Revision Policy and Procedure of the reformed IPC Limitations and Perspectives

1. Revision Policy and Procedure of the reformed IPCLimitations and Perspectives Antonios Farassopoulos - WIPO February 2008

2. Main features introduced by the Reform influencing the IPC Revision policy and procedure: • Separation of the IPC into Core and Advanced levels • Obligation of reclassification of PCT minimum Documentation before entry into force of revised scheme

3. Core and Advanced levels Advanced level • Complete IPC, including the Core level • Search of International Patent collections, e.g. PCT Minimum Documentation • Classification of documentation in medium and large patent offices • Revised frequently (up to four times a year)

4. Core and Advanced levels Advanced level (continued) • Reclassification compulsory for users of advanced level • Published electronically • Revision should not impact Core level – Exceptions • File size and file growth criteria for subdivision of groups

5. Core and Advanced levels Core Level • Simplified IPC, i.e. main group + some one-dot and two-dot subgroupsTotally ~ 1/4 of Advanced level • Search and classification of national patent collections, mainly in small offices • Dissemination of patent information and statistics • Stable, revised every three years

6. Core and Advanced levels Core Level (continued) • Published on paper and electronically • Revised if: • New technologies not available • Need for a new structure • Large groups needing subdivision and AL groups do not exist • File size and growth criteria higher than those of AL

7. Core and Advanced levels • Full compatibility limitations • Need of adjustment of references in several places • True compatibility only at each new Core level edition • Between editions of the Core level, new Core level groups are in force in Advanced level

8. Different Revision Procedures for the two levels Advanced level • By a special subcommittee (ALS) with limited membership-committed to reclassify PCT Min • Discussion - decisions mainly by electronic means. Physical meetings rather formal • Fed by Harmony projects

9. Different Revision Procedures for the two levels Core level • By a Working Group (IPC/WG) with wide membership (IPC Union) • Discussion – electronic means and physical meeting • Decisions mainly during meetings • Mainly maintenance of the IPC • Definitions • Clarification of titles or structure • Removal of references • No need for intellectual reclassification

10. Conflicts and Complications • Between the two bodies and relevant revision projects • New subdivisions of CL decided by IPC/WG need also approval by all ALS members • Obligation for reclassification • Creation of new subclasses or main groups by ALS need approval by IPC/WG • Important projects split in two: • CL entries >> IPC/WG • AL entries >> ALS • Initial procedure needed adjustments

11. Conflicts and Complications • Preparation of French version • For AL initial draft by IB • For CL initial draft by French speaking office • For mixed projects – both • Reformed IPC Information System – RIPCIS • Developed during reform • Need for different references in CL groups according to CL-AL not initially foreseen • Continuous need for adjustments to resolve conflicts between CL-AL projects in some areas

12. Conflicts and Complications • Commitment for reclassification • Need for agreement of all ALS members before revision • Lack of resources for reclassification in one office delays entry into force even when a project is completed • Increase of divergence between IPC and local Classifications

13. Conflicts and Complications • Publication • Absence of synchronization between CL-AL • Complication of validity file structure • Need to jump between versions/editions when switching between AL-CL - Problems with pointers • Manual calculation of rollup when new subclasses/main groups are used in AL • Difference in version indicators between AL-CL for the same group • Inconsistencies in the presentation of new or deleted symbols from one version to the next • Need every three months to prepare two publications • Early pub (without French) • Official pub (with French)

14. Efficiency of Revision • Creation of two levels and of ALS would permit a more rapid growth of IPC to meet ECLA-FI-USPC • IPC6-IPC7 80 days of IPC/WG - 2 sessions per year - Amendment approved ~3000 - New places in IPC 2145 • IPC7-IPC8 96 days of IPC/WG - 2 sessions per year - Amendment approved 8040 - New places in IPC 1338 • IPC8-IPC9 30 days of IPC/WG - 2 sessions per year - Amendment approved 1365 - New places in IPC 163 12.5 days of ALS - 2 sessions per year - Amendment approved 267 - New places in IPC 232 Days spent on Task Force meetings or TWG meetings not counted

15. Use of the two levels for Classification Since January 2006 - 3.750.000 documents published worldwide available in MCD with IPC AL - 5.800 documents with Core level only - 3.700 documents by CL offices - 2.100 documents by AL offices (?) - 1,700 have a family member classified in AL

16. Ideas for the Future • Synchronize CL and AL, and reduce rate of publication of AL • In view of amendments introduced • Relative use between AL and CL • Electronic publication only • CL to become a subset of AL • Further simplified ? • Use one body for revision of the IPC • Efficiency – wider participation

17. Ideas for the Future • Simplify structure of IPC master files • Reclassification • Wider participation • Publication of revised scheme even if PCT min reclassification not completed (70% ?) • New and old schemes available during completion of reclassification in the same edition with adequate warnings

18. Ideas for the Future • Strategic role of CE for future revision • Set up strategic and medium term goals for revision of the IPC • Set up clear criteria for the revision of the IPC • identify areas of the IPC for revision and for maintenance

19. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Any Questions ?