EPO Strategic debate - PCT consultation process, November 2004.
There is an ongoing discussion about possible models of co-operation between the European Patent Office and the intellectual property offices of EPO member states, with emphasis on the PCT work (i.e., ISA / IPEA). The question is how to share the workload and, of course, the fee revenues. From the microsite of the European Patent Organisation:
"PCT consultation process
Strategic debate, November 2004
In the context of recent developments such as the introduction by WIPO of the ISO or the granting of ISA status to the Finnish Office, the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation has decided at its June 2004 meeting to launch a strategy debate on the co-operation within the Organisation.
Two significant events have already been arranged: the Council will begin defining the exact scope of the discussion and establishing its objectives at its autumn meeting (27 to 29 October 2004), and then hold an extraordinary meeting devoted entirely to this strategy debate from 24 to 26 November 2004.
The debate needs to be conducted in an open and transparent manner. To this end, the Chairman of the Council is making his personal position paper (which confines itself to suggestions about relevant goals in the given context), along with the position papers received from member states of the Organisation, available to the interested public and to the numerous parties in the process (see CA/70/04 + Addenda).
To facilitate the broadest possible consultation, the secretariat of the Administrative Council has set up the following address for those who wish to submit their views:
These submissions should be in electronic form only, and in one or more of the Organisation's official languages (English, French, German). In submitting their views in this way, the contributors authorise the Organisation to publish them on this site and to refer to the source. They also accept that the Organisation reserves the right not to publish every contribution.
It should be noted that only submissions made in good time for the Council meetings can be given due consideration."
The main goals of the Eiropean Patent Office are set out in Document CA/70/04:
"1.1 Expanding the strong position of the EPO to a leadership role within the PCT system: This goal can only be achieved by further increasing the profile of the Office as a PCT authority because in other economic areas, the national European offices are barely known as PCT authorities. Strengthening the position of the Office means, first of all, creating the capacity to be able to process PCT registrations from anywhere in the world on time without exception. Secondly, it entails the ability to set standards for quality, and thirdly, offer attractive prices. In doing so, Europe could put itself in the position to define the quality standards of PCT work worldwide. The introduction of the 'written opinion' has made this even more important because the PCT product could become a sort of 'certificate of patentability'.
1.2 Further the harmonisation of patent procedure in Europe: This goal is about much more than harmonising legislation and guidelines, and controlling quality standards for Office products. It has to do with knowledge transfer 'brain-to-brain', with the creation of a unified doctrine ('unité de doctrine') among all patent experts in Europe, whether examiners, patents attorneys or judges, and finally, with education.
1.3 Keeping the EPO on a solid financial footing: This is a central condition for guaranteeing a strong European Patent Office. The financial results for 2003 were poor in comparison with previous years. This alone is not enough to worry about; however, there is a series of trends which need acknowledging and response. The relative frequency of sick leave or attempts to expand privileges, for instance, can indicate a danger that the discrepancy between EPO salaries and those of national governmental employees is growing. In addition, the shift to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) (which will show the financial situation of the EPO in a much clearer, and unflattering, light) is delayed. Finally, as the discussion of an academy and 'improving the synergy' during the AC meeting of March 2004 has shown, large financial burdens that would be difficult to control might be looming on the horizon. This all shows that the goal of keeping the EPO financially sound is not attainable without increased efforts.
1.4 Maintaining the integrity of the EPO: Since its expansion, the EPO is no longer a 'limited circle' of pioneers. There are new interests which must be considered if the EPO wants to continue developing in the interests of its integral role in the European economy.
A number of national Governments have provided responses; see here.
Feel free to contact PA Axel H Horns via e-mail
horns@ipjur.com. BEWARE: DO NOT SEND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION UNENCRYPTED VIA E-MAIL. USE OF ENCRYPTION SOFTWARE IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. PA AXEL H HORNS IS PROVIDING SUPPORT FOR ENCRYPTED E-MAIL MESSAGES USING PGP OR PGP COMPATIBLE FORMATS. THE PGP PUBLIC KEY FOR PA AXEL H HORNS IS AVAILABLE
HERE. THE GnuPG PUBLIC KEY FOR PA AXEL H HORNS IS AVAILABLE
HERE.
Dipl.-Phys. Axel H Horns is Patentanwalt (German Patent Attorney),
European Patent Attorney as well as European Trade Mark Attorney. In particular, he is Member of:
European Patent Office and the intellectual property offices of EPO member states, with emphasis on the PCT work (i.e., ISA / IPEA). The question is how to share the workload and, of course, the fee revenues. From the 
