About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

IP Outreach Research > IP Use and Awareness

Reference

Title: UK Intellectual Property Awareness Survey 2006
Author: Robert Pitkethly [Oxford University]
Source:

UK Intellectual Property Office
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ipsurvey.pdf

Year: 2007

Details

Subject/Type: IP Knowledge, IP Protection
Focus: Commercialisation, Economic / Financial Impact
Country/Territory: United Kingdom
Objective: To provide an insight into the awareness and use of intellectual property in all sizes of firm and all sectors of industry throughout the UK.
Sample: 1.709 firms of all sizes and in all sectors of UK industry
Methodology: Mail questionnaire

Main Findings

Overall, the following intellectual property rights (IPRs) were either created or owned by firms: patents (9.2%), trademarks (36.2%), copyright (60.5%), database rights (14.4%), and other (12.1%). Larger firms tended to own/create more intellectual property (IP) than their smaller counterparts: while 41.4% of large firms (250+ employees) reported creating/owning patents, just 7.0% of micro-enterprises (0-9 employees), and 16.9% of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) reported doing so.

The four top-rated methods to protect IP were: confidentiality agreements (26.9%), followed by copyright (21.9%), secrecy (19.2%), and lead-time over competitors (14.8%).

IP knowledge and understanding varied by industry sector and firm size, with technical sectors and larger firms showing more signs of knowing the right answers to IP-related questions. Larger firms were also found to spend more on obtaining/maintaining IPRs, and were more likely to have been involved in legal disputes related to IPRs.

The larger the firm, the greater the extent of IP management practices; relative to smaller firms, their larger counterparts were more likely to: license in/out, have specific persons/departments responsible for managing IPRs, have attempted to value their IP, have an overall IP policy, provide training in IP issues to their staff, and check for potential infringements.

Larger firms were also the most likely to have sought advice on IPRs. Large companies’ preferred sources of advice on IPRs were external patent/trademark attorneys, external solicitors, and such staff in-house. SMEs relied more on the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO). Micro-enterprises predominantly turned to solicitors, the UK IPO, and external patent/trademark attorneys. The perceived need for IP advice was highest in technical sectors.

To sum up: the larger a firm, the greater its IP awareness (as measured by IP knowledge/understanding, IP management practices, and awareness/use of IP information/advice). The degree of IP awareness also varies by industry sector, but less noticeably (with “other community social and personal service”, “transport equipment”, and “real estate, renting and other business activity” sectors the most IP aware; and the “hotels and restaurants” sector least IP aware). Given that small companies are generally IP unaware, efforts to promote IP awareness should be concentrated primarily on them.

[Date Added: Aug 18, 2008 ]