

In areas such as free trade deals, Jorna says that the Commission needs to consider the Inventor Trail and ensure that the IP chapter “makes sense” for companies on both sides. But should the goal of IP policy making always be to facilitate corporate growth – or does that lead to an ACTA-style backlash. Let us know.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and how to empower women in tech and IP
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Kevin Mack, Via’s new president, emphasises the importance of collaborative licensing structures and shares how AI tools can help create new lines of business
A Tokyo District Court ruling concerning movie spoilers, and a second chance for VLSI against Intel were also among the top talking points
Practitioners believe new AI tools at the USPTO will not replace lawyers or disrupt revenue, but instead expose where a trademark attorney’s value lies
Leighton Cassidy Legal hopes to leverage its founder's international experience and provide clients with a rare chance to receive litigation and prosecution under one umbrella
Gift this article