Japanese
English[3] Effects on the Business of Japanese Patent Attorneys (benrishi)
How did the increase in the number of Japanese patent attorneys called benrishi have effects on the business of patent attorneys? In 2011, the Japan Patent Office conducted a questionnaire survey to 8,500 Japanese patent attorneys known as benrishi regarding the business of patent attorneys ranked in the top three of their major business and got answers from 1,540 out of the 8,500 patent attorneys. As a result, regarding "Frequency-1" that is the most common business, patent attorneys who answered "Patent or utility model application agency business" were the most with 1,026 patent attorneys (equivalent to 66.6% of all) (see Fig. 21), followed by those who answered "Business pertinent to international applications" with 86 patent attorneys (5.6%), those who answered "Finding invention" with 76 patent attorneys (4.9%), and those who answered "Trademark application agency business" with 72 patent attorneys (4.7%) in the order presented.
Regarding "Frequency-2" that is the second most common business, patent attorneys who answered "Business pertinent to international applications" were the most with 458 patent attorneys, followed by those who answered "Business pertinent to ex parte examination" with 250 patent attorneys, and those who answered "Trademark application agency business" with 155 patent attorneys. Regarding "Frequency-3" that is the third most common business, patent attorneys who answered "Business pertinent to ex parte examination" were the most with 278 patent attorneys.
The above results show that patent attorneys who answered "Patent or utility model application agency business" to any of "Frequency-1" to "Frequency-3" account for 76.0% of all patent attorneys, i.e., many of the patent attorneys engage in patent or utility model application agency business as their major business. The results also show that patent attorneys who answered "Business pertinent to international applications" to any of "Frequency-1" to "Frequency-3" account for 46.9% of all patent attorneys, i.e., nearly half of the patent attorneys engage in international business as their major business.
Fig. 22 shows ratio of patent attorneys who receive a large number of requests for application agency business from within Japan to those who receive a large number of requests for application agency business from outside Japan, out of those who answered to the questionnaire survey. The percentage of patent attorneys who receive a large number of requests for application agency business from within Japan is 88%, while that of those who receive a large number of requests for application agency business from outside Japan is 12%. This shows that the percentage of requests for application agency business from within Japan is markedly high.
As shown above, among the business of Japanese patent attorneys reffered to as benrishi, the percentage of patent application agency business within Japan is the most. However, the number of patent applications to the Japan Patent Office has been decreasing year after year. It increased from approximately 421,000 applications in 2005 to approximately 427,000 applications in 2011, and then decreased to approximately 342,000 applications in 2011 (see Fig. 23). The supposed factors for the decreasing number of applications include the stronger trend of large-sized companies to pursue quality over quantity of patent applications and economic downturn.
Fig. 24 shows the number of patent applications filed by foreign nationals to the Japan Patent Office. The number of patent applications filed by foreign nationals was approximately 52,000 in 2002, increased to approximately 63,000 in 2007, and then decreased to approximately 53,000 in 2009. It has remained flat since 2009 to reach approximately 55,000 in 2011.
Looking at the trend of the number of patent applications per Japanese patent attorney so-called benrishi, the number of patent applications was approximately 50.6 per Japanese patent attorney in 2008, but substantially decreased to approximately 39.5 in 2011 (see Fig. 25). It is assumed that such trend resulted from two factors, a decrease in the number of patent applications and an increase in the number of patent attorneys.
In contrast, the percentage of proxy patent application to the Japan Patent Office has been increasing year after year. Fig. 26 shows the percentage of proxy patent applications filed by Japanese patent attorneys out of patent applications to the Japan Patent Office. The percentage of patent applications filed by patent agencies has increased year after year from 86.67% in 2002 to 91.41% in 2011. In contrast, the percentage of patent applications filed by the principals without appointing any patent agency has decreased from 13.32% in 2001 to 8.58% in 2011. It is thought that the decreased number of patent applications and improved service of patent attorneys in Japan have established a situation that makes people easier to ask patent attorneys to represent them regarding patent applications.
Since the number of patent applications per Japanese patent attorney has decreased, working hours Japanese patent attorneys spend to file patent applications to within Japan has decreased. The Japan Patent Office conducted a questionnaire to survey the percentage of patent firms that answered "working hours have increased over the past 5 years", that of patent firms that answered "working hours have remained flat", and that of patent firms that answered "working hours have decreased" for each business. Fig. 27 shows the survey results. Regarding patent applications to within Japan, the percentage of patent firms that answered "working hours have decreased over the past 5 years" is the most with 53%. The percentage of patent firms that answered "working hours have increased over the past 5 years" is the most with 45% in patent applications to emerging countries.
How do Japanese patent firms think to strength the business of patent attorneys said to benrishi in reaction to the decrease in the number of patent applications within Japan? Fig. 28 shows the results of the questionnaire survey on the future business expansion policy that the Japan Patent Office conducted targeting patent firms. What business patent firms answered they would like to strengthen in the future was the most for patent applications to within Japan, etc. with 37% of patent firms, followed by patent applications to emerging countries, etc. with 31% of patent attorneys and patent applications to developed countries, etc. with 28% of them.
These results show that Japanese patent firms try to deal with the decrease in the number of patent applications by strengthening their business to file patent applications to within Japan, and that many of the patent firms would like to strengthen their business to file patent applications to outside Japan.
Fig. 29 shows actions that patent firms are implementing in order to strengthen the human resources aspect. The number of patent firms that answered their Japanese patent attorneys were working to acquire knowledge such as taking training and courses on intellectual property is 49 (equivalent to 79.0% of all), the largest percentage, followed by 33 patent firms (53.2%) that answered their patent attorneys were working to exchange their views on intellectual property with external patent attorneys regardless of their direct business. Furthermore, the number of patent firms that answered their engineering staff was working to acquire knowledge such as taking training and courses on intellectual property is 22 (equivalent to 35.5% of all).
On the other hand, while the number of patent firms that answered their patent attorneys were working to have companies incorporate intellectual property in management and business strategies in order to build the employees into human resources capable of consulting is 10 (16.1%), that of patent firms that answered their patent attorneys were implementing part of the same actions but not enough is 19 (30.6%). The number of patent firms that answered they should implement action, which would allow their patent attorneys to grab the opportunity of OJT for studying in overseas educational institutions or dispatching to overseas workplaces to grow as human resources capable of performing on a global scale, comes to 25 (40.3%).
These results show that a large number of patent firms would like to develop human resources capable of performing in a global scale and conducting consulting business pertaining to intellectual property, but have still not fully implemented the action.
How would companies like to use external patent attorneys? Fig. 30 shows for what companies are using and intend to use external patent attorneys. 768 companies (equivalent to 95.4% of all) use external patent attorneys as an application agency from the application phase of patents, etc. within Japan, accounting for the largest percentage of use of external patent attorneys, followed by 709 companies (equivalent to 88.1% of all) use those as an agency acting as a liaison with local agency and representing the companies regarding procedures for acquiring rights outside Japan, accounting for the second largest percentage of use of external patent attorneys. 555 companies (equivalent to 68.9% of all) that use external patent attorneys to deal with troubles pertaining to intellectual property within Japan account for the third largest percentage of use of them. These companies use external patent attorneys to deal with infringement of rights, counterfeit product, advanced fetch of trademark, reception and sending of warnings, etc. within Japan. 366 companies (equivalent to 45.5% of all) that use external patent attorneys to deal with troubles pertaining to intellectual property outside Japan account for the fourth largest percentage of use of them. 143 companies (17.8% of all) answered that they would like to use external patent attorneys.
Furthermore, 276 companies (equivalent to 34.3% of all) use external patent attorneys as advisors or consultants for general matters concerning intellectual property activities, and 103 companies (equivalent to 12.8% of all) answered that they would like to use external patent attorneys as advisors or consultants.
As a result, a large number of companies have answered that they would like to use external patent attorneys for dealing with troubles pertaining to intellectual property overseas and for advisory and consulting business pertaining to general matters concerning intellectual property, leading to expectation for an expansion in the business of patent attorneys in the said fields.
Fig. 31 shows for what the intellectual property headquarters of universities, research institutions, and technology transfer institutions are using and intend to use external patent attorneys. The percentage of the intellectual property headquarters of universities and others that use external patent attorneys as an application agency from the application phase of patents, etc. within Japan is 93%, accounting for the largest percentage of use of external patent attorneys. Then, the percentage of those using the external patent attorneys as an agency acting as a liaison with local agency and representing them regarding procedures for acquiring rights outside Japan comes to 78%, accounting for the second largest percentage of use of external patent attorneys.
The percentage of the intellectual property headquarters of universities and others that use external patent attorneys as instructors for training on intellectual property has come to 55%, higher than the percentage of companies that use external patent attorneys for the same business (i.e., 36%). In addition, the percentage of the intellectual property headquarters of universities and others that use external patent attorneys as advisors or consultants for general matters concerning intellectual property activities (i.e., 47%) has also come to be higher than the percentage of companies that use external patent attorneys for the same business (i.e., 34%).
In contrast, the percentage of the intellectual property headquarters of universities and others that use external patent attorneys to deal with troubles pertaining to intellectual property within Japan is 24%, exceedingly lower than the percentage of companies that use external patent attorneys for the same business (i.e., 68.9%). Likely, the percentage of the intellectual property headquarters of universities and others that use external patent attorneys to deal with troubles pertaining to intellectual property outside Japan is 13%, lower than the percentage of companies that use external patent attorneys for the same business (i.e., 45%).
In 2011, the Japan Patent Office sent out a questionnaire to large-sized companies (approximately 900 in number), small and medium-sized companies (approximately 600 in number), and universities/technology transfer institutions (approximately 100 in number) to survey user satisfaction with the business of patent attorneys and received answers from 352 large-sized companies, 128 small and medium-sized companies, and 44 universities/technology transfer institutions. Fig. 32 shows the survey results. The Japan Patent Office surveyed satisfaction with the business of patent attorneys for which the Office received requests in fiscal 2010 by giving ratings according to the five grade evaluation system: "Very satisfied"corresponds to 5 points, "Somewhat satisfied" corresponds to 4 points, "Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied" corresponds to 3 points, "Somewhat dissatisfied" corresponds to 2 points, "Very dissatisfied"corresponds to 1 point, and indicated an average score by business. The results show that all types of business earned the ratings of 3 points "Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied" or higher.
