Patents? More Probable, Innovative Utility Models

Scaling down, to scale up.

Why is China, where it is on the global economic scale?

Or Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan—the so-called “Gang of Four”, and even South Africa, our neighbour—roughly 2,300 klicks south of our border—as the crow flies?

The Gang of Four went from developing to developed nations, based on homegrown development programmes, because they decided THEY were the master of their own destinies.

We can do the same.

How?

The answer—really—is simple, yet not easy:

INNOVATIVE MANUFACTURING!

Manufacturing, or—indeed its more descriptive counterpart—manufacturing capacity, is pivotal and has transformed those, and many other economies around the world.

Some of the older advanced economies that “discovered” the power of in-border manufacturing, have since entered into decay, or decline, as they have sought to outsource manufacturing capacity, all for the love of cost-cutting.

Point in fact, the mighty US of A, having capitulated its manufacturing processing and competitive advantage to the new kid on the block—a developing nation—the People’s Republic of China (but, that is a story for another day, and for more qualified minds to discuss).

Proof positive, that manufacturing is the foundation upon which economic stimulation rests, which in turn, as Noam Chomsky explains, causes “…innovation, leading to higher stages of sophistication in production, design, and invention.”?

And case in point—the Zambian context—look at a company called Trade Kings Limited:

Started as a garage-based business, the founder looked around and wondered why a nation, like Zambia, abundant in innovative, creative people, should be importing washing powder. A staple of any household.

Today—from a single washing powder product—listen to what the company website says:

“Following intensive research and development, new technologies and cutting-edge ingredients, BOOM Bubble Plus Detergent Powder was launched. Trade Kings Group established itself, as an epitome of quality products. This sparked an intense focus on research and innovation”. (emphasis authors).

“We have been creating innovative products since 1995.” From humble beginnings, with a single product and a man with a single-minded vision, to one of Sub-Saharan Africa’s largest FMCG manufacturing groups.” (emphasis by author).

FMCG, to you and me:

“Fast-moving consumer goods (FMCGs) are products that sell quickly at relatively low cost. FMCGs have a short shelf life because of high consumer demand (e.g., soft drinks and confections) or because they are perishable (e.g., meat, dairy products, and baked goods).” (Investopedia).

This is what Zambia, needed, and still needs, as does any developing country to help galvanise consumer spending, and competitiveness, which in turn, stimulates economic growth.

Innovative manufacturing.

Trade Kings—the manufacturer and innovator focused on research and development—is our Coca-Cola, Inc., our PepsiCo, and our Nestlé.

National pride, on a grand scale.

Not only is it into manufacturing and innovating through research and development, but it has also cornered and grasped the Zambian market—and indeed the regional markets—by the throat, through its strong brand presence.

Needless to say, Trade Kings Ltd, is making maximum use of the intellectual property system to register and protects its products, both through the trade marks and industrial design registration systems.

Trade Kings has grown to encompass the manufacture of personal home care, laundry and confectionery, up to and including, the manufacture of steel.

That’s the power—combined— of manufacturing, innovation, research and development, AND the intellectual property system, working together for maximum economic effect.

Enough said, anyone can tell that I am a proud Zambian, who’s happy to announce that Trade Kings, is a wholly-owned Zambian conglomerate.

Of course, Trade Kings Limited is not the only manufacturing company in Zambia, locally owned or otherwise, there ARE others, but this is by far the biggest success story in our country.

Having gone, “over and above”, in singing unsolicited praises of our local success story, let me get back on topic, and ask,

“Where to Zambia?”

We are always talking about mining, being the bread and butter of our economy. Yes, granted, to an extent, but that is a wasting resource, and while we still have that bedrock resource, we should pivot and develop “evergreen” sources of wealth creation, not just for the Zambian government, but for the general citizenry, especially the innovators and creators of intellectual property.

Evergreen, evergreen to me, because it is a product of human intellect, and we all know, the source or fountain of THAT intellect, is inexhaustible, even infinite.

The extractive industries are by their nature of capital intensity, restrictive industries for the average Zambian.

So as a nation of utility model innovators—at this point in our history—our superpower is to focus on the inclusive industries.

Why?

Because these are where we can reap the maximum benefits for the nation and its people. If our institutions allow for inclusivity, this will in turn encourage participation in the economic activities of the country by the large mass of people, where their talents and skill are better put to good use—as every individual who has a skill can fit in, participate, and earn a living for themselves and their families—and equally important, earn the nation the necessary revenue to meet its social obligations.

To function effectively, these economic institutions must operate in an environment of respect for laws, property rights, and a level playing field. ?

More paramount, is government support.

But, Zambia, having won its political independence in 1964, expected this to result in economic independence, which one further would have expected it to bring—with it— expanded economic opportunities for the citizenry.

Has it?

But for that to happen, it is largely dependent on the policy direction of the government.

I, therefore, believe the Zambian government has taken a step in that direction by repealing and replacing the old Patents Act with the new law, the Patents Act of 2016 and embedding the law on utility models, under chapter XV of the Act, for the registration and protection of the utility model, in which our innovators have a comparative and competitive advantage.

So, the focus of this article is the utility model as a means of manufacture for economic development.

We have thousands of artisanal skilled labour in this country. Visit any of our high-density or industrial areas—they are ubiquitous, those innovators—and yet that is the resource, as a country, we have neglected. There are millions of dollars locked up in that resource. Millions are locked out of people’s pockets, but also millions, are locked out, in terms of government revenue through taxes.

Speaking of the Act

It defines a utility model as “…an intellectual property right with less stringent patentability requirements to protect an invention.”?

That definition is significantly relevant because as you may know, patent protection criteria is a truly stringent requirement.

The threshold for patentability is, to be honest, stringently prohibitive, and that is why, wise leadership recognises and acknowledges limitations and works to capitalise and leverage strong points.

And so we must capitalise on our strength as a nation, in our field of strength—utility models.

The innovativeness of the Zambian is unsurpassed.

But it is being wasted, this strength, in so far as income and wealth generation is concerned. Our innovators are paid a pittance for their innovation, if at all, because, we have failed to leverage these human resources by ensuring they are informed and educated on their right to register and protect their intellectual outputs—and if a third party wants to use it, they must seek the registered owner's permission or enter into a licensing agreement.

Section 109 of the Act, provides the procedure for applying for a utility model.

A straightforward procedure and requirement, not the complicated stipulations of a patent application. This is good for us, as a country, and a great step ahead.

The Act stipulates, in Section 15—categorically—that the patentability requirements of an invention do not apply to a utility model (variously also known as a “petty patent”, not because it is trivial, but rather because its registration certificate criteria are less stringent than those for the grant of a patent).

·???????? A quick crash course 101 for patentability, as required under the patent law is:

(1) it must be new (concept of so-called novelty, that is to say, not known, “published”, anywhere in the whole world);

(b) it must involve an inventive step (technical leap from the known technology); and

(c) it must be capable of industrial application (must be useful to/in industry).

Those of you who are history buffs will recall that the success of the Industrial Revolution was a resultant effect arising from the revolutionising of the processing and production of cotton, through innovative means, namely, through the invention of mechanisation.

In other words, as Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, say in their book, “Why Nations Fail”, “The engine of technological breakthroughs throughout the economy was innovation.” (underline by author).

·???????? But the criteria for registration of a utility model, take a look (reproduced verbatim from the Act):

An application for the registration of a utility model shall

contain—

(a) a request for the registration of the utility model;

(b) a claim specifying what is to be protected by the registration of the utility model;

(c) the description of the subject matter of the utility model;

(d) the drawings to which the claim or description relates; and

(e) any other requirements as may be prescribed

Simplicity, simplified.

To conclude, I would like to end—first—with a quote I wish to dedicate to the unfortunate happenings—the man-made sufferings and the natural disasters around the world, and—second—a thought, for all those whose nations have been deemed irrelevant:

The Quote:

Past World Bank President, James Wolfensohn, put a plaque in the lobby of the World Bank Headquarters in New York, that read:

“If we act now with realism and foresight,

If we show courage,

If we think globally, and

Allocate our resources accordingly,

We can give our children a

More powerful and equitable world.

One where suffering will be reduced.

Where children everywhere

Will have a sense of hope.

This is not just a dream.

It is our responsibility.

The Thought:

Those of us who live in the southern hemisphere, have been labelled, variously, with some downright demeaning, egregiously insulting terms, such as “underdeveloped”, and “third world”.

Those terms were synonyms for “uncivilised”, and “savage; backward” world, respectively.

For some reason, we have taken them on the chin; maybe for fear of losing donor funding, concessional loans, and the magnanimity of the West.

Anyway. Moving on.

Then, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was deemed second world—and with the rise of “political correctness”, we’ve been “elevated”, patronisingly; paternalistically; and condescendingly, to “low”, or “middle-income nations”—well, truth be told, we ARE those (so, what do we do about them titles?).

Well, that’s well and good, but my point for bringing this up is that, it is incumbent upon us, as Africans and African nations, to step forward, look up, and declare ourselves ready to move into the so-called first world, to prove, we too, can transform our nations; and therefore our lives for the better, and achieve what the so-called developed world boasts about.

Without giving myself the “burden” of reciting Rudyard Kipling’s”, 1899 poem, “The White Man’s Burden”, allow me, instead, reference,

William Easterly, in his amazingly informative book, “The White Man’s Burden”, in which he posits that, “The White Man’s Burden emerged from the West’s self-pleasing fantasy that ‘we’ were the chosen ones to save the rest.” (underline by author).

The Berlin Conference of 1885 (dubbed the scramble for Africa) concluded with these “misleadingly altruistic, but arrogant” words, “aiming at instructing the natives and bringing home to them the blessings of civilisation.”?

Charmingly self-absorbed.

This attitude resonates and echoes throughout the pages of history, and I—personally—believe it is time, in all fairness, we relieved “The White Man of that Burden”—he has surely babysat us, long enough. ???

For we too, are a chosen people and race, and deserve to take our seat in the temple of the gods—as equals.

Ok, final, final conclusion:

Writing in 1948, W.E.B Du Bois, surmised, “…that alongside the Atlantic slave trade in Africans, a great world movement of modern times is the partitioning of Africa, and that, the primary reality of imperialism in Africa today is economic…" (underline mine).

We all know this.

Take away the natural resources, and Africa may be as good as a black, black hole—a place to avoid.

So here is a clarion call to action, a question, really:

When, fellow African citizen—brothers and sisters, all women and men of all creeds, backgrounds, and races, all well-meaning humans—when shall we wake up to reality, the reality that has been staring us in the face, for over 140 years, and still counting??

When we honestly search our souls, we WILL meet the answer. It stares us squarely in the face.?

Notes:

Berlin Conference - Wikipedia viewed 24 August, 2024

Investopedia viewed 24 August, 2024

https://www.tradekings.co.zm/, viewed 24 August, 2024

The Patents Act No. 40 of 2016

Why Nations Fail, the origins of power, prosperity and poverty, 2013