Nations Built on International Property are in Danger!

  Intellectual Property Nations are in Danger written by Hisamitsu Arai and Rensei Baba.

In 2003, Mr. Arai  , after serving as patent attorney general, was appointed as the very first secretary general of the intellectual property department, and has made tremendous achievements. Then there was Prime Minister Koizumi's Declaration of Intellectual Property in 2002, the official announcement of the　Intellectual Property Basic Act in 2003, and the establishment of Intellectual Property High Court. I took part in the intellectual property policy in the era of Secretary General.

  This book compiles shocking data and examples on how Japan's patent and intellectual property fields are increasingly showing signs of Galapagos syndrome. Because Mr. Arai who was responsible for establishing the Intellectual Property High Court is the one  pointing these things out, the situation must be dire. I'll catch you up.

- The application rate for patents overseas, is 51% in the United States and 63% in Europe. Japan is at 24%, with most applications being domestic.

- The United States, China and South Korea are planning to match with Europe in establishing a classification system for patents. Japan will adhere to the Japanese style.

· Intellectual property lawsuits are at 8000 in China, 4000 in the United States, and 200 in Japan.

Moreover, intellectual property trials in  Japan are decreasing, which is unusual from a global perspective.

· The United States and China are 100 billion yen in compensation, but Japan is at 1 billion yen. 1/100.

That’s only a 20% difference from the annual salary of a professional baseball player.

Japan is a haven for patent infringers, and it is meaningless to exercise patent rights in Japan.

· Stamp fee for a lawsuit of 100 billion yen costs 16 million yen.

In the US it is $ 350, and in France its zero.

It is hard to make a trial in Japan.

· The Japanese intellectual property trials are considered “not successful, too few in number, and slow”, so the world is unwilling to deal with them.

· Japanese companies set a precedent by holding intellectual property trials in the US and not Japan.

· Many trials in Japan end in settlement. Depending on the constitution and capacity of the court.

· Trials in Japan are secretive, and the schedule and documents of the trial are not published.

· We live in an era where companies can select courts across national borders. Judges must also have international perspective, skills, and knowledge. But if judges serve for 12 years in the United States, and then alternate to Japan for 2-3 years, it will be impossible to cultivate experts.

　This book also points out that lawyers do not make appropriate remarks when new problems arise in scientific advancement. How should legal and judicial officials respond to this?