370/20
RECEN
VERIN REGISTRY
FROM:
Jill Barrett
05 JAN 1994
16
Assistant Legal Adviser K174 270 3381
D
INDEX
Dr Wyver HKD
PA
REGISTRY Action Taken
DATE:
10 December 1993
They Thought- to it was only for
period uplo
1997 it would not be
worth if.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND LOCALISATION OF HONG KONG'S PATENT
SYSTEM
1. I refer to Hong Kong's draft consultation paper on localisation of Hong Kong's patent system which came under cover of Mrs Chok's letter of 1 December.
2.
I have no comments of substance to make on this paper. I do not have sufficient specialised knowledge of patent law or, even more importantly, the administration of a system of patent protection, to be able to comment on the domestic aspects of the proposal as set out in paras 4-19. It is important that the experts in the DTI and Patent Office look at it carefully, particularly as a number of novel elements are proposed, eg the introduction of a petty patent system.
3. As far as the two relevant international conventions are concerned, according to para 22, the proposed patent system would enable Hong Kong to continue to comply with the requirements of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. I have not identified any obvious inconsistencies between the proposed new system and our obligations under the Paris Convention. However, I would like to see the comments of the DTI experts on this point, as well as their more general observations on the proposals, before concluding that there is no problem.
4.
I
Para 28 proposes that the question of the Patent Cooperation Treaty be the subject of separate consultations. refer to my minute of 30 July to Mr Bunten on this subject, in which I raised a number of queries about HKG's proposals. I see from Ms Bouch's letter of 6 December to Mrs Sullivan that
I also you are still waiting for the Patent Office's comments. suggested in para 7 of my minute that Ms Bouch might like to obtain from the WIPO Legal Division further particulars of their view that it would not be advisable for Hong Kong to have a separate receiving office. Would you please check with Ms Bouch whether there has been any action on this front. Although HKG are proposing to consult the Chinese separately on this aspect, we ought to make our views known to HKG as soon as possible in case they affect the details of the localisation proposals. If the Patent Office are not in a position to reply yet, you could perhaps send some tentative comments on the basis of my minute of 30 July.
Till Bamb
Jill Barrett