Evaluations at the EC (the IP context) Kamil Kiljański Geneva, 6 October 2011

Page  2  Policy assessment over the legislative cycle.  Methodology and institutional set-up.  Experience in IP impact assessments and evaluations. Outline

Page  3 The Policy Cycle Identify and measure problems Identify possible solutions (policy options) Measure their impact Monitor results and assess progress Set objectives Implementation Analyse actual vs. expected Adoption Identify indicators to monitor progress Choose the “best” solution*

Page  4 Impact Assessment: key analytical steps Problem definition Objectives Policy options Impact analysis Comparison of options Monitoring and evaluation N° 1: Make trade-offs apparent N° 1: Make trade-offs apparent N° 3: Not just “common sense”, but evidence! N° 3: Not just “common sense”, but evidence! N° 4 Being transparent N° 4 Being transparent N° 2: Not just ticking off boxes, but “rule of reason” N° 2: Not just ticking off boxes, but “rule of reason”

Page  5  Centralised review: Impact Assessment Board (Secretary General).  Decentralised ‘production’ (individual Directorates General). –Policy unit (evidence, consultation and drafting). –Economic analysis unit (fresh pair of eyes).  Transparency: roadmaps, joint publication of IA and IAB opinion.  The broader context (European Parliament). The institutional set-up.

Page  6  More frequent for spending programmes than legislation.  The evaluation ‘mandate’. –Resources and timing. –Scope. –Choice of the counterfactual (reference scenario). –Stakeholder consultation and data gathering. –Outsourcing.  The evaluation criteria: –Effectiveness (indicators) and efficiency (least cost?). –Distributional effects (and unintended consequences). –Consistency with other related initiatives. Evaluations (ex post assessment).

Page  IA Directive amending Directive 98/71/EC on the legal protection of designs 2005 IA accompanying the decision on accession to Hague agreement on Designs IA on copyright in the online music sector 2008 IA on Directive 2006/116 on term of protection of copyright and related rights 2009 IA on the fees payable to the OHIM and on the Community trade mark 2010 IA on the translation arrangements for the EU patent 2011 IA on enhanced cooperation in the creation of unitary patent protection Study on the overall functioning of the trademark system in Europe IA on the cross-border access to orphan works IA on European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy IP evaluation so far (completed).

Page  8 Trademark study (Max-Planck Institute, 2011)  Hybrid approach: –Interviews with national patent offices and user organisations. –User survey (by Allensbach, ~1500 respondents). –Econometric analysis (INNO-Tec).  Key issues: –Relationship between CTM and national systems (‘coexistence principle’). –Cooperation between OHIM and national offices. –Further harmonisation of trademark procedures. –‘Genuine use’. –Enforcement activities. –Usage of fees.

Page  9  IA on Collective Rights Management  IA on the revision of the Community Trade Mark (OHIM) Regulation and of the Directive approximating national trade mark laws  Report on the resale rights directive 2001/84/CE  Study on geographical indications  IA on the review of the Directive on the enforcement of IPR IP evaluations in the pipeline.