UNDER THE MICROSCOPE:The inventions of young Irish innovators are being copied - and they can't afford to contest the matter in court, writes WILLIAM REVILLE.
WE HEAR a lot these days about the necessity to build a "knowledge-based economy" in Ireland to replace our traditional manufacturing economy which cannot keep us much longer in the economic style to which we have grown accustomed. This is official Government policy and seems to be the only way to secure our economic future. I agree with this analysis, but if this policy is to be successful we must ensure that new products invented and developed by Irish ingenuity are properly protected so that they cannot be copied, marketed and sold with impunity by powerful foreign companies.
Government policy is to enhance education at all levels, but particularly science, engineering and technology at graduate and postgraduate levels. The idea is that the bright new graduates will then invent, develop and manufacture new Irish products, and also attract multinational companies to locate R&D in Ireland. But for this plan to work, Irish inventions must be patented and infringements of patents by powerful overseas companies must be vigorously contested in court. Otherwise the fruits of Irish ingenuity will be stolen by well-established foreign companies and no benefits will accrue to the Irish economy. It appears that protection of Irish patents in the international arena is a weak point in our current strategy.
A case in point recently came to my attention. A bright young Irish graduate in industrial design engineering, and the winner of several international awards, designed two new products to prevent leg injury in horses. Leg injury plagues the horse industry. Some 75 per cent of race and jump horses are affected and 20 per cent of racehorses retire prematurely due to leg injury. The two new products were patented in 2002 and both the UK and European Patent Offices granted patents that ensure no other manufacturer can legally market or sell this technology in their jurisdictions. The two products became very popular with horse trainers throughout Europe.
The subject of my story formed an Irish company and launched the products internationally in 2004. This was the culmination of nine years hard and unpaid work to bring these products from concept to market, going through the stages of research, design, testing, patenting, setting up production, sales and marketing. The design of these products depends on a thorough understanding of design principles, materials science, equine anatomy and leg action, and the peculiar stresses and strains imposed by racing and jumping.
Then came alleged infringement of the patents. The first two UK companies to be challenged emerged in 2005. One agreed to withdraw its products but the other continues allegedly to infringe. The legal costs of these actions came close to €50,000 between 2005 and 2007 - money that came out of the young designer's own pocket and which he cannot afford out of a start-up business.
More companies of concern to the inventor have emerged, including seven UK companies and one Italian. These numbers will continue to rise unless they are legally challenged, but the cost is prohibitive to a young private company.
The foreign companies of concern to the young inventor are well established and financially robust.
It takes a large and powerful company only a matter of months to copy and launch these products on the market. This technology as of right should only be exported from Ireland, but potential foreign copiers are able to sell more copies than the Irish company can sell of the original!
The young man in my story has been unable to obtain financial assistance from the State to fight the alleged patent infringements. But, we are shooting ourselves in the national foot if we give our international competitors the notion that they can violate Irish patents with impunity. The large manufacturing nations fully recognise the importance of the patent system in the maintenance of their economic strength and can be ruthless in protecting their national interests. I understand that the official body that governs the British equestrian trade, and which has a responsibility to protect inventors within the industry from patent infringement, allegedly ignored the infringement of the Irish patents when this was brought to their attention.
I realise that patent infringement by the powerful is a common occurrence in the business world. For example, there is the well-known example of the very expensive legal battle fought by Dyson against an alleged patent infringement by Hoover. Dyson won the case, otherwise they might have gone down the tubes.
Companies are expected to take these things on the chin. However, there is surely a case for Government assistance to native fledgling Irish companies to protect their intellectual property, at least until our knowledge-based economy is well established.
William Reville is associate professor of biochemistry and public awareness of science officer at UCC - understandingscience.ucc.ie