Website Search

We operate at the forefront of technology but the IP professions are often the slowest to adopt new approaches to doing business. Our pool of clients continues to increase in diversity and we need to reflect this in the way our firms are made up. Nowadays large corporate clients are insisting that firms with which they do business have a strategy to support a diverse workplace.

Many famous business leaders have overcome prejudice to achieve success and want to pave an easier way for those that follow them.

Richard Branson, founder of Virgin Group, attributes much of his success to dyslexia and learning disabilities and the resultant need to delegate. Many of us with neurodiverse conditions excel in particular areas that can be used to advantage. Other famous entrepreneurs with dyslexia include fashion designer Tommy Hilfiger and Apple founder Steve Jobs. A diverse team covers all bases and is stronger.

Numerous well-known people with disabilities are supporting initiatives to reduce some of the hurdles that they faced. These are helping to increase diversity and inclusion in the workplace. But the world, and the IP professions in particular, have a long way to go.

Within our firms this starts with recruitment. Think about it – if you have a job applicant who is wheelchair bound do you discount them immediately or consider whether he/she/"they" can be accommodated? And what if they prefer not to state their gender? Do you consciously or unconsciously discount someone with a particular surname/from a lesser-known educational establishment? Do you recruit by word of mouth and thereby increase the chances that you recruit in your own likeness?

And I haven't even started on the more obvious issues such as race or religion ...

FICPI-UK is proud to count itself as one of the founding organisations of a task force dedicated to diversity and inclusion in the UK IP professions, IP Inclusive. The leader of IP Inclusive is Andrea Brewster, a former president of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA). The aim of IP Inclusive is to implement a challenging range of diversity-improving initiatives, and this has been going from strength to strength over a period of six years with support from CIPA, CITMA, the IP Federation, FICPI-UK and the UK IPO. It's about doing more than just paying lip service to the principles of diversity.

At the root of inclusivity we need to encourage young people to study subjects that will equip them to embark on careers in IP. For this there is a dedicated outreach campaign: Careers in Ideas.

Within IP Inclusive a number of "communities" have been formed including "Women in IP", "IP and ME", and "IP Out". More recent additions include "IP Ability" and "IP Futures", and there will be more to come as we learn about the different issues that potential recruits to the professions face. IP Inclusive has hosted discussions on mental health, difficulties of carers (especially as the pandemic continues) and a whole range of subjects beyond those that first spring to mind when diversity is mentioned.

For a lot of us involved with IP Inclusive it's been a huge learning curve and it's broadened our minds to the importance of diversity in building strong teams. It's also forced us to examine some of our prejudices, conscious or unconscious.

Perhaps some of you have similar initiatives in your countries, in which case we'd love to hear about them and share ideas. Or perhaps this has inspired you to start something similar, in which case there's a wealth of information on the IP Inclusive website.

The moral and business case for diversity and inclusion is clear. Don’t be left behind.

Next steps
• Find out more about the IP Inclusive initiative for the UK and explore similar initiatives in your area

How FICPI makes IP attorneys more effective
The FICPI community is built on trusted, global relationships with strong shared interest to promote common solutions and advocacy for private practice. FICPI forums, committees and meetings are opportunities to gather insights from the international IP attorney community and to discuss and further practice-related issues as well as topics of patent and trade mark law.

Read more about Is your firm missing out on work for lack of commitment to diversity and inclusion? Log in or register to post comments

India recently amended its Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (BD Act, 2002) by passing the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023 after two years of consideration. India, being rich in biodiversity had introduced the BD Act, 2002, to fulfil its obligations under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing. Its legislative intent was to ensure that the benefits derived from the use of Indian biological resources and associated traditional knowledge are shared in a fair and equitable manner among the indigenous and local communities.

The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) is the central body administering the BD Act, supported by the State Biodiversity Boards (SBB) and the District level Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC). The provisions under the BD Act, 2002, required multi-stage permissions from the NBA to access resources for commercialisation, including for filing patent applications that disclose the use of Indian biological resources. The permissions were granted through agreements with the NBA on mutually agreed terms on access and benefit sharing (ABS) fees. Non-compliance with the provisions could attract penalties including fines, and even imprisonment.

Needless to say, there was widespread concern among the related research and industry sectors, particularly domestic players with regard to the prevailing law as it created several barriers to accessing Indian biological resources for purposes of research as well as commercialisation. Over the years, various stakeholder representations highlighted to the concerned ministry that the existing provisions negatively impacted both research and business. Particularly, changes were being sought to enable collaborative research and investments and to ease the requirement of obtaining NBA permissions before the grant of a patent application.

Stated objectives

The Biodiversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021, aimed to address these concerns by simplifying compliance requirements, stating the following objectives. The Bill further formed the basis of the Biological Diversity Act, 2023, (BD Act, 2023):

(i)    Encourage cultivation of medicinal plants;

(ii)   Encourage the Indian system of medicine;

(iii) Facilitate fast-tracking of research, the patent application process, and transfer of research results while utilising the biological resources available in India without compromising the objectives of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya protocol;

(iv)  Decriminalise certain provisions related to imprisonment and instead introduce/increase fines for non-compliance; and

(v)   Encourage more foreign investments in biological resources, including in research, patent filings and commercial utilisation, without compromising national interest.

With this as background, the following key amendments in the BD Act, 2023, are of particular importance:

1.      Decriminalisation: The amendments to section 55 of the Act have removed the provision on imprisonment and instead, increased the quantum of fines (5 to 10 times compared to the earlier Act).

2.      Exemption from seeking NBA permission for Indian entities: under the earlier Act i.e. BD Act,2002, any Indian entity with mere non-Indian participation in its share capital or management, would be required to seek permission to access Indian biological resources for research, commercial utilisation or knowledge associated thereto. Amended section 3(2) has harmonised the definition of a non-Indian entity with the Indian Companies Act[1]. As a result, only those Indian entities which are directly controlled by a foreign entity will now need such permissions.

3.      Intellectual Property Rights (IPR): amendments to Section 6 clarify the process for obtaining an IP disclosing Indian biological resources and associated traditional knowledge. While non-Indian entities will still be required to seek prior approvals, Indian entities now only need to register such information with the NBA while filing an application for a patent (or any IP) and seek prior approval in case the patent is commercialised.

4.      Use of foreign bioresources: a new section 36A authorises the NBA to monitor and regulate the access and utilisation of biological resources obtained from foreign countries.

5.      Indians to pay ABS to SBBs: the powers of SBBs have been clarified and the amendment to section 7 now requires Indian entities to pay ABS to them.

6.      Expansion of NTAC exemption list: The list of biological resources Normally Traded as Commodities (NTAC) has been expanded to include derivatives of NTAC bioresources, agricultural wastes and cultivated medicinal plants and their products. The exemption is, however, restricted to Indian entities and applies to trading purposes only as was the case earlier.

While the Biological Diversity Amendment Act, 2023, is still new, and more clarity on its implementation will emerge as the NBA publishes the related regulations or guidelines, it has been welcomed as a positive step towards opening up access and utilisation of Indian biological resources for domestic players.

The Indian research and industry stakeholders are viewing it as a significant step towards encouraging science and innovation in the related sectors, and achieving the ambitious goal of a $300 bn bioeconomy set by the Indian government.

FICPI's view and involvement

FICPI uniquely combines education and advocacy on topics around patents and trade marks, with a focus on developing the professional excellence of its individual members. FICPI Forums, Congress, committees and meetings are opportunities to gather insights from the international IP attorney community on any issue, whether it be practice-related or topics of patent and trade mark law.

Next steps Search for FICPI members in India by navigating to the FICPI member directory and searching by country.  Consider getting involved in FICPI Study & Work Groups, such as Group 5 (CET 5): Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals, for which Deepa is Reporter.

 

[1]Clause (27) of Section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013- “Control” shall include the right to appoint majority of the directors or to control the management or policy decisions exercisable by a person or persons acting individually or in concert, directly or indirectly, including by virtue of their shareholding or management rights or shareholders agreements or voting agreements or in any other manner.

Read more about Revised Indian Biodiversity Law aims to boost bioresource-dependent sectorsLog in or register to post comments

Under the direction of Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, that agency has made great strides to improve diversity both within the USPTO and in the innovation ecosphere at large.

The USPTO website aptly states:

“At the USPTO, we know that the broad diversity of our country is the number-one reason our nation continues to be inventive and innovative. This diversity drives our arts and culture, and our economic vitality and growth. But we are not unique and we are not doing enough. Most of the world recognizes the importance of diversity in developing solutions to the world’s most challenging problems. Most of these problems are common to all of us.1"           

On the innovation side, Director Vidal’s efforts have led to the creation of the Women’s Entrepreneurship (WE) initiative2 and the Council for Inclusive Innovation (CI2)3. On the practice side, the USPTO’s efforts began with expanding opportunities to practice before the agency by evolving the admissions criteria for the patent bar.  

On October 18, 2022, the USPTO published a Federal Register Notice (FRN)4 requesting public input on whether to modify the scientific and technical criteria for admission to practice in all patent matters. To date there have been three categories of technical and scientific qualifications that allow applicants to be eligible to sit for the registration: (1) Category A for specified bachelor’s, master’s, or PhD degrees; (2) Category B for other bachelor’s, master’s, or PhD degrees with technical and scientific training; and (3) Category C for practical engineering or scientific experience. In response to the public comments, the USPTO published a FRN5 implementing the changes including: 

(1) requiring the USPTO to review certain applicant degrees in Category B every three years to determine whether they should be moved to Category A, (2) making a modification to the accreditation requirement for computer science degrees such that all Bachelor of Science in computer science degrees from an accredited university or college will be accepted under Category A, and (3) providing clarifying instructions to applicants for limited recognition.

Director Vidal stated that “[e]xpanding the admission criteria of the patent bar will encourage broader participation and keep up with ever-evolving technology…This is part of our effort across the Agency to deploy and keep up with the fast pace of technological change and to lower barriers to our innovation ecosystem.6” 

These changes are now reflected on the USPTO’s website7. 

A further effort to expand opportunities to practice at the USPTO was the creation of a design patent practitioner bar.  On May 16, 2023, the USPTO published a FRN8 proposing its creation, and after receiving public comments, the USPTO implemented the design patent practitioner bar, wherein admitted design practitioners would practice solely in design patent matters9 as published on November 16, 2023.  Admission to the design patent bar requires that an applicant have a bachelor’s, master’s, or doctorate degree in one of the following areas (or its equivalent): industrial design, product design, architecture, applied arts, graphic design, fine/studio arts, or art teacher education.  Applicants for registration to practice in design patent matters only have to take and pass the current registration examination and pass a moral character evaluation in order to be registered10. 

Most recently, on February 20, 2024, the USPTO issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)11 to amend the criteria that individuals must meet to practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Previously, only members of the USPTO patent bar were eligible to appear as lead counsel in America Invents Act (AIA) proceedings involving third-party challenges to issued patents. Other attorneys could appear if granted permission in a specific proceeding, and were limited to acting as backup counsel. To expand these opportunities, the Office proposed giving parties the option to designate non-registered practitioners whom the PTAB has recognised on a pro hac vice basis as lead counsel, allowing parties to proceed without backup counsel upon a showing of good cause, and establishing a streamlined alternative procedure for pro hac vice admission available when counsel was previously recognised pro hac vice in a proceeding. 

On October 9, 2024, the USPTO issued a final rule12 to amend the rules to allow parties to proceed without back-up counsel upon a showing of good cause, and to establish a simplified and expedited alternative procedure by which parties can request that a non-registered attorney be recognised pro hac vice. However, based on input received from the public13, the USPTO decided NOT to permit non-registered attorneys to appear as lead counsel, and instead proposed a pilot project under which non-registered attorneys who are recognised pro hac vice would be permitted, in certain circumstances, to appear as lead counsel14. The final rule became effective on November 12.

FICPI's view and involvement

FICPI is pleased that the USPTO continues to maintain high standards for practicing before the examining corps and the PTAB, and continues to value and encourage the specialised backgrounds required to be a competent and successful patent practitioner.

FICPI itself has been making great strides to increase diversity of its membership and representation of more diverse individuals on its committees and senior leadership. In the past few years in particular, this has been driven by FICPI’s DEIA Committee, and through the Presidency of Roberto Pistolesi, who early-on declared that encouraging younger IP attorneys to join FICPI was one of his goals.

Initiatives such as the Young IP Attorney of the Year and encouraging more diversity of speakers at platforms such as the FICPI Congress and Open Forum form part of this strategy. 

Next steps Consider becoming involved with FICPI’s DEIA Committee, find out more here: https://ficpi.org/commissions/deia-committee Get involved with organising FICPI webinars and contributing your ideas for speakers from diverse backgrounds here: https://ficpi.org/commissions/webinar-committee

 

Footnotes:

  https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/remarks-uspto-director-kathi-vidal-women-ip-diversity-and-inclusion   https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/womens-entrepreneurship-series-leading-purpose-women-making-difference   https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/usptos-council-inclusive-innovation-launches-new-initiative-expedite-patent   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/18/2022-22569/expanding-admission-criteria-for-registration-to-practice-in-patent-cases-before-the-united-states   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/16/2023-10409/expanding-admission-criteria-for-registration-to-practice-in-patent-cases-before-the-united-states https://www.uspto.gov/subscription-center/2023/uspto-opens-opportunities-practice-agency-evolving-admissions-criteria  https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/OED_GRB.pdf   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/16/2023-10410/changes-to-the-representation-of-others-in-design-patent-matters-before-the-united-states-patent-and   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/16/2023-25234/representation-of-others-in-design-patent-matters-before-the-united-states-patent-and-trademark   ibid   https://www.uspto.gov/subscription-center/2024/expanding-opportunities-practice-ptab   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/10/10/2024-23319/expanding-opportunities-to-appear-before-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board   Presumably including comments made by FICPI during a meeting with USPTO officials on April 17, 2024.   https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/10/10/2024-23319/expanding-opportunities-to-appear-before-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board

Image: posed by models

Read more about USPTO expands inclusivity while maintaining high standards for practiceLog in or register to post comments

Diversity, equality, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) was the topic of Workshop 4 at the FICPI World Congress 2022 in Cannes in September 2022.
 

The workshop was led by Dr Emily Dodgson of Abel + Imray LLP in the UK with Dr MaryAnne Armstrong and began with a brief presentation on the FICPI DEIA committee co-chaired by Dr Sharon Crane and Elia Sugrañes.   

The DEIA committee aims to support FICPI's ambitions to be a diverse and inclusive organisation, and to assist FICPI members in making their own firms more diverse and inclusive. The aim of the workshop was to understand views and experiences in connection with DEIA within the FICPI membership.   

Diversity and inclusion must go together

Participants discussed why DEIA was of interest to them and its relevance in the IP industry. 

Is it important not only to be diverse (i.e. have people with different characteristics working together) but to operate inclusively so that everyone (whatever their characteristics) feels part of and are treated as belonging to the group?

It is the combination of both diversity and inclusion that leads to equality and delivers the benefits of having a more diverse organisation.     

 

Affinity bias

During the workshop, attendees were invited to try an exercise known as the circle of trust.

In this exercise, participants write down a list of the initials of the 6-10 people who they trust the most (excluding family members). 

The facilitator reads out some characteristics (e.g. gender, nationality, age (roughly), race, native language, accent, educational background, social class, religion, etc.) and participants place a tick beside those people on their list who are similar in respect of that characteristics to themselves.

For example, male participants will place a tick beside all men on their list, white participants will place a tick beside all white individuals on their list.  Often participants find that many of their trusted people have several of the same characteristics as themselves. 

This reflects the phenomenon of affinity bias, whereby people extend not only greater trust, but also greater positive regard, cooperation, and empathy to people like themselves. 

 

How would your firm score in the affinity bias test?

The workshop then discussed how this affinity bias may manifest in the workplace, for example leading to a tendency for managers to hire, promote, or otherwise value more highly those who have attributes or qualities in common with their own. 

This tendency is illustrated by a study discussed in the recent IPO paper “The Myth of the meritocracy in law firms and corporate legal departments” (IPO members only), which showed partners in a law firm gave a legal memo significantly lower ratings when they believed it was written by a black associate. The same memo, with the same errors, was viewed as more meritorious work when seen as coming from a white associate. 

Participants were invited to consider how their own firm and FICPI would perform against a modified version of the checklist produced by the UK organisation IP Inclusive. 

Points on that list include: 
 

Have you signed up to local diversity organisations? Do you have a DEIA officer? Do you have a DEIA policy? Do you have a diversity committee or something similar?  Do you provide unconscious bias training? If so, to all staff or only some? Do you have your own support groups or mentoring schemes forparticular groups who might be disadvantaged in the workplace?  Does your organisation take active steps to remove bias from its processes and systems? Does your firm get involved in DEIA events and campaigns? Do you collect DEIA data? Do you have a mental health at work policy?  

The attendees also shared examples of best practice they had come across in their own and other firms to encourage diversity and inclusivity. 

This included initiatives such as mentoring schemes, reviewing recruitment processes to remove barriers and encourage applications from underrepresented groups, inviting staff from underrepresented groups to talk about their experiences, increased flexibility in terms of work patterns (part time working, flexitime, remote working) and menopause education.

The workshop outputs will inform the work of the FICPI DEIA Committee going forwards.

 

FICPI’s view and involvement

FICPI is the only organisation exclusively for independent IP attorneys, bringing practitioners from around the world together to connect, share knowledge and grow, through occasions such as the FICPI World Congress, as well as events such as the Open Forum and regular FICPI webinars. IP attorney members can get involved with FICPI work to promote common solutions and advocacy for private practice through FICPI Commissions and Committees.

 

Next steps Consider becoming involved with FICPI’s DEIA Committee FICPI members and Congress attendees may access presentations and reports from the FICPI Congress 2022 in Cannes by clicking here. Workshop 4, on the topic of DEIA, was held on 27 September. Find out more about the 21st FICPI Open Forum, being held in October 2023

 

Read more about Considering affinity bias when developing DEIA initiativesLog in or register to post comments

In Latin America in general, the issue of diversity and inclusion remains poorly addressed in some sectors, and addressing it implies breaking many taboos that persist within our society.

At ASIPI, the Inter-American Association of Intellectual Property, we took the decision to express our opinions on these matters and to generate contributions, and above all, to actively disseminate and promote mutual respect and inclusion.

In an effort to raise awareness of the importance of Diversity and Inclusion among ASIPI members, the Diversity and Inclusion Committee developed an ongoing social media campaign in 2022 and 2023, to recognise and celebrate global initiatives related to these matters. We also organised webinars and panels to discuss these topics at the association's annual events.

Furthermore, in 2022, the Committee launched an event named “Come as you are” during ASIPI’s Annual Congress in Colombia. This event encouraged attendees to come dressed in something unique that identified them, leaving everyone free to express their individualities in a safe and unprejudiced environment. We wanted to celebrate the differences that enrich us.

The event was very well received and for the first time an Intellectual Property Association included an official celebration on the issue of Diversity and Inclusion in its programme, emphasising ASIPI’s commitment to DEI. In 2023, we further developed the event and called it “WE… RESPECT” - to raise awareness of the importance and right to be respectful and to be respected within the Association. The committee wanted to highlight that “our limits end where another person’s limits start”. 

On this occasion, the Committee compiled responses from various members of the Association, including the executive committee, about what respect means to each of them. These responses were shared on social media, so that the theme of respect was reflected on and understood by members.

Breaking paradigms, during the event ASIPI surprised everyone with the show “El Sirenito”, one of the best drag queen shows in Latin America. Once again, the event was a success and broke barriers for many of ASIPI’s members, including those who identified themselves or had some affinity with the LGBTQ+ community. We received comments like “this was truly one of the best and most compassionate experiences I've ever encountered at an IP conference”, and “I’ve never felt more included and seen at an IP conference than I do now”.

This groundbreaking initiative within our association achieved significant success. It struck a chord with numerous members who have encountered various forms of discrimination, those who have close ties to the LGBT community, and individuals who have directly experienced or witnessed such discrimination within their families.

We know there is still much work to do in this area, but we are proud of our committee’s work and passion to make a difference and are driven to continue to create a positive impact in our region for our profession.

Looking ahead to the coming year, we plan to continue to foster and promote the significance of mutual respect, acceptance, non-discrimination, and freedom through ASIPI and our Diversity and Inclusion Committee.

Read more about ASIPI: respect for diversity and inclusionLog in or register to post comments

On 20 January 2025, the newly inaugurated US President signed an Executive Order entitled “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing” that mandated that each government agency:

terminate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all DEI, DEIA, and 'environmental justice' offices and positions (including but not limited to 'Chief Diversity Officer' positions); all 'equity action plans,' 'equity' actions, initiatives, or programs, 'equity-related' grants or contracts; and all DEI or DEIA performance requirements for employees, contractors, or grantees.1

The new administration’s recent decision to shut down all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives is forcing federal agencies, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to restructure, or even eliminate DEI programmes, or at the very least, to recast their descriptions on the agencies’ websites. 

  Recent USPTO DEIA initiatives

In recent years, the USPTO has developed and fostered various DEI initiatives designed to increase access to the innovation ecosystem among underrepresented groups such as women and minorities. Programmes like the USPTO’s Council for Inclusive Innovation, the Women’s Entrepreneurship Initiative, Black Innovation and Entrepreneurship program and outreach efforts to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) aimed to increase awareness, education and accessibility to patenting resources, as well as to guide its participants through the process of idea, to intellectual property, to market.

In an interview with Law360, Kathi Vidal, who resigned in December 2024 from her position as Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, remarked that during her tenure at the USPTO, the agency:

created a more energized and innovative workforce and hired and retained the best talent while increasing productivity and improving quality…focused on lifting and supporting all employees — not through quotas or preferential treatment, but by de-biasing systems and providing opportunity for all…[and that] work was bipartisan and supported the business and economic imperative of improving the timeliness and quality of [the agency’s] work, reducing patent and trademark pendency, and issuing robust and reliable IP protection.2

  New direction for the Department of Commerce and USPTO?

Howard Lutnick, prior to his nomination as Secretary of Commerce in the new administration, the agency under which the USPTO falls, confirmed he espoused DEI initiatives as fundamental to gaining a broad perspective3. However, these comments now appear at odds with the administration’s mandate to end government DEI programmes. It remains to be seen how the USPTO will artfully balance this mandate with its primary goal of rewarding and fostering innovation.

Does “America First” really foster US innovation?

The new administration is driven by its “America First Policy” to “champion core American interests and always put America and American citizens first”4.   Integral to this policy is a directive to “assess the status of United States intellectual property rights such as patents, copyrights, and trademarks” conferred to non-US inventors, and to “make recommendations to ensure reciprocal and balanced treatment of intellectual property rights...”5.  

While enhancing the US intellectual property system will certainly benefit US innovation (e.g. the PREVAIL ACT (Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership); PERA (Patent Eligibility Restoration Act); RESTORE Patent Rights Act (Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive Patent Rights Act of 2024), doing so to the disadvantage of foreign applicants could be considered inconsistent with the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, which the US joined in 1887:

Article 2 National Treatment for Nationals of Countries of the Union
(1) Nationals of any country of the Union shall, as regards the protection of industrial property, enjoy in all the other countries of the Union the advantages that their respective laws now grant, or may hereafter grant, to nationals; all without prejudice to the rights specially provided for by this Convention. Consequently, they shall have the same protection as the latter, and the same legal remedy against any infringement of their rights, provided that the conditions and formalities imposed upon nationals are complied with.
(2) However, no requirement as to domicile or establishment in the country where protection is claimed may be imposed upon nationals of countries of the Union for the enjoyment of any industrial property rights.
(3) The provisions of the laws of each of the countries of the Union relating to judicial and administrative procedure and to jurisdiction, and to the designation of an address for service or the appointment of an agent, which may be required by the laws on industrial property are expressly reserved.

Moreover, dissuading foreign applicants from seeking intellectual property protection in the US could likewise dissuade investment in US business, and potentially restrict the availability within the US of technologies patented outside the US.  In this regard, legislative measures such as PERA are critical to encouraging the pursuit of IP protection in the US, as judicial-made policy has created obstacles to IP protection in critical areas such as computer-related inventions, artificial intelligence and medical diagnostics, where such obstacles do not exist outside the US.

Restricting Diversity, Equity and Inclusion cannot foster innovation

Without providing inclusive access to the innovation ecosphere, we risk ignoring the creativity that arises from diverse perspectives. Such diverse perspectives lead to change – and change is the essence of invention and innovation.  If the US wants to compete as a world leader in innovation, it must not stifle the diversity of thought that arises from the equitable inclusion of all voices.

FICPI's view and involvement

FICPI itself has been making great strides to increase diversity of its membership and representation of more diverse individuals on its committees and senior leadership. FICPI endeavours to ensure that women are equitably represented in FICPI working groups, governance and as speakers at FICPI conferences. 

In the past few years in particular, this has been driven by FICPI’s DEIA Committee, and through the Presidency of Roberto Pistolesi, who early-on declared that encouraging younger IP attorneys to join FICPI was one of his goals.

Initiatives such as the Young IP Attorney of the Year and encouraging more diversity of speakers at platforms such as the FICPI Congress and Open Forum form part of this strategy. 

Next steps Consider becoming involved with FICPI’s DEIA Committee, find out more here: https://ficpi.org/commissions/deia-committee Get involved with organising FICPI webinars and contributing your ideas for speakers from diverse backgrounds here: https://ficpi.org/commissions/webinar-committee

References:

1 Executive Order 14151.
2 https://www.law360.com/articles/2291130.
3 https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/trump-s-commerce-secretary-pick-publicly-affirmed-dei-at-us-companies-before-nomination/ar-AA1yRw7e
4 America First Policy Directive to the Secretary of State, Executive Order 14150 dated January 20, 2025
5 America First Trade Policy, Presidential Memorandum dated January 20, 2025, specifically referring to rights conferred to those in the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

Read more about The end of DEI initiatives in the US - the impact on the USPTO and US innovationLog in or register to post comments