Industry Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2012

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Okay. Great.

Finally, you mentioned a couple of times that there are opportunities to strengthen the IP regime in Canada. Perhaps you could use your remaining time to highlight or reinforce what those opportunities are.

[Morgan Elliott]

I know that there are some administrative things in CIPO that Robert would like to address.

[Robert Guay]

We do have some suggestions. We didn't intend to cover them today, but we do have some general notions that we believe in.

One of them, which I spoke about earlier, is this notion of having an opportunity to question the validity of the patent after it issues. That's really important to us. I think it's one of the ways you can ensure that the system is a little more balanced.

That's one example. Another example is patent expertise. We've seen in other jurisdictions that patent expertise really makes a big difference, and that's throughout the entire chain. That's not just in the judiciary; it's also at CIPO.

I know that CIPO has put a lot of effort into trying to strengthen their expertise in terms of what they do and how they do it, but as in many other things, I think, there's always room for improvement. Their searching ability, for example, is something that is important to companies like RIM, in that the better the job they do, the higher the quality of the patent examination, so expertise is really key. To the extent that we can work towards strengthening that throughout the entire chain, I think it's something to go after.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you.

Do I have any time left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

You have one minute.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Dr. Meulien, you mentioned in your presentation some examples of sharing risks and reducing costs through your collaboration with, I believe, university researchers.

Could you just explain, in that scenario, how you sort out the ownership of IP?

[Dr. Pierre Meulien]

It goes a little bit back to what I was talking about in terms of the precompetitive space. You're sharing knowledge across a number of groups. They can be from the private sector or from the public sector.

You're sharing it, so everybody agrees from the outset that they will not file any intellectual property on the common knowledge resource that's being created in that project. They sign on to that. Then, after that precompetitive space, each individual is allowed to patent what they like when they generate their own research findings within a company or whatever.

You're sharing risk early on, but you're generating much more data than you would on a one-on-one basis. Then, later on down the value chain, you're protecting, if you're a company, what you'd like to actually commercialize.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Braid.

Now we go on to Madame LeBlanc for five minutes.

[Hélène LeBlanc, NDP, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

I am going to share my time with Mr. Harris.

Ms. Nolet and Mr. Hamill, earlier we talked about a tax credit reduction—with the rate dropping from 20% to 15%—and changes to eligible capital expenditures.

What impact will that new measure, which is included in the omnibus budget bill, have on Canada's pharmaceutical industry? I'm talking about the SR&ED program.

[Declan Hamill]

As I said earlier, it really depends on the company. We have over 50 companies, and many of them have different business models. Some companies are affected more than others.

I would say overall that it's not a good thing. It's a net minus. That said, it is something that is a little bit different from the issue that Brigitte was speaking about earlier, which is how R and D is actually counted in Canada. That's a 1987 SR and ED definition in the PMPRB's regulations, and 1987 was a long time ago. I graduated from high school in 1987. My hair was a bit different back then. I weighed a lot less.

We are really looking for the government to undertake a serious re-examination of that definition, because increasingly, as our business model goes on, less and less of what we actually do in the country is included, and that's problematic for us.

[Hélène LeBlanc, NDP, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Harris, go ahead.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Merci.

Going back to RIM, I can certainly forgive you for that advertisement. I have a friend who works for RIM; I've seen one of the new phones, and it's very exciting, but I won't say what I saw because I'm not going to steal your thunder.

[An hon. member]

You're not supposed to have seen it.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

That's why I'm not saying who showed me.

I want to ask what your thoughts are with respect to the ability to patent software and business methods. It is something that has come up a few times in this committee. Then perhaps in the larger sense, to the other witnesses as well, I'd like to know what your thoughts would be on Canada creating an IP office, and possibly about having an online database of patents and whether this would be helpful to the system.

I'll start with RIM.

[Robert Guay]

Perhaps I can speak to your questions.

In terms of the ability to patent software and the ability to patent business methods, I think every country has its own set of rules when it comes to patent eligibility. Canada is no different. There have been some rules that have been put in place.

As far as RIM is concerned, a lot of what we do is built into the software. We also build tangible things that take the form of hardware, perhaps, but half of what we do is in the software. This expression that people use of patenting software and whether that is a good thing or a bad thing, in my view, is a dangerous generalization of what software can and could be. You really have to go to the particulars of each jurisdiction to see whether the system goes too far in allowing applicants to patent software-related inventions.

In the case of RIM, we're always on the lookout to protect the innovations we come up with. As far as we're concerned, the Canadian system is good in that regard, and we don't have much to say about it.

In terms of creating a database, which I thought was your other question, I believe CIPO already has a database of patents that can be consulted. Certainly it could use some improvements to make it easier to see what's in that database, to consult it and to do perhaps more detailed searches. That would certainly help. It would also help if CIPO brought their database infrastructure up to par with what is readily available from other patent offices around the world.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It could be a good app, too.

Mr. Hamill, would you briefly comment?

[Declan Hamill]

Briefly, from our perspective there could be improvements made at CIPO. They do have a database, as Robert said, already. I think in terms of their qualitative performance—and this is anecdotal, so take it for what it is—I've heard that they are improving and they are trying to make changes, and I think they're doing fairly well.

The other issue you mentioned was the IP office idea. I've heard that a few times. I know that the U.S. has a sort of IP czar, and I'm not sure if that's what you were referring to.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It was, more or less, but I think my time has run out.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

The time is pretty well over now, Mr. Hamill.

[Declan Hamill]

I'll just finish by asking, “To what end?” I think that's the question we'd have to ask. Is it really a necessary thing, or would it simply complicate matters? I don't know.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I assume all of this could be shared with the committee after today.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

That's right.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

It would be like closing remarks.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

That's right. You can certainly have any kind of written submissions and send them to the clerk. That would be fine.

Go ahead, Mr. Carmichael, for five minutes.