4家机构减持套现61.88亿港元 美图如何“美”下去？|美图|套现|创新工场_新浪科技_新浪网
4家机构减持套现61.88亿港元 美图如何“美”下去？
　　继股价闪崩风波后，美图公司（以下简称“美图”，01357.HK）又遭机构减持抛售。
　　今年6~7月，包括创新工场、老虎基金、启明创投和IDG资本在内的4家机构集体减持美图股票。据了解，这4家机构均为美图的主要投资方，此次累计减持美图股票7.28亿股，共套现61.88亿港元。
　　此前，美图在港交所上市前，曾被贴上“香港主板市值仅次于的互联网企业”“超豪华股东现身”“月活4亿”等诸多标签。
　　对于上述减持行为，IDG资本向《中国经营报》记者表示，此次减持为机构正常退出流程，仍看好美图未来的发展。
　　美图官方则向记者回应表示，公司不评论投资者的个别决定，但作为投资者有权利和自由可以购买和售出任何上市公司流通的股票。公司的管理层看好公司长远发展，不会减持。美图公司董事长蔡文胜本人也公开表示，他个人在很长一段时间内都不会减持，合适的时候他会增持。
　　然而，包括互联网分析师于斌、艾媒咨询集团创始人张毅在内的业内人士认为，多家机构30多天集体减持美图超60亿港元，金额之大，不排除投资机构减持对于美图前景的考虑。此外，在众多业内人士眼中，如何找到更好的盈利模式依然是美图亟须解决的问题。
　　套现离场争议
　　美图由蔡文胜、吴欣鸿于2008年创建，当时因旗下一款名为美图秀秀软件主打简单的人像美颜而迅速走红进入公众视野。此后，美图相继以“美”为生态推出美拍相机、美拍等软件。
　　据美图招股说明书显示，日上市之前，美图共进行了5轮融资，总额达5.01亿美元。在给美图投资的团队中，囊括了创新工场、IDG资本、华夏基金、老虎基金等一众明星投资企业。
　　然而，随着今年6月禁售期结束，从6月19日，的创新工场出售了0.66亿股美图股票到7月3日老虎环球基金减持4亿股、7月7日启明创投减持2.12亿股、7月25日IDG资本减持美图5000万股，4家机构投资累计减持美图股票7.28亿股，共套现超过61亿港元。
　　此外，美图公司董事长蔡文胜的儿子CaiRongjia曾在3个月内3次减持美图9.12亿港元。继5月5日的最后一次减持后，其子持股比例已低于5%。
　　在外界看来，由于美图目前的盈利存在不确定性、变现模式仍存争议，资本市场上的大量减持也让美图的关注度提高。
　　启明创投曾参与了美图A轮、C轮融资。但在7月7日，启明创投减持美图2.12亿股，套现18.02亿港元。此轮售出后，与当年投资美图相比，两年内启明创投获益约9.7倍。
　　参与投资美图的启明创投主管合伙人甘剑平向媒体表示，作为机构投资者，在被投资的公司上市或者被并购之后逐步退出，赚的就是这个钱，是正常行为。此外，IDG资本方面也向本报记者回应称，美图上市解禁期后出售部分股票是早期基金的一种普遍、标准做法。IDG资本仍然在美图董事会占有席位并准备长期持有部分美图股份，持续看好美图未来的发展。
　　在减持机构、美图方面的回应中，各方一致认为减持都属于正常行为，在记者采访的多位金融人士及业内人士眼中，证券市场里，投资机构在解禁期过后套现离场更像是一个无可厚非的“套现”行为。上市前，机构以低价入股，上市后在锁定期内持股，锁定期结束后卖出，并不违规。然而，这些机构及蔡文胜儿子的集中巨额减持，再次引发了业界对美图盈利模式的关注与担忧。在张毅看来，一般解禁期过后，机构减持的数额不会太大。目前，美图的市值才562.39亿港元，但短期内集中减持超60亿港元，超过10%的套现还是比较大的。“而且从美图目前的亏损态势来讲，大机构的减持很容易让投资者对其股价失去信心，对美图的前景捉摸不透。”
　　自美图上市以来，其“过山车”式的股价一直牵动着投资人的心。美图在上市之初股价一度低迷，还曾跌破发行价；到了3月，其受资本市场追捧，其中3月20日的股价一度达到最高点时的23.05港元/股。此后，美图的市值又从超过900亿港元跌落到361亿港元。
　　近日，美图创始人蔡文胜在公开回应中也称：“美图目前的价值，可以定义为是99%的人看不懂，但不是不看好，因为大家都知道身边的人在用，这也是为什么它的争议很大。”
　　不过，值得注意的是，在上述机构减持的同时，又不断有资本买入，美图的股价自8月4日以来一路高涨。
　　盈利模式待解
　　张毅告诉记者，一般而言，多家机构减持最直接的影响是挫伤股民对股价的信心，如果严重的话还会对供应商以及上下游的产业链产生影响。乐视就是最直接的例子。
　　事实上，美图还在“美”的版图中扩张，其主要通过在线广告、智能硬件、互联网增值服务和电商平台4种变现方式变现。然而，根据美图此前公布的财报数据显示，其业绩处于亏损状态，旗下小众手机产品与拥有巨额用户量的带“美”软件营收占比倒挂，难以找到更好的盈利模式，这些质疑一直以来也是美图公司无法回避的问题。
　　值得注意的是，第三方数据机构QM（QuestMobile）和易观千帆分别发布的报告对美图类软件在近期的表现进行了分析。近年来美颜经济的热火朝天不仅让美图在“美”的市场坐拥大量用户，也让更多的竞争对手参与进来。
　　据QM发布的《移动互联网2017年Q2夏季报告》显示，今年6月份相机美图APP的用户规模数据显示，除了激萌、天天P图、相册管家的月活跃用户规模增长率为正值之外，美图秀秀、美图相机、相机360的用户规模增长率皆为负数。此外，易观千帆给记者提供的一组今年6月的数据显示，在相机美图APP中，美图秀秀、美颜相机依然凭借每月1.1亿、0.96亿的月活跃用户量，将只有3千多万的用户活跃度的Faceu激萌、b612咔叽等甩在身后。不过，易观千帆的数据还显示，从2017年4月份到2017年6月份，美图秀秀及美颜相机的整体活跃度却在下降。
　　作为美图旗下两大用户最多的APP，美图秀秀和美颜相机在最重要的月活跃用户指标中双双下滑两成，美图最引以为傲的用户优势已经不再高速增长，这也意味着美图数据可转化用户变少。
　　行业分析师赵子明告诉记者，美图秀秀和美颜相机用户活跃度下降与新晋品牌Faceu激萌、天天p图的快速增长不无关系。
　　此外，最近一年以来，有着极强需求的美颜市场，也给OV（OPPO、vivo）等国产手机提供了逆袭的机会，这使得以华为、OV、金立、小米为代表的国产手机在美颜自拍功能上比拼更为激烈。
　　业内甚至还有观点认为，美图公司近年来推出了一系列“美”系APP，如美拍、美妆相机、美铺、美图定制等，产品矩阵快速扩张，但这同时也让美图无法将更多的精力集中在提升美图秀秀和美颜相机的产品力上。为此，美图秀秀和美颜相机月活跃下滑也在情理之中。
　　“终端市场的不确定性较大。”于斌告诉记者，手机市场的硬件、运营、研发、售后成本都太高。对于美图而言需要尽快找到好的盈利模式。
　　美图方面向记者表示，其将凭借专利技术和大数据分析能力，提供更全面、创新性的广告解决方案。8月，美图宣布与进行合作，在香港、台湾全面导入其广告平台，从而帮助广告主强化精准营销，这项合作将在日于香港和台湾同时启动。（陈佳岚，李静）
或许谁都不希望看到这样一个景象，不久的将来搭载Helio X30的某某...
腾讯在资本市场受此影响依然很是明显，7月4日，腾讯控股跌幅达4....
近日一款名为“全能车”软件受到人们关注，只要缴纳一份押金，便...World Patent Report:
A Statistical Review - 2008 edition
[ version] []
IMPORTANT NOTE
Please find the latest available publications on patent statistics .
Intellectual property rights have been high on the policy agenda in recent years.
Understanding the evolution and use of the patent system is critical to understanding policy debates, including the role of intellectual property in economic growth and development, and the relationship between IP policy and key public policy concerns, such as health and the environment, and for developing initiatives to improve the efficiency of the patent system itself.
This report provides readers with statistical indicators that shed light on issues such as the functioning of the patent system and its use by both developed and developing countries. The statistical information provided in this report allows users to analyze and monitor the latest trends in patent activity based on objective and detailed information.
The World Patent Report: A Statistical Review is an annual publication and the 2008 edition is the third edition in the series. There is a continuing effort at WIPO to improve statistical information on patent activity covering as many countries as possible across the world and to develop and provide new indicators that are relevant to current policy issues.
The report contains a wide range of indicators, some of which are published for the first time in the 2008 edition, covering areas such as:
Patent filings and grants by offices and countries of origin with the aim of providing an overview of the level of patent activity across the world.
Patent statistics by field of technology which highlight and identify key / emerging technologies.
Use of utility models as an alternative to patents for protecting intellectual property rights.
International filings through the Patent Cooperation Treaty, indicating the level of internationalization of technologies.
Use of the patent system in emerging countries.
Processing of patent applications, including pendency volume and time, which highlight the challenges faced by patent offices with rapidly increasing numbers of patent filings.
Opposition and invalidation.
Cost of patenting.
All statistics included in this report and additional data (i.e. longer time series and more countries / patent offices) are available for download from WIPO&s statistics website: /.
This report was prepared by Mosahid Khan, Ryan Lamb, Bruno Le Feuvre, William Meredith, Catherine Calais Regnier, Alex Riechel, and Hao Zhou of the Patent Information and IP Statistics Service of the World Intellectual Property Organization.
We would like to thank the many National and Regional Intellectual Property Offices that shared their statistics with WIPO, without the contribution of which this report would not have been possible.
Francis GURRY
Deputy Director General
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOTAL PATENT FILINGS
PATENT FAMILIES
TOTAL PATENT GRANTS
PATENTS IN FORCE
UTILITY MODELS
RESIDENT PATENT ACTIVITY
NON-RESIDENT PATENT ACTIVITY
INTERNATIONAL FILINGS THROUGH THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY
PATENT ACTIVITY IN SELECTED EMERGING COUNTRIES
PATENT ACTIVITY BY FIELD OF TECHNOLOGY
PATENT INTENSITY
PATENT PROCESSING ACTIVITY
STATISTICS ON OPPOSITION AND INVALIDATION
COST OF PATENTING
HIGHLIGHTS
Worldwide patent activity increased by 4.9% between 2005 and 2006, mostly due to increased filings by applicants from China, the Republic of Korea and the United States of America
The total number of applications filed across the world in 2006 is estimated to be 1.76 million, representing a 4.9% increase from the previous year. Between 2005 and 2006, the number of filings worldwide by applicants from China, the Republic of Korea and the United States of America increased by 32.1%, 6.6% and 6.7% respectively.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office was the largest recipient of patent filings, for the first time since 1963, with a total of 425,966 patent applications filed in 2006.
There was a small decrease in the number of patents filed at the Japan Patent Office in 4). The patent offices of China (210,501), the Republic of Korea (166,189), and the European Patent Office (135,231) also received a large number of filings.
Patent applicants tend to come from a relatively small number of countries of origin. For example, applicants from Japan, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea, Germany and China accounted for 76% of total patent filings in 2006.
Chinese residents increased their share of total worldwide patent filings from 1.8% to 7.3% between 2000 and 2006, mostly due to increases in domestic patent filings.
Although the number of patent applications filed across the world has increased at a steady pace, the rate of increase is less than the rate of increase observed for other economic indicators such as GDP and trade.
In 2006, approximately 727,000 patents were granted across the world.
Similar to patent filings, patent grants are concentrated in a small number of countries. Applicants from Japan, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea and Germany received 73% of total patent grants worldwide. Between 2000 and 2006, the number of patents granted to applicants from China and the Republic of Korea grew by 26.5% and 23.2% a year, respectively (average annual growth rate).
There has been an increase in the level of patenting activity in emerging countries. The patent offices of India, Brazil and Mexico all received a large number of filings in 2006. However, for the majority of the reported emerging countries, non-resident applicants accounted for the largest share of total filings in these countries. There has also been an increase in the use of the PCT System by emerging countries for international filings.
Increasing internationalization of the patent system
There has been a significant increase in the level of internationalization of patent activity as reflected by non-resident patent filings and international filings through the PCT System. The non-resident filings share of total patent filings increased from 35.7% in 1995 to 43.6% in 2006.
Non-resident patent filings originate from a relatively small number of countries, led by the United States of America (21.9% of non-resident filings worldwide), Japan (21.7%) and Germany (10.8%).
The 8 largest countries of origin increased their share of worldwide non-resident patent filings from 66% to 74% between 2000 and 2006.
Applicants from emerging economies, including China, file relatively few patent applications outside their home countries.
Many inventions result in filings in multiple offices.
Approximately 24% of all patent families are filed in 2 or more offices.
10% of patent families are filed in 4 or more offices.
The level of internationalization varies across countries/economies. The share of non-resident patent filings is very high in the patent offices of Hong Kong (SAR), China, Israel, Mexico and Singapore & where more than 90% of total filings are accounted for by non-resident applicants. In addition, between 2005 and 2006, non-resident patent filings increased by 7.4%, whereas resident filings increased by 3.1%.
The number of international patent filings filed through the PCT in 2007 is estimated to be 158,400, representing a 5.9% increase from the previous year. Emerging countries such as India, Brazil and Turkey are increasingly using the PCT System to file international applications.
Approximately 6.1 million patents were in force in 2006
Approximately 6.1 million patents were in force in 2006. The largest number of patents in force were in the United States of America (1.8 million in 2006). However, the majority of patents in force were owned by applicants from Japan.
Both measures of patents in force, by country of origin (ownership of the patent) and by patent office (where the patent is in force), reflect an increase in the number of patents in force in 2006.
Although patent rights are conferred to the applicant for up to 20 years, available data show that only a minority of patents are maintained for the full 20 year term.
More than half of the patents in force in 2006 were filed during the period between 1997 and 2003.
Increase in patent filings in computer technology, telecommunications and electrical machinery technologies, but a decrease in biotechnology
In 2005, a large number of patent filings were filed across the world in computer technology (144,594), telecommunications (116,770), and electrical machinery (121,350) technologies. Between 2001 and 2005, patent filings in computer technology, optics, and semiconductors grew by 5.3%, 5.0% and 4.9%, a year, respectively. There was a modest increase in pharmaceuticals filings (1.7%) and a decrease in biotechnology filings (-2.7%).
The recent pressures on energy resources have created an increase in patenting activity related to energy technologies. Examples can be seen in patent filings related to solar (thermal and photo) energy, fuel cells and wind energy. Patent filings in the fields of solar energy and fuel cells mainly originated from Japan. Patent applications in the field of wind energy were evenly distributed, with Germany and Japan being the top two countries of origin for this technology.
Large volume of pending applications at some patent offices
There has been an increase in the number of pending patent applications at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
By 2006, the number of patent applications awaiting examination at the USPTO was 1,051,502. There has also been an increase in the application processing time, as reflected by the increase in the number of months for first office action and total pendency time.
Between 2004 and 2005, there was a sharp increase in the number of pending applications at the Japanese Patent Office (JPO).
In 2006, there were around 836,801 patent applications awaiting examination at the JPO. However, the increase at the JPO was mostly due to the shortening of the time limit for request for examination, from 7 years to 3 years, which has created an increased examination workload for a period of several years. Since 2005, the volume of pending applications at the JPO has stabilized and it is expected to decrease in the near future.
The number of pending applications at other large patent offices, such as Germany (265,395) the European Patent Office (247,165) and Canada (205,776), is relatively small (compared to the USPTO and the JPO) and has been stable over time.
Increased opposition and invalidation requests
In most of the reported offices, the numbers of opposition or invalidation requests are loosely correlated with the number of patents granted, the exception being Germany where requests have declined while the number of granted patents has increased.
In general, there is an upward trend in the numbers of opposition or invalidation requests which may reflect an increasing interest in the challenging of granted patents by third parties.
METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION
A patent is an exclusive right granted by law to applicants / assignees to make use of and exploit their inventions for a limited period of time (generally 20 years from filing). The patent holder has the legal right to exclude others from commercially exploiting his invention for the duration of this period. In return for exclusive rights, the applicant is obliged to disclose the invention to the public in a manner that enables others, skilled in the art, to replicate the invention. The patent system is designed to balance the interests of applicants / assignees (exclusive rights) and the interests of society (disclosure of invention).
Patent statistics as an indicator of inventive activity
It is widely accepted that patent statistics are a reliable (although not perfect) indicator of innovative activity. Therefore, it has become standard practice to use patent statistics for monitoring innovative activities and the development of new technologies. However, when using patent statistics as an indicator of inventive activity, the following points should be taken into consideration:
Not all inventions are patented. There are other alternatives such as trade secrecy or technical know-how available to inventors for protecting their inventions.
Use of the patent system for protecting inventions varies across countries and industries. Applicants& different filing strategies or filing preferences may render
direct comparison of patent statistics difficult.
Differences in patent systems may influence the applicant&s patent filing decisions in different countries.
Due to the increase in the internationalization of research and development (R&D) activity, R&D may be conducted in one location but the protection for the invention might be sought in a different one.
Cross-border patent filings depend on various factors, such as trade flows, foreign direct investment, market size of a country, etc.
Notwithstanding the points mentioned above, patent statistics do provide valuable information about innovative activity.
Patent statistics methodology
To obtain patent rights, the applicant must file a patent application and pay fees. The patent office examines the application and decides whether to grant or reject the application. A large volume of data is generated during the patent application process, which are frequently used by researchers to construct statistical indicators for measuring innovative activity, patenting activity of offices and countries, etc. However, for correctly interpreting patent statistics, it is important to understand the methodology used in constructing the indicators.
Date: patent indicators are often constructed based on dates.
Indicators used in this report are based, in general, on the following concepts:
Patent filing (application) indicators are constructed according to the patent filing date.
Patent grant indicators are based on the grant date.
Patent families data are based on the priority (first filing) date.
Technology indicators are based on the publication date.
Country of origin: patent applications include information pertaining to the country of residence of the inventor and the applicant (or assignee). Patent statistics based on the country of residence of the inventor may indicate the location of the invention, whereas the country of residence of the applicant (or assignee) provides information about the owner of the patent at the time of the application.
Country of origin used in this report is based on the country of residence of the first-named applicant (or assignee), which will include companies that are domiciled in a country but which may be effectively owned or controlled by overseas interests. This is particularly the case in countries with large foreign direct investments.
Statistics based on the concept of resident and non-resident filings are included in this report. Resident filing refers to an application filed at an office of or acting for the State in which the first-named applicant in the application concerned has residence. Likewise, non-resident filing refers to an application filed at an office of or acting for the State in which the first-named applicant in the application concerned does not have residence.
Data sources
The patent statistics published in this report are taken from the WIPO Statistics Database, which is based on information supplied to WIPO by patent offices in annual surveys and data generated at WIPO during the PCT application process.
Each year, WIPO collects patent statistics from patent offices, including the number of patent applications filed and patents granted and enforced, broken down by country of origin, date and a number of other criteria. A continuing effort is made to improve the quality and availability of patent statistics. It is difficult to obtain data for all patent offices with all possible breakdowns, however every effort is made to cover data for all patent offices / countries. When it is necessary and feasible, missing data are estimated by WIPO on an aggregate level.
The statistics on field of technology and patent families are constructed by WIPO based on data obtained from the PATSTAT database, which is maintained by the EPO. Macroeconomic and research and development data are obtained from the World Bank and UNESCO.
Pending applications and pendency time statistics are obtained from WIPO Statistics Database, supplemented with data from the Trilateral statistical reports and annual reports of patent offices. The opposition / invalidation request data were derived from National IP Offices annual reports and publications as well as from statistics requested by WIPO directly from IP Offices.
Please note that due to the continual updating of missing data and the revision of historical statistics, data provided in this report may be different from previously published figures.
National and international patent systems
The procedures for patent rights are governed by the rules and regulations of national and regional offices. There are a number of international (e.g. see PCT section below) and regional treaties in existence, which have brought national legal frameworks governing patent systems closer together. However, in order to accommodate different national interests and needs, there are differences in the architecture of patent systems at the national level.
While more commonalities among the national legal systems are found with regard to certain elements of the patent system, other aspects reflect substantially different approaches. The existence of differences within the patent system has a significant impact on the statistical indicators and may hamper proper interpretation of such indicators. For example:
The existence of alternative forms of patent rights to standard patents, such as utility models, provisional patent applications and design patents may result in fewer standard patent applications.
There are differences in the patentability of subject matter. For example, it is possible to protect business method inventions in some jurisdictions but not in others.
In some patent offices, submission of a patent application automatically results in search and/or examination, while in other offices an applicant is required to make a request for examination within a specified time limit.
To assist users in correctly interpreting and analyzing patent statistics, WIPO has collected and published information on the characteristics of different national patent systems which is available at .
The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)
The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) is an international treaty administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The PCT makes it possible to seek patent protection for an invention simultaneously in a large number of countries by filing a single &international application& with a single patent office (i.e. receiving Office). The PCT system simplifies the process of multi-national patent filings by reducing the requirement to file multiple patent applications for multi-national patent rights. The PCT international applications do not result in the issuance of &international patents& and the International Bureau (IB) does not grant patents. The decision on whether to confer patent rights remains in the hands of the national and/or regional patent offices, and the patent rights are limited to the jurisdiction of the patent granting authority.
The PCT procedure consists of an international phase and a national/regional phase. The PCT international application process starts with the international phase and concludes with the national/regional phase. For further details about the PCT system, refer to:
A.1.1: Total Patent Filings
Note: PCT national phase entry data is incomplete prior to 1995.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
In 2006, the total number of patent applications filed across the world is estimated to be around 1.76 million, representing a 4.9% increase from the previous year.
Between 1995 and 2006, the mean yearly growth rate of total number of filings was 5.3%. The growth of total patent filings is lower than that of other economic indicators. For example, the mean yearly growth rate of the volume of world trade was 7.2% over the same period.
Over the past two decades, there has been a significant increase in the share of non-resident patent filings. In 2006, the share of non-resident patent filings accounted for 43.6% of total filings, representing an 8.0 percentage point increase from the 1995 level.
Concurrently, the share of resident patent filings decreased from 64.3% to 56.4%.
A.1.2: Patent Filings By Patent Office
Note: The share of non-resident filings in France is very low which is partly due to the fact that the PCT national phase route is closed for France. A PCT applicant seeking protection in France must therefore enter the PCT regional phase at the EPO.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
Long-term trends of patent filings at selected patent offices show that filings were stable between the early 1880s to mid-1960s, after which there has been a steady increase in filings in most offices. The most notable increases were at the patent offices of the United States of America (USPTO), Japan (JPO), China (SIPO), Republic of Korea (KIPO) and the European Patent Office (EPO).
In recent years, there has been a downward trend in filings in France, Germany and the United Kingdom. This is due to the fact that two routes are available for filings in Europe (national route and regional route through the EPO).
In 2006, the USPTO received the largest number of filings (425,966), followed by JPO (408,674), SIPO (210,501) and KIPO (166,189). Between 2000 and 2006, filings at SIPO and KIPO increased by 26.3% and 8.5% a year (average annual growth rate), respectively. In contrast, patent filings at the JPO decreased by 0.4% a year.
Non-resident filings account for a small share of total filings in Japan (15.1%) and France (15.8%). However, the share of non-resident filings is very high in Mexico (96.3%), Israel and (96.6%) Hong Kong (SAR), China (98.8%).
A.1.3: Patent Filings by Country of Origin
Note: The data includes patent filings in the office of the country of residence as well as patent filings abroad.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
In 2006, applicants from Japan (514,047) and the United States of America (390,815) filed the largest numbers of patent applications worldwide. A substantial number of filings also originated from the Republic of Korea (172,709), Germany (130,806) and China (128,850).
Between 2000 and 2006, there was a significant increase in the number of filings originating from Australia, China, India and the Republic of Korea. The average annual growth rate for these countries was far above that of all reported European and North American countries. Japan, the United Kingdom and Sweden experienced a modest growth in filings (less than 1% a year).
Between 2000 and 2006, Japan&s share in total patent filings decreased by 6.7 percentage points. The share of patent filings originating from China, the Republic of Korea and the United States of America increased by 5.4, 3.5 and 2.0 percentage points, respectively. The share of the top 10 countries of origin increased from 82.4% (2000) to 85.2% (2006), reflecting an increasing level of concentration.
A.2.1: Patent Families
Note: Country share is based on foreign-oriented patent families (i.e. patent families that include at least two patent offices).
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
A patent family is defined as a set of patent applications inter-related by either priority claims or PCT national phase entries, normally containing the same subject matter. Statistics based on patent family data eliminate double counts of patent applications that are filed with multiple offices for the same invention.
Many inventions result in filings in multiple offices.
Approximately 24% and 10% of all patent families are filed in 2 or more offices and 4 or more offices, respectively.
The latest available data show that the total number of patent families created across the world in 2005 amounted to 876,432. Since the mid-1990s, there has been a steady increase in the total number of patent families.
The distribution of patent family by size (i.e. number of offices in which applications for the same invention are filed) shows considerable variation. For example, most of the patent families originating from the Russian Federation, China and Brazil are domestic-oriented patent families. A large share of patent families originating from the Netherlands, Switzerland, Italy, France and Germany are foreign-oriented patent families.
Japan (29.9%) and the United States of America (28.4%) accounted for the largest share of total foreign-oriented patent families. Although in recent years, there has been an increase in the number of foreign-oriented patent filings originating from Brazil and China, their combined share is less than 1%.
Patent families increased at a slower pace than total filings. For example, between 1995 and 2005, patent families increased by 3.6% a year (average annual growth rate), whereas total filings increase by 4.8% a year.
A.2.2: Patent Families by Origin and Destination
Note: European Patent Office (EPO), Japan Patent Office (JPO), Korean
Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO,
China) and United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
The graphs above show a breakdown of patent families by countries of
origin (owner of the invention) and destination office (five largest patent
offices). It provides some indication of the ownership of the invention and
the region where the owner wishes to protect the invention.
Although the largest share of patent families originating from Japan and
the Republic of Korea contain patent applications filed with the USPTO, a
significant proportion of their patent families also contain patent
applications filed with the patent office of China (SIPO). A large
proportion of patent families originating from Canada (59%) contain patent
applications filed with the USPTO, reflecting the impact of the geographical
proximity to and the market size of the United States of America. European
countries tend to have a high share of patent families containing patent
applications filed with the European Patent Office.
A.3.1: Total Patent Grants
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
In 2006, approximately 727,000 patents were granted by patent offices
around the world, representing an 18.2% increase from the previous year. The
increase could be due to increasing efforts by patent offices to reduce
backlog and the substantial increase in the number of patents granted by the
patent offices of China and the Republic of Korea (see A.3.2).
Since 1991, there has been an upward trend in the number of grants,
similar to the trend observed for the number of patent filings (see A.1.1).
However, the trend in patent grants is more volatile than patent filings.
The number of patents granted by patent offices depends on resources
available to the offices (e.g. number of examiners, IT infrastructures,
The share of non-resident patent grants has remained more or less stable
over the past six years. This is in contrast to the trend observed for
patent filings, which shows an increase in the share of non-resident filings
(see A.1.1).
A.3.2: Total Patent Grants By Patent Office
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
The long-term trends of patent grants by the five largest patent offices
show that the number of patent grants was stable for the period of
followed by an upward trend between the early/mid 1960s and the early 1990s,
and the rate of increase accelerated from the mid-1980s.
The numbers of patents granted by the patent offices of France, Germany
and the United Kingdom have been decreasing over the past 15 years. This is
due to the existence of two parallel routes for obtaining patent protection
in these countries (the national route and the regional route through the
In 2006, the five largest patent offices (patent offices of the United
States of America, Japan, the Republic of Korea, China and the European
Patent Office) accounted for approximately 76.5% of the total patent grants,
representing a 6.3 percentage point increase from the 2000 level.
The share of non-resident grants (in total grants) varies across patent
offices, ranging from 99% in Hong Kong (SAR), China to 10.3% in Japan. It is
also very high in Mexico and Singapore. In contrast, the non-resident grant
share is very low in Japan and the Russian Federation.
A.3.3: Total Patent Grants by Country of Origin
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
In 2006, applicants from Japan received approximately 217,000 patents.
Applicants from the United States of America and the Republic of Korea also
received a substantial number of patents. Between 2000 and 2006, the number
of patents granted to applicants from China and the Republic of Korea grew
significantly. All the reported countries, except Ukraine, experienced an
increase in the number of grants.
In 2006, residents of Japan (29.9%) and the United States of America
(21.3%) accounted for the largest share of world patent grants. However,
their combined share of total grants decreased from 58.6% to 51.2% between
2000 and 2006. The share of patents granted to applicants from the top 10
countries of origin has increased from 85.6% to 87.4%, reflecting a slight
increase in the concentration level. A similar trend is observed for patent
filings (see A.1.3)
A.4.1: Patents in Force
Note: The number of patents in force by country of origin is underestimated
because approximately 0.5 million patents in force are of unknown origin.
Source: WIPO Statistics Database
In 2006, the total number of patents in force across the world is
estimated to be around 6.1 million.
Applicants from Japan (approximately 1.6 million) and the United States
of America (approximately 1.2 million) own the majority of patents that were
in force in 2006.
For all countries, except Austria, France, Spain and Ukraine, the number
of patents in force in 2006 is higher than the 2004 level.
The largest number of patents in force is in the United States of
America (approximately 1.8 million).
France, Switzerland and the Netherlands rank higher in terms of the
number of patents in force by country of origin than by patent office. In
contrast, Hong Kong (SAR), China, and Mexico rank higher in terms of patents
in force by patent office. This reflects the presence of a large number of
foreign applicants in their respective domestic markets (see A.3.2)
A.4.2: Age Profile of Patents in Force
Patent rights are conferred to the applicant (inventor) for a limited
period, generally 20 years. The patent holder has to pay maintenance /
renewal fees at specific intervals to the patent office to keep the patent
in force. For example, maintenance fees for patents granted by the United
States Patent and Trademark Office are due at 3.5 years, 7.5 years and 11.5
years. The time interval for paying maintenance fees varies between patent
More than half of the patents in force in 2006 were filed during the
period between 1997 and 2003. A minority of patents are maintained for the
full term of 20 years from filing.
A.5.1: Utility Model Filings
Utility models are a special form of IP rights for inventions granted by
a State to an inventor or his assignee for a fixed period of time. The terms
and conditions of granting a utility model are different from that for
normal patents (e.g. shorter term and less stringent examination
requirements). Utility models are an important alternative to patents in the
countries where they are available.
In 2006, the Chinese patent office received 161,366 utility model
filings. The patent offices of the Republic of Korea and Germany also
received large numbers of filings. Between 2000 and 2006, there was a
substantial increase in filings at the patent offices of China, the Russian
Federation, Ukraine and Turkey.
In 2006, the share of non-resident filings varied from 0.8% in China to
20.9% in Austria. Non-resident filings accounted for a small fraction of
total filings at the patent offices of Brazil, Ukraine, the Republic of
Korea and the Russian Federation (less than 5%). The share of non-resident
utility model filings is below that of non-resident patent filings (see
A.1.2). This indicates that utility models are mostly used for protecting
inventions in the domestic market.
A.5.2: Utility Model Grants
In 2006, the number of utility model grants at the Chinese patent office
was 107,655. The patent offices of the Republic of Korea (29,736), Germany
(16,638), Japan (10,593) and Russian Federation (9,568) also issued large
numbers of utility models. Between 2000 and 2006, there was a substantial
increase in the number of grants at the Chinese and Russian patent offices.
In contrast, there was a decrease in the number of grants at the patent
offices of Germany, Japan and the Republic of Korea.
The share of non-resident grants varied from 1.2% in China to 22.9% in
Mexico. The share of non-resident grants is high at the patent offices of
Mexico, Slovakia, Japan and Austria, while it is very low at the patent
offices of China, Ukraine, the Republic of Korea, Mongolia and the Russian
Federation.
B.1.1: Resident Patent Filings
In 2006, the total number of resident patent filings is estimated to be
around 994,525, representing a 3.1% increase from the previous year.
Since the mid-1990s, resident patent filings have followed an upward
trend, with a high growth rate between
and . A notable
decrease in filings occurred in .
In 2006, the top ten patent offices received approximately 94% of the
total resident patent filings. Over the past 10 years, resident filings in
France, Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom have remained relatively
stable. In contrast, filings in China, the Republic of Korea, and the United
States of America increased significantly.
B.1.2: Resident Patent Filings by Country of Origin
In 2006, Japan had the largest number of resident patent filings
(347,060), followed by the United States of America (221,784), the Republic
of Korea (125,476) and China (122,318). For the majority of the reported
countries, the number of filings in 2006 is higher than the 2005 level. The
most notable increase in filings occurred in China and the Russian
Federation, whereas Japan experienced a decrease.
Although Japan had the largest share of resident filings in 2006, its
share decreased by 11.8 percentage points during the
China, on the other hand, had increased its share by 9.2 percentage points.
European countries& share is, to a certain extent, underestimated
because residents of European countries may also file applications directly
at the European Patent Office which are considered as non-resident filings
in this report.
B.2.1: Resident Patent Grants
The total number of resident patent grants was stable during the
period (on average 232,000 grants a year), followed by a steady
increase during the
period and a stable growth rate between 1998
and 2004. In 2006, around 407,864 resident patents were granted around the
world, representing a 22.5% increase from the previous year.
The trend in patent grants is much more volatile than the trends in
patent filings because the processing of patent applications depends on the
resources available to patent offices (e.g. number of examiners, IT
infrastructure, etc.).
The number of patents granted by the top ten patent offices was stable
from 1963 to 1990, after which there has been a steady increase in the
number of patent grants.
In 2006, the top five patent offices (patent offices of Japan, the
United States of America, the Republic of Korea, China and the Russian
Federation) accounted for 85.8% of total resident patent grants. Between
2000 and 2006, the share of patents granted by those five offices increased
by 3.9 percentage points.
B.2.2: Resident Patent Grants by Country of Origin
In 2006, Japanese residents (126,804) received the largest number of
patents. The number of patents granted to residents of the United States of
America was similar to that of the Republic of Korea (around 90,000).
Between 2005 and 2006 there was a significant increase in the number of
resident grants for Austria and the Republic of Korea, whereas Finland, the
United Kingdom, Australia and Sweden experienced a considerable decrease.
Between 2000 and 2006, the share of resident patent grants of Japan and
the United States of America decreased by 7.1 and 6.9 percentage points,
respectively, while that of the Republic of Korea increased by 14.1
percentage points.
To a certain extent, the share for the European countries is
underestimated, because patents granted by the European Patent Office are
considered as non-resident grants.
C.1.1: Non-Resident Patent Filings
The total number of non-resident filings increased at a steady pace
during the period of , after which there has been a faster increase
in filings. Between 1994 and 2006, non-resident filings grew by 7.3% a year
(average annual growth rate).
In 2006, the total number of non-resident filings is estimated to be
around 770,109, representing a 7.4% increase from the previous year. For the
most recent years, the growth rate of non-resident filings has been higher
than the growth rate of resident patent filings (see B1.1).
In 2006, the patent office of the United States of America received in
excess of 200,000 non-resident filings, which is significantly higher than
other offices.
For all the reported patent offices, except Thailand and the United
Kingdom, the number of non-resident filings in 2006 is higher than the 2005
level. The most notable increase in non-resident filings occurred in Israel,
Brazil and Hong Kong (SAR), China.
C.1.2: Non-Resident Patent Filings By Country of Origin
In 2006, the largest number of non-resident patent filings originated
from the United States of America (169,031) and Japan (166,987). Applicants
from Norway, India, Spain and Austria, on the other hand, filed fewer than
5,000 applications each.
China accounted for a low number of non-resident filings in 2006.
However, the number of filings originating from China has increased at a
rapid pace. The average annual growth rate was in excess of 30% during the
period of .
Between 2000 and 2006, the Republic of Korea and Japan had the largest
increase in the country share of non-resident filings. The combined share of
the top eight countries increased from 66.4% in 2000 to 73.8% in 2006,
reflecting an increasing level of concentration.
C.1.3: European Regional Filings by Office
There are two options for applicants seeking patent protection in the European region, direct filing with an European national office, or filing at the European Patent Office.
The intra-regional indicator shows the patent filing activity of residents of EPC (European Patent Convention) countries by patent office. The European Patent Office (EPO) accounted for the bulk of EPC countries& intra-regional patent filings (87.6%). When seeking patent protection in other EPC countries, applicants prefer to file at the EPO rather than at the national patent offices.
The extra-regional indicator shows the patent filing activity of non-EPC applicants by patent office. The trend for the extra-regional filings is similar to that of the intra-regional filings. The EPO accounted for the majority of filings (78.6%) originating from non-EPC residents who intend to protect their inventions in the EPC region. However, the EPO has a lower share of extra-regional filings than intra-regional filings. The patent offices of Germany and the United Kingdom have a higher share of extra-regional filings than intra-regional filings.
C.2.1: Non-Resident Patent Grants
The number of non-resident patent grants has increased from around 177,617 in 1985 to around 319,429 in 2006. The trend of non-resident grants is similar to that of non-resident filings (see C.1.1). Average annual growth rate for the period of
is higher than the growth rate for the period of .
In 2006, the patent office of the United States of America (83,947) issued the largest number of non-resident patents. The number of patents granted to non-residents by the patent offices of China and the Republic of Korea are of a similar magnitude (approximately 32,000).
Between 2005 and 2006, there was a significant increase in the number of patents granted to non-residents by the patent offices of Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea and the United States of America.
The number of non-resident patents issued by the patent office of China increased substantially until 2004, after which there has been a slowdown in the grant rate.
C.2.2: Non-Resident Patent Grants By Country of Origin
Emerging countries such as Brazil, China, India and Mexico have a low ranking for non-resident grants by country of origin compared to their ranking by patent office (see C.1.1). This indicates that these countries have a low patenting activity abroad and a high presence of foreign applicants in their respective domestic markets (see A.1.2 and A.3.2).
In 2006, applicants from Japan (28.4%) and the United States of America (20.3%) received the largest share of total non-resident patent grants. Germany also had a high share of total non-resident patent grants. Between 2000 and 2006, Japan&s share increased by 3.2 percentage points, while that of the United States of America and the United Kingdom decreased by 1.6 and 1.3 percentage points, respectively. The combined share of the top eight countries has remained more or less constant.
D.1.1: International Filings through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)
The total number of PCT filings (international patent applications filed through the Patent Cooperation Treaty) in 2007 was approximately 158,400, representing a 5.9% increase from the previous year. PCT filings grew rapidly until 2001 (yearly growth rate in excess of 10%) and since then, there has been a slowdown in the yearly growth rate.
The United States of America is by far the largest user of the PCT system. In % of all PCT filings originated from the United States of America, which is almost double the share of the next largest user, Japan (17.5%). PCT filings originating from India, Austria, Spain and Italy are relatively low, however, in recent years there has been an increase in the number of filings originating from these countries.
Between 2000 and 2006, the share of filings originating from Japan, the Republic of Korea and China increased significantly, while a notable decrease has been observed for the United States of America.
D.1.2: Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT): PCT International Filings by Ownership Type
The majority of PCT filings originated from the business sector. However, it should be noted that the share of the business sector in PCT filings might be overstated as the distribution is calculated based on the top 3,000 PCT applicants (i.e. it excludes individual filers and applicants with fewer than 5 filings). The share of the business sector varied from 99% in both Sweden and Germany to 52% in Spain.
The university sector has a high share of PCT filings in Israel (19.9%), Australia (17.5%) and Spain (15.2%). The government sector accounted for more than 30% of PCT filings in Spain and India.
Japan and the United States of America have six companies each in the top 20 ranking. For all top 20 business sector applicants, except Philips, Nokia and Intel, the number of PCT filings in 2007 is higher than the 2005 level.
All of the top 20 university applicants using the PCT system are from the United States of America (15) and Japan (5).
The University of California is by far the largest PCT applicant from the university sector. The highest ranking non-US universities are Kyoto and Tokyo universities (Japan).
D.1.3: Non-Resident Filings by Filing Route
To file a patent application in a foreign country, applicants may either file directly or via the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT route). In both cases, the foreign filing is made within the 12 month priority period provided by the Paris Convention.
There has been a significant increase in the use of the PCT route for foreign filings. Between 1995 and 2006, the share of non-resident filings based on the PCT route increased from 25.0% to 48.9%.
The use of the PCT route for foreign filings varies across patent offices. More than 85% of non-resident filings at the patent offices of Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Norway and Mexico are filed via the PCT route. In contrast, less than one-fifth of the non-resident filings in Germany, the United States of America and the United Kingdom are filed via the PCT route.
E.1.1: Patent Filings in Selected Emerging Countries
The use of the patent system has been increasing in emerging economies in recent years. India, Brazil and Mexico all received a large number of patent filings in 2006.
For the majority of these patent offices, non-resident applicants accounted for the largest share of total filings. For example, non-resident applicants accounted for almost all the filings at the patent offices of Peru and Mexico.
For the majority of reported countries, the number of PCT filings in 2007 is higher than the 2002 level. Algeria, Turkey and Saudi Arabia had the most notable increase (average annual growth) in PCT filings. However, the combined share of all reported emerging countries in total PCT filings was only 2.5% in 2007.
E.2.1: Patents Granted in Selected Emerging Countries
Of the selected offices, the patent office of Mexico (9,632) awarded the largest number of patents in 2006. The patent offices of India (4,320) and Brazil (2,465) also granted a significant number of patents. For the majority of patent offices, the share of patents granted to non-resident applicants is far above that for resident applicants. For example, 98.6% of total patents granted by Mexico were to non-resident applicants. The exceptions are Belarus and Latvia, where non-resident applicants accounted for a small share of total grants.
There has been a considerable increase in patents granted to both resident and non-resident applicants in Saudi Arabia and Algeria and a large increase in non-resident patents granted in Chile, Morocco and the Philippines.
F.1: Patent Filings by Field of Technology
Table 1: Total number of patent filings by field of technology
Electrical engineering, which includes computer technology, telecommunications, electrical machinery, apparatus, energy and audio-visual technology, was the most active technical sector according to the number of patent applications. A high number of applications were also filed in the fields of optics and medical technology.
Between 2001 and 2005, patent applications in the fields of computer technology, optics and semiconductors grew by relatively high percentages. Patent applications in the fields of IT methods for management, analysis of biological materials and chemical engineering, on the other hand, decreased during the same period.
F.2: Foreign-Oriented Patent Families by Field of Technology and Origin
Table 2: Foreign-oriented patent families by field of technology and country of origin: top 15 origins,
Note: The patent families definition adopted here implies that patent applications will be filed with at least one foreign patent office, therefore, they are referred to as &foreign-oriented families&. Foreign-oriented patent families provide some indication of inventions that applicants consider worth protecting in multiple countries.
It is common for applicants to seek patent rights for the same invention in multiple jurisdictions, generating multiple patent applications. Therefore, counts of patent filings have a tendency to over-estimate the number of inventions. The number of patent families which are based on the first filed patent applications, on the other hand, better reflects the number of inventions created because it eliminates multiple counts of the same invention.
Table 2 provides a breakdown of foreign-oriented patent families by field of technology for the top 15 countries of origin. In most fields of technology, the largest number of patent families was created by applicants from Japan and the United States of America.
The top rankings based on total number of foreign-oriented patent families are dominated by industrialized countries, China being the only exception, ranked 13th. This shows that even though emerging countries such as India, Brazil and Mexico have a high level of patent activity in their respective domestic markets, only a small proportion of their total patent filings are filed in a foreign country.
F.3: Relative Specialization Index (RSI) of Foreign-Oriented Patent Families by Origin
While the total number of patent families indicates the overall strength of the countries& research and development (R&D) activities, the relative specialization index (RSI) provides an indication of countries& R&D strength in a particular field of technology.
In each field of technology, we can identify countries having an above-average concentration of foreign-oriented patent families (i.e. a positive RSI value). Examples include Denmark and the United States of America in the fields of biotechnology, India in the field of pharmaceuticals, Israel, Denmark and India in the field of medical technology, Finland, China, the Republic of Korea and Sweden in the field of telecommunications, Canada and Finland in the field of information technology, and Singapore and the Republic of Korea in the field of semiconductors.
F.4: Patent Filings in Energy Technology
The recent pressures on energy resources have created an increase in patenting activity related to energy technologies. Examples can be seen in the patent filings related to solar (thermal and photo) energy, fuel cell and wind energy (definitions based on the international patent classification symbols assigned to patent applications). The distribution of these applications by countries of origin reveals the concentration of research activities in these technologies.
Patent filings in the fields of solar energy and fuel cell mainly originated from Japan. Patent applications in the field of wind energy were evenly distributed, with Germany and Japan being the top two countries of origin for this technology.
The total number of patent applications in the field of wind energy was considerably less than that in the other two technological fields.
G.1.1: Resident Patent Filings per Gross Domestic Product
The ratio of resident patent filings to GDP corrects for the effects of country size and improves comparability across countries.
The gap between the Republic of Korea and Japan for the resident patent filings per GDP (Gross Domestic Product) indicator is considerably smaller than the gap observed for the resident patent filings indicator (see B.1.2).
The United States of America has higher resident filings than China and the Russian Federation, however, when the size of the GDP is taken into consideration both China and the Russian Federation have a higher resident filing to GDP ratio.
For the majority of reported countries, the 2006 resident filings to GDP ratio is lower than the 2000 ratio, which is mainly due to the fact that GDP increased at a faster rate than resident patent filings. China and the Republic of Korea are two notable exceptions, whose 2006 resident filings to GDP ratio is higher than the 2000 ratio.
G.1.2: Resident Patent Filings per Million Population
The resident filings to population ratio shows a trend similar to that of the resident filings to GDP ratio (see G.1.1). However, there are a few notable differences. For example, due to the population size, China, India and Russian Federation have a lower ranking for the resident filings to population ratio than their rankings under the resident filings to GDP ratio.
The most notable increases between 2000 and 2006 occurred in the Republic of Korea, the United States of America, New Zealand and China. Japan, Sweden and Finland, on the other hand experienced a decrease in the resident filings to population ratio over the same period.
G.1.3: Resident Patent Filings per Research and Development Expenditure
Research and development (R&D) expenditure and patent filings are highly correlated. Countries with a high level of R&D investment tend to have a high resident filings to R&D expenditure ratio (patent intensity). The Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Japan, China and New Zealand have a high patent intensity.
G.1.4: Trends in Resident Patent Filings per Research and Development Expenditure
From 2000 to 2006, the patent intensity ratio (resident filings per research and development expenditure) of China and India has increased slightly, which is mostly due to the higher growth rate of resident filings relative to that of R&D expenditure.
The patent intensity ratio of Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom, on the other hand, has declined, especially for the most recent years. The decrease in patent intensity ratio of Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom is mostly due to the fall in resident filings.
H.1: Patent Processing Activity
In 2006, the number of pending applications (i.e. patent applications waiting for substantive examination) at the patent office of the United States of America (USPTO) was in excess of 1 million. The patent office of Japan (JPO) also had a large number of pending applications.
Between 2004 and 2006, the number of pending applications at the patent offices of the Russian Federation, the United States of America and Japan increased by 49.2%, 38.4% and 38.1%, respectively. However, the increase in Japan, to a certain extent, is due to the change in the request for examination rule, shortened from 7 to 3 years, which came into force in 2004. The number of pending applications at the European Patent Office (EPO) has been stable.
The average pendency time for first office action at EPO, JPO and USPTO has increased during the period of . KIPO has the lowest pendency time for first office action and it has decreased over the same period.
The EPO has the highest average total pendency time (or pendency time in examination) and the latest available data shows that the total pendency time is almost twice the pendency time of first office action.
I.1: Statistics on Opposition and
Invalidation by Patent Office
the reported offices, the number of patents subjected to a request to oppose or invalidate the granting thereof, consists of, for the most part, less than 6% of total patents granted by that office for the same year, and for most large offices, less than 1% of patents granted, the EPO being the exception.
The sudden drop in the number of patents opposed in Japan is explained by a change in 2003 at the JPO from an opposition procedure after an examiner&s decision to grant a patent to a trial for invalidation.
In most of the reported offices, the numbers of opposition or invalidation requests is loosely correlated with the number of patents granted, the exception being Germany where requests have declined at the same time that the number of granted patents has increased.
In general, there is an upward trend in the numbers of opposition or invalidation requests which may reflect an increasing interest in challenging granted patents by third parties.
J: Cost of Patenting
The scenario above shows that translation costs can make up between 18% and 36% of total costs, depending upon the number of countries.
Official fees represent approximately a third of total costs whereas legal costs vary from approximately a quarter to half of the total, depending on the number of countries selected.
Official fees are higher when filing through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) system despite the fact that the maintenance costs are postponed. However, the more countries selected, the less significant the difference.
Annex A: TOP PCT Applicants
Short Name
PCT Applicant Name: Business Sector
MATSUSHITA (JP)
MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD.
PHILIPS (NL)
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.
SIEMENS (DE)
SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
HUAWEI (CN)
HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD.
ROBERT BOSCH (DE)
ROBERT BOSCH GMBH
TOYOTA (JP)
TOYOTA JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHA
QUALCOMM (US)
QUALCOMM INCORPORATED
MICROSOFT (US)
MICROSOFT CORPORATION
MOTOROLA (US)
MOTOROLA, INC.
NOKIA (FI)
NOKIA CORPORATION
BASF AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
3M INNOVATIVE (US)
3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY
LG ELECTRONICS (KR)
LG ELECTRONICS INC.
FUJITSU (JP)
FUJITSU LIMITED
SHARP (JP)
SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHA
NEC CORPORATION
INTEL (US)
INTEL CORPORATION
PIONEER (JP)
PIONEER CORPORATION
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
SAMSUNG (KR)
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
Short Name
PCT Applicant Name: University Sector
CALIFORNIA (US)
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
COLUMBIA (US)
THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK
TEXAS SYSTEM (US)
BOARD OF REGENTS, THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM
WISCONSIN (US)
WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION
OSAKA UNIVERSITY (JP)
OSAKA UNIVERSITY
HARVARD (US)
PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE
JOHNS HOPKINS (US)
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
KYOTO (JP)
KYOTO UNIVERSITY
STANFORD (US)
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
FLORIDA (US)
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.
TOKYO (JP)
THE UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO
ILLINOIS (US)
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
PENNSYLVANIA (US)
THE TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
MICHIGAN (US)
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
THE RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
NAGOYA (JP)
NATIONAL UNIVERSITY CORPORATION NAGOYA UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH RESEARCH FOUNDATION
SOUTH FLORIDA (US)
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
CORNELL (US)
CORNELL RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.
TOHOKU (JP)
TOHOKU UNIVERSITY
Annex B: IPC and Technology Concordance Table
Field of Technology
International Patent Classification (IPC) Symbols
I: Electrical engineering
Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy
F21#, H01B, H01C, H01F, H01G, H01H, H01J, H01K, H01M, H01R, H01T, H02#, H05B, H05C, H05F, H99Z
Audio-visual technology
G09F, G09G, G11B, H04N-003, H04N-005, H04N-009, H04N-013, H04N-015, H04N-017, H04R, H04S, H05K
Telecommunications
G08C, H01P, H01Q, H04B, H04H, H04J, H04K, H04M, H04N-001, H04N-007, H04N-011, H04Q
Digital communication
Basic communication processes
Computer technology
(G06# not G06Q), G11C, G10L
IT methods for management
Semiconductors
II: Instruments
G02#, G03B, G03C, G03D, G03F, G03G, G03H, H01S
Measurement
G01B, G01C, G01D, G01F, G01G, G01H, G01J, G01K, G01L, G01M, (G01N not G01N-033), G01P, G01R, G01S; G01V, G01W, G04#, G12B, G99Z
Analysis of biological materials
G05B, G05D, G05F, G07#, G08B, G08G, G09B, G09C, G09D
Medical technology
A61B, A61C, A61D, A61F, A61G, A61H, A61J, A61L, A61M, A61N, H05G
III: Chemistry
Organic fine chemistry
(C07B, C07C, C07D, C07F, C07H, C07J, C40B) not A61K, A61K-008, A61Q
Biotechnology
(C07G, C07K, C12M, C12N, C12P, C12Q, C12R, C12S) not A61K
Pharmaceuticals
A61K not A61K-008
Macromolecular chemistry, polymers
C08B, C08C, C08F, C08G, C08H, C08K, C08L
Food chemistry
A01H, A21D, A23B, A23C, A23D, A23F, A23G, A23J, A23K, A23L, C12C, C12F, C12G, C12H, C12J, C13D, C13F, C13J, C13K
Basic materials chemistry
A01N, A01P, C05#, C06#, C09B, C09C, C09F, C09G, C09H, C09K, C09D, C09J, C10B, C10C, C10F, C10G, C10H, C10J, C10K, C10L, C10M, C10N, C11B, C11C, C11D, C99Z
Materials, metallurgy
C01#, C03C, C04#, C21#, C22#, B22#
Surface technology