IP Financing – global development NatWest Leads the Way in Transforming Financing Ecosystem with IP-Backed Loan

In a pioneering move, NatWest has granted the first intellectual property (IP)-backed loan to Sci-Net, signaling a transformative shift in the financing ecosystem. This innovative approach positions NatWest as a trailblazer in recognizing and leveraging intangible assets as collateral, opening new avenues for funding tech-driven companies. Historically, businesses have depended on tangible assets for securing loans, which constrained IP-rich firms. By accepting IP assets as collateral, NatWest is redefining the financing landscape, providing critical financial support to companies that thrive on innovation. This not only facilitates growth for companies like Sci-Net but also sets a new standard in the banking sector. NatWest’s groundbreaking initiative demonstrates its commitment to embracing the evolving nature of business assets, acknowledging the significant value of intellectual property. This move is just the beginning, with Sci-Net’s deal paving the way for more IP-backed financing solutions. NatWest’s leadership in this area is expected to inspire other financial institutions to follow suit, fostering a more dynamic and inclusive economic environment where intangible assets play a central role in corporate finance.

A traditional hurdle to ip backed financing has been the high cost of obtaining valuation of ip and intangible assets to be given to the banks as part of credit assessment, Sollomon IP valuation software and platform is solving that problem and as testament to its capability, Natwest is making loan decision by using the Sollomon software platform in the valuation and collateral suitability checking. Adastra IP is a proud exclusive partner in Malaysia and the South East Asia region. As the value of intangible assets continues to rise, it is timely for lenders and financial institutions to give more weight to intangibles and IP assets as a rightful asset class on its own and with it, a much welcomed runway for businesses to capitalise on their IP assets to obtain affordable cost of capital in scaling their business.

Impact of the WIPO treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and associated traditional knowledge: Perspectives from India and other countries

INTRODUCTION:

In May 2024, WIPO signed a groundbreaking treaty on intellectual property, genetic resources, and related traditional knowledge. This treaty marks the first time that WIPO has addressed the convergence of intellectual property, genetic resources, and traditional knowledge, while also incorporating special protections for Indigenous Peoples and local communities. The foundation for addressing intellectual property issues related to genetic resources, traditional knowledge (TK), and folklore was laid at the World Intellectual Property Organization's (WIPO) General Assembly in 2000.

Subsequently, the newly formed Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) embarked on exploring ways to enhance the intellectual property protection of genetic resources, traditional knowledge (TK), and traditional cultural expressions (TCEs), with the primary aim of improving global protection in these domains. Article 1 of the treaty underscores the objective of setting international norms in the realm of TK and TCE, emphasizing the enhancement of the efficacy, transparency, and quality of the patent system concerning genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, along with preventing erroneous patent grants for inventions lacking novelty or inventiveness in this context.

Key Focus Areas of the Treaty:

Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources: o Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS): Ensuring legal access to genetic resources for research and development, coupled with equitable sharing of benefits. o Patentability and Disclosure Requirements: Debate surrounding the necessity of disclosing the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in patent applications.

Traditional Knowledge (TK): Protection of TK: Developing legal mechanisms to safeguard traditional knowledge from misappropriation and misuse. Documentation and Preservation: Supporting initiatives aimed at documenting and preserving traditional knowledge while respecting the rights of indigenous and local communities.

Traditional Cultural Expressions (TCEs): Safeguarding Cultural Heritage: Promoting protection against unauthorized use and commercialization of traditional cultural expressions.

Indian Perspective

India boasts a rich legacy of traditional knowledge and genetic diversity. Consequently, it has been profoundly affected by the absence of global standards pertaining to genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Instances involving neem, basmati, and turmeric prompted India to combat the appropriation of its traditional knowledge. The Biological Diversity Act 2002 (NBA) was enacted to establish a legal framework for preserving biological diversity, promoting sustainable utilization, and ensuring equitable distribution of benefits arising from biological resources and associated knowledge. NBA prohibits the transfer of research results on biological resources acquired from India to foreign entities without prior approval, and mandates prior consent for transferring accessible biological resources or traditional knowledge (TK) to third parties. The Act also delineates processes for implementing Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) regulations in India. The Jeevani formulation involving the Kani tribe from Kerala exemplifies ABS in practice.

However, international norms addressing this issue are welcomed. The newly signed WIPO treaty is poised to globally recognize the imperative to protect genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Section 64(p) of the Patents Act 1970, which provides grounds for revocation if the complete specification fails to disclose or inaccurately mentions the source or geographical origin of biological material used for the invention, aligns with the need for patent protections. Nonetheless, the WIPO treaty offers leeway for rectifying instances of fraudulent conduct or intent (Article 5.2 (bis)), and precludes revocation solely based on an applicant's failure to disclose information (Article 5.3). Thus, while Section 64(p) may not align entirely with the WIPO treaty, it raises questions about regulating TK and GK resource theft without stringent measures against biopiracy.

Analysis from the Viewpoint of Other Countries

EPO (European Patent Office):

The European Patent Office (EPO) has laid the groundwork for protecting genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge through the Nagoya Protocol. To ensure compliance with the Protocol, EPO mandates due diligence to confirm legal access to genetic resources and fair distribution of benefits.

ASEAN Countries:

ASEAN countries exhibit varying degrees of effort in protecting genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Singapore, and Brunei have enacted laws and regulations aligned with international agreements like the CBD and Nagoya Protocol to safeguard biodiversity and traditional knowledge.

Conclusion :

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) adopts a different approach, where the granting of a US patent on traditional knowledge does not preclude its use by indigenous peoples outside the US. However, the US supports international agreements like the CBD, Nagoya Protocol, and the recent WIPO treaty to safeguard genetic resources and traditional knowledge.

Myanmar - Patent Law came into effect on 31 May 2024

On May 31, 2024, Myanmar introduced its much-anticipated patent law, marking a significant step forward in the country's intellectual property regime. This new legislation aims to modernize Myanmar's patent system and align it with international standards, paving the way for increased foreign investment and technological innovation.

In this update, we would like to share some summarised points of Myanmar's Patent Law. We have selected a few of the key chapters in the patent law for an overview of the key features, covering patentability, application requirements, examination process and opposition as well as availability of minor invention.

Inventions Eligible for Protection

? Novelty: An invention is considered novel if it does not exist in prior technology, including anything published, spoken of, or publicly disclosed before the application date or the requested right of priority date.

? Inclusion of an Inventive Step: An invention includes an inventive step if an expert in the relevant technical field cannot easily understand it.

? Industrial Applicability: An invention is industrially applicable if it can be produced or used in any industrial enterprise, broadly encompassing various socioeconomic activities.

Application

? Application Process: Applicants eligible for patent rights must apply to the Registrar as prescribed.

? Application Content: The application must include a complete description of the invention, the name and brief description of the invention, and requests for one or more patents, among other details.

? Language Requirements: Applications can be submitted in Myanmar or English, with translations required if requested by the Registrar.

Examination, Opposition, and Registration

? Examination: Examiners must classify the invention according to international standards, check conformity with sections 19 and 20, and submit compliant applications to the Registrar. ? Amendments: If an application does not meet the requirements, the applicant is notified to amend it within 60 days.

? Opposition: Persons may oppose a patent application within 90 days of public announcement by submitting an objection form with prescribed fees.

? Registration: The Registrar reviews the Examiner’s remarks and decides on granting or refusing the patent, records the decision, and announces it publicly.

Right of Priority

? Priority Rights: Applicants who apply within one year from the initial application in a Member State of the Paris Convention or WTO enjoy the right of priority.

? Trade Exhibitions: If an invention is displayed at an authorized international trade exhibition, the date of initial display is considered the application date if applied within one year.

Minor Inventions

? Registration: Minor inventions that are novel and usable in industrial enterprises can be registered for a minor invention patent.

? Exclusions: Minor invention protection does not cover phases of a working process, chemical or pharmaceutical substances, objects prohibited under the law, and artistic works.

? Term: The term for a minor invention patent is 10 years from the application date.

? Opposition and Revocation: Opposition can be filed within 60 days of the announcement, and the Registrar can revoke a minor invention patent if it does not conform to the stipulated requirements.

Singapore - Trademark Dispute: Google vs. Green Radar – Trademark Dispute Over "grMail" Falls Short.

Google's attempt to block the registration of "grMail" by Green Radar was rejected by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS). Green Radar applied for their trademark in respect of IT security services. Google opposed the application citing confusing similarity between the marks, brand dilution, and unfair advantage. However, the Registrar found that "grMail" and "Gmail" were only moderately similar and distinct enough for consumers to identify the individual marks. Additionally, the services offered by both companies were deemed dissimilar. The Registrar acknowledged Gmail's public recognition but concluded that "grMail" would not harm its distinctiveness or unfairly benefit Green Radar. Consequently, Green Radar's trademark application was allowed for registration, and Google was ordered to pay legal costs.

#adastraIP #intellectualproperty #intellectualpropertyfirm #trademark #patent #copyright #designrights