Best year ever, concentration, and the future

It is time for EPO statistics to come out again, and for once (even without PR spin and puff) they include the slightest indication that bad times may be behind us.

Best year ever

The number of applications was the highest ever - but don't get too excited yet.

Years in which the number of applications was not the highest ever were:-

• 1991-95 [when panic led to a drastic lowering of fees  (yes, prices can go down as well as up)], 
• 2002 [when dot-com dot-bombed], 
• 2009, 
• 2011-2013.

Why not 2010? Well that was the spike in divisional applications when things went mad for a while.

In other words "best year ever" claims should be expected in a time of growth . What had impressed until recently was stagnation in applications.

Similarly grant numbers have gone up. Grants are not keeping pace with applications however.

So we have a slight kick in the number of applications, and in recent years an increase in the number of grants (when demand is static increased efficiency should translate as more grants). What happened to grants in 2000? Strikes.

The Early Certainty from Search program may have something to do with the high grant numbers. This coming year may show whether re-organising Examiner desks has resulted in higher efficiency to grant (or refusal).

Concentration

I commented in 2014 on how much of the Netherlands’ European patent applications were represented by Philips.

This year Philips account for nearly 34% of the Netherlands patent applications. Looking outside the Netherlands this year's statistics show how concentrated applications are from some countries:-

Country/ region	Total European/ Euro-PCT applications	Top 1 applicant in region		Top 2 applicants in region
		Applications	% of total	Applications	% of total
EPC	76097	2,402	3.2%	4,296	5.6%
US	46292	1,869	4.0%	3,574	7.7%
JP	21426	1,034	4.8%	1,909	8.9%
KR	6411	2,366	36.9%	4,457	69.5%
CN	4680	1,953	41.7%	2,823	60.3%

One would expect the EPC states to be less concentrated, as SMEs file predominantly in their own region rather than abroad.

What is interesting is how much of Korean and Chinese filings depend on so few companies. Korean concentration is understandable given the predominance of the chaebol, but the concentration of Chinese applicants in so few hands (and those in information and communications technology) show how little engagement Chinese industry as a whole has with the rest of the world - at present.

The future

It is still too soon to suggest that the unitary patent had any effect beyond marginal in European applications in 2015: most applicants do not look that far ahead.

However, unless Brexit spoils everything, there is a reasonable expectation that applications could soar over the next 2-3 years.