10

Practical Use of Intellectual Property in Small andMedium-sized Enterprises and Venture Companies
At present, about 4.8 million small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) exist in Japan, supporting
Japan’s industrial base and playing a significant role in leading the local economy. Meanwhile, there are
growing expectations for venture companies from the viewpoint of creating new industries. In order for theseSMEs and venture companies to develop and expand based on their technology, intellectual property (IP) serves
as an essential management element. However, considering the necessary funds and human resources, it is notnecessarily easy for these companies to promote an IP strategy in all areas including IP creation, protection, andutilization.
In this study, a questionnaire survey was conducted on SMEs and venture companies to investigate andanalyze the status of their engagement in IP activities and their problems related to IP. In addition, the existingsupport measures for SMEs and venture companies provided by various support organizations were identified
and studied, while efforts on new support measures that are currently being prepared for implementation werealso investigated and examined.

Ⅰ Introduction
Today, an overwhelmingly huge proportion ofpatent applications are filed by large companies.
However, patents are not only for large
companies. The patent system is a national
system that protects the mainstay technology ofsmall and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) andventure companies, which do not have as muchland or funds as large companies, but havetechnology.
This study group conducted an interview
survey and a questionnaire survey on relevant
companies and institutions in order to investigate
and review the problems concerning usage ofintellectual property (IP) in SMEs and venturecompanies for (i) overall IP management and forthe three phases (ii) IP creation, (iii) IP
protection, and (iv) IP usage.
In addition, the measures and efforts ofinstitutions and organizations for supporting the
IP management and IP utilization of SMEs andventure companies were studied. Specifically, thestudy was made on: (i) IP management support
using IP experts; (ii) IP management andutilization using IP trust and IP associations; (iii)
support measures related to IP litigation; and (iv)methods of utilizing IP overseas.

Ⅱ Outline of the Questionnaire
Survey on Engagement in IP
Activities
A questionnaire survey was conducted on
7,014 companies randomly selected from SMEs
that have filed industrial property rightapplications such as those for patent or trademark
over the past three years and SMEs in Ota City of
IIP Bulletin 2005

Tokyo and Higashi-Osaka City of Osaka, which
are places where many companies are said tohave proprietary technical capabilities, based on
open databases.
The respondents showed a high degree ofinterest in IP with 84.3 percent answering “veryinterested” and “interested.” The highest
percentage of respondents answered the “selfutilization type” as their current model and future
direction, while a large proportion of respondents
forecasted that future IP strategy would bedirected toward the “IP commercialization(licensing) type.”
About 40 percent of the companies had
employees in charge of IP, while many small
companies did not have such personnel. Most of
the employees in charge of IP (80.2 percent) were“concurrently holding another post.” The average
number of such staff members was two in thecase of dedicated employees, one or two in thecase of employees currently holding another post,
and one in the case of temporary employees.
The most frequently used external experts
were “patent attorneys,” followed by “attorneys
at law.” These experts were generally“contracted only when necessary,” but in half ofthe cases, the “patent attorney” was “contracted
as an advisor of the company.” The service mostsought from external experts was “IP application
management” at 49.6 percent.
The most mentioned problems related to IP
management were “the low level of recognition
and interest within the company” (36.8 percent)and “lack of funds and human resources foracquiring IP and dealing with IP infringement”(35.1 percent).
The particularly frequently mentioned
problem in the IP creation phase was “lack of● 70 ●

human resources and funds for IP creation, suchas R&D” at 52.7 percent.
As for the main purpose of filing IP
applications and acquiring IP rights, a large
proportion of respondents mentioned defensive
purposes with 80 percent responding “to preventthe products and services from being imitated bycompetitors.” Many respondents also mentioned“advantageous for sales activities (higher
customer confidence, etc.)” (60 percent). The
most mentioned problem was “lack of funds,”
followed by “difficulty of decision-making,”“being unable to acquire IP rights strategically,”and “lack of human resources.”The
relatively
frequently
mentioned
problems related to IP transfer/licensing in the IP
utilization phase were “difficulty of assessing IP
and technology values” at 27.1 percent and “lowin-house awareness of IP transfer/licensing” at
22.2 percent. In the case of finding that aJapanese IP right has been infringed, aparticularly high proportion of the companies said
they “consult a patent attorney or an attorney atlaw” (69.7 percent), followed by a smaller
proportion that “warn the infringing party” (25.0
percent).
The reasons mentioned for “hardly taking
anymeasures”
included“difficultyofinvestigating infringement,” “do not know how todeal with infringement,” and “as a result ofconsidering the cost-effectiveness.” A very highproportion of respondents (81.7 percent)mentioned “consultation with a patent attorney oran attorney at law” as a measure to be taken
when being accused of infringement, followed by“confirm the presence and content of the rightclaimed by the opponent” at 33.3 percent.
The most mentioned request for support
from the government or public support
institutions were “upgrading of preferential
measures (tax, subsidy, etc.) for R&D-oriented
companies” (63.8 percent) for the IP creation
phase. A large proportion of respondents
mentioned financial support also for the IP
protection phase, such as “expansion of the
reduction/exemption measures concerning IP
acquisition costs” (62.0 percent) and “loan/aid
systems for IP acquisition costs” (52.4 percent).
For the IP utilization phase, there were growing
expectations for “holding seminars on IP
utilization” (39.8 percent), “offering more
information on assessment of IP values andcontract-related legal affairs” (38.1 percent), and“enhancementofthemarketfunction(improvement of the IP transaction market) suchas matching between IP providers and IP users”(35.1 percent).
The most mentioned support measuresdemanded upon being infringed or held
accountable for infringement were “an increase of

consultation services concerning IP disputes”(48.3 percent) and “infringement investigation
support by a public institution” (41.9 percent),
followed by “measures for reducing SMEs’
litigation costs” and “systems for low-cost andquick conciliation or arbitration.” This indicatesthat there are high expectations for consultation
services, investigation and arbitration services
related to infringement, and financial support.
The most mentioned problem in using apublic support institution or an external expert
was “the unclearness of the support systems
provided by the government or support
institutions” at 50 percent, indicating that the
support systems are not fully understood bycompanies. Following this, 20 percent of thecompanies mentioned a financial problem that“the expert fee is expensive.”

Ⅲ IP-related
Problems
FacingSMEs and Venture Companies
One of the problems in overall IP
management is the problem of cost. The mostburdensome costs include the cost of strategicallyacquiring IP rights such as patents (filing multiple
applications) or acquiring foreign IP rights(translation), as well as the cost for obtaining theinfringing product and investigating theinfringement and the cost for litigation when
exercising IP rights.
In addition, lack of IP strategies, such as notincluding IP rights in the management strategy,
not acquiring IP rights in consideration of theiruse, and not acquiring IP rights strategically, wasalso indicated as a problem. In the interviews
and the study group meetings, the lack ofcontracts was also pointed out as a fundamental
problem.
One of the problems in the IP creation phase
was a lack of human resources and funds fortechnological development. Thus, financial
support measures seem to be considered
important for the IP creation phase.
For the IP protection phase, many
respondents mentioned “lack of funds foracquiring IP rights” and “difficulty of determining
whether or not to acquire IP rights” as problems
for both Japanese and foreign IP rights. As forJapanese IP rights, many respondents alsomentioned “being unable to acquire IP rights
strategically” as a problem. As support measures,
expectations were high for financial assistance
while with regard to foreign patents, expectations
were high for offers of information and education
on foreign patents.
In the IP utilization phase, a relatively highproportion of respondents mentioned the
difficulty of assessing the IP and technology
values as a problem related to IP transfer/● 71 ●IIP Bulletin 2005

licensing. As for infringement overseas, arelatively high proportion of respondents
mentioned the difficulty of dealing withinfringement of IP rights. As support measures,
expectations were high for education on value
assessment and offers of information as well as
for enhancement of the market function andsupport for infringement investigation.

Ⅳ Existing
IP-related
SupportMeasures for SMEs and Venture
Companies
For overall IP management, prefectural SME
support centers and the Organization for Small &Medium Enterprises and Regional Innovation,
Japan (SMRJ), provide support for formulating IP
strategies, and the SMRJ also offers an expert
dispatch service. Consultation services areprovided by the Patent Offices of the Regional
Bureaus of Economy, Trade and Industry, theJapan Patent Attorneys Association (JPAA), theJapanese Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA),
the Japan Institute of Invention and Innovation(JIII), the SMRJ, and the National Center for
Industrial Property Information and Training(NCIPI). The Japan Patent Office (JPO), the JPAA,
and the JIII hold workshops and seminars as IP
awareness-raising activities.
As information-related support in the IP
creation phase, the NCIPI provides industrial
property information and examination progress
information, which are searchable by document
number or various classifications, and the JIII
offers support including free prior art search
before filing utility model applications. As
cost-related support, various subsidies andfinancial support are provided by public
institutions, such as subsidies from the Small andMedium Enterprise Agency (SMEA) as well as
loans and finance from the Japan FinanceCorporation for Small Business (JFS) and theDevelopment Bank of Japan.
As filing-related support in the IP
protection phase (filing/IP right acquisition), thebranch offices of the JIII offer PCs for common
use to be used for PC filings and an advisor
service to provide guidance on how to use thePCs and the filing procedure. Cost-related
support includes the system of reduction/
exemption of patent acquisition cost. SMEs andventure companies who qualify can be fully orhalf exempted from the fee for requestingexamination, and be fully or half exempted fromthe annual fees for the first three years or be
granted a three-year grace period for theseannual fees. As subsidies, some local
governments such as Metropolitan Tokyo, Osaka
Prefecture, and Aichi Prefecture have original
systems to provide subsidies for patent filings
IIP Bulletin 2005

cost, etc. As support for prior art search toward
strategic IP acquisition, the JPO provides aservice where the JPO, upon the applicant’s
request, entrusts the prior art search for patentapplications of SMEs and individuals before
requesting examination to a private search agency
and sends back the search results for free. In theexamination and appeal phases, the JPO provides
the accelerated examination system, theaccelerated
appealexamination
system,examination
throughinterview,
appealexamination through interview, examination
through visitation, and examination through TV
interview.
Consultation services on IP utilization areprovided by the JPAA, the JFBA, the NCIPI, andthe JIII, while a dispute settlement service isprovided by the Japan Intellectual Property
Arbitration Center (JIPAC). As a cross-sectional
support service, the JFBA in collaboration with
the JPAA, the Japan Chamber of Commerce andIndustry (JCCI), the JIII, and the Japan External
Trade Organization (JETRO) decided to provide a
joint consultation service on counterfeits andpirated copies.
As seminars on IP utilization, the NCIPI
holds seminars for promoting patent transfer/licensing and JETRO holds seminars on measuresagainst counterfeits and pirated copies.
As support measures for IP transfer/licensing, the JPO organizes patent licensing fairs
and the NCIPI provides a patent licensing
database. In terms of financial assistance,
Metropolitan Tokyo provides a subsidy for thecost required for fact-finding investigation of IP
infringement.

Ⅴ Examples and Challenges of the
Existing
IP-related
SupportMeasures for SMEs and Venture
Companies
1

Japan IT Patent Association

The Japan IP Patent Association was foundedin March 2001 under the recognition that acommon framework for IP services is required forindependent IT companies (particularly companies
specializing in software). The association consistsof a chairperson, a board of directors, members,
and a secretariat. It currently has a membershipof 25 companies and entrusts the secretariat to
WebStar Co., Ltd.
Its services include support for building IP
infrastructure, such as provision of IP educational
programs, support for discovering/acquiring IP,
support related to patent infringement warnings(including support for taking measures uponreceiving an infringement warning, checking therisk of the company’s products and technology● 72 ●

infringing competitors’ patents, and prior art
search services). It also provides IP strategy
related services, such as consulting services on
IP strategy and management as well as IP
consulting services for entering the Chinese
market.
2

Management support by comprehensive
support centers for SMEs and venturecompanies

Support centers that provide management
support to SMEs and venture companies
currently exist in more than three-hundred
locations nationwide. Meanwhile, the national
centers run by the SMRJ are located in eightplaces throughout Japan. About 750 experts areregistered with these centers. These experts
include management experts, such as SME
management
consultants,
certifiedpublicaccountants, certified tax accountants, professional
engineers, attorneys at law, and certified social
insurance and labor consultants, as well as
technology-related experts.
The consultation services are provided by
two to three experts every day at eight support
centers nationwide. In addition, experts maketrips to seminars and exhibitions in various places
to hold management consultation meetings.
Management consultation services are alsoavailable by e-mail and telephone. The
consultation services are free and can be used
several times. They are suitable for use bybusiness founders and people who have juststarted business.
The long-term expert dispatch service is aservice where a management expert or atechnical expert is dispatched to an SME or aventure company long-term, ranging from half ayear to two years. In order to use the long-term
dispatch service, it is desirable for the company
to have the capacity to take in the expert. The
long-term dispatch of an expert is a paid
service.
3Support measures by the IP Support
Center of the JPAAThe JPAA established an IP Support Centerin April 1999. One of the services provided by the
support center is dispatch of instructors andconsultants. It is a service to dispatch instructors
and consultants when an institution with a public
nature or a public benefit status holds a lecture,seminar,workshop,study
meeting,orconsultation meeting on IP.
The JPAA has permanent offices for freepatent consultation in Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka, andFukuoka. The office in Fukuoka is open once aweek, and the offices in Tokyo, Nagoya, andOsaka are open on all weekdays. The offices
receive more than 5,000 requests for consultation
every year through visits or by telephone.
In fiscal 2004, the JPAA, the Ministry ofInternal Affairs and Communications (MIC), andthe National Institute of Information andCommunications Technology (NICT) jointly held
five IP seminars for IP ventures at sevenlocations nationwide, namely, Sapporo, Niigata,Kanazawa, Nagoya, Matsuyama, Kagoshima, andNaha.
In order to prevent – as far as possible –excellent workable inventions of individuals and
SMEs from being buried due to economic reasonsand to protect such inventions, the JPAA has asystem for supporting patent filings, etc. andalthough small, it manages to provide somefinancial assistance from its tight budget.
4

Support measures by the Japan
External Trade Organization (JETRO)

Today, JETRO has a network of 76 overseas
offices, headquarters in Tokyo and Osaka, and 36
offices throughout Japan.
As a service to provide information on the IP
systems of various countries, JETRO holds
seminars on measures against counterfeits andpirated copies, inviting IP practitioners ofcompanies that are actively conducting businessin the relevant country and JETRO staff stationed
in the relevant country. In addition, it creates anddistributes country-by-country manuals on thebasics and know-how of anti-counterfeit measuresand collections of court decisions and caseexamples. JETRO also provides advice andinformation individually upon request.
Besides these, as support for facilitating IP
acquisition in the counterpart country, JETRO
supports improvement of the skills of local
IP-related persons and builds systems fordeveloping IP translators by using the ODA
budget, targeting local IP-related organizations,patent attorneys, etc. that are involved withJapanese companies.
JETRO supports individual and specificinvestigations of SMEs, which wish to gain anunderstanding of the overseas IP infringement
situation, through JETRO’s domestic network(supporting two-thirds of the investigation costbased on the SMEA budget).
In addition to the conventional consultation
services, five IP-related organizations in Japan(the JFBA, the JPAA, the JCCI, the JIII, andJETRO)
jointlylaunchedacounterfeit
consultation network with about 600 consultation
access points nationwide in December 2004.

● 73 ●IIP Bulletin 2005

5

Consultation services for measuresagainstinfringementofindustrial
property rights provided by the
Asia-Pacific Industrial Property Centerof the JIII

The Asia-Pacific Industrial Property Center(APIC) provides consultation services formeasures against infringement of industrial
property rights basically for free. The services
are composed of a consultation service and advice
by a consultant, an interview consultation service
conducted by an expert of no longer than one
hour in principle, and an offer of information
through a mini guidebook. It also holds
workshops and consultation meetings for local
SMEs around 20 times a year with thecooperation of the branch offices of the JIII. The
APIC commissions the expert consultation
services to 13 attorneys at law and 23 patent
attorneys every year.
The notable matters consulted on during
fiscal 2003 included the increase in dead copies of
replacement parts for machines and equipment inNorth East Asia, the increase in counterfeits ofthe traditional products of locations within Japan,
and the increased use of mail order routes forselling counterfeits.
When SMEs conduct business overseas, it isimportant for them to acquire patents, design
rights, trademarks, etc. at an early stage as apreventive
measureagainstcounterfeits.
However, there are differences in the IP rightsystems of various countries, so acquisition ofmultiple IP rights would be effective for avoiding
loopholes.
6

Support measures for SMEs andventure companies provide by the JFBA

Attorneys at law have knowledge on not only
IP laws, but various kinds of laws, and experiencein litigation practices. Therefore, they are capableof supporting SMEs and venture companies ineach phase of IP creation, utilization, andprotection
throughcreationofinternal
regulations or written agreements for preventing
any future disputes and carrying out appropriate
dispute settlement in anticipation of thedevelopments of the litigation.
The respective bar associations of the JFBA
have a framework for providing consultation
services on IP-related legal issues, and it ispossible for the consultant to directly undertakethe case. Some associations have a list of special
IP consultants and are able to introduce
well-suited consultants. The legal consultation
service is a paid service.
Legal aid is a system for providing legal
expert support or assisting the cost for legal

IIP Bulletin 2005

proceedings. However, legal aid is only available
to individuals with an income lower than aspecific level, and unfortunately, it is currently
not provided to SMEs and venture companies.
7

Support measures by the JapanIntellectual Property Arbitration Center

The Japan Intellectual Property Arbitration
Center (JIPAC) has a paid consultation service
system. The consultation service requires abooking, and is provided on the decided time anddate by an attorney at law and a patent attorney
or by either of the two at the JIPAC secretariat.
The main dispute settlement procedure isconciliation, and the procedure is taken inaccordance with JIPAC’s mediation procedure
regulations. Conciliation is a procedure to settle a
dispute based on an agreement between theparties, so it requires the consent of the opponent.
The settlement terms are decided by anagreement between the parties. The procedure isconfidential, so the conciliator and JIPAC’s staff
concerned also bear the duty of confidentiality.
Arbitration is a dispute settlement procedurein which the parties to the dispute agree to leave
the judgment on the dispute to an arbitrator andto follow the judgment. The arbitrator renders anarbitration judgment after examining the claims
and evidence of the parties. The arbitration
judgment has the same legal effect as a final court
judgment, and it can be enforced by gaining acourt’s decision of execution.
The Center Hantei (interpretation) service isa procedure in which JIPAC’s experts determine(interpret) whether or not a specific product orprocess falls within the scope of an industrial
property right or whether or not a specificindustrial property right is valid, upon request ofa party concerned. However, unlike arbitration,
the result is not legally binding. There isunilateral Hantei, which involves only either oneof the parties, and bilateral Hantei, which is
conducted under agreement between bothparties.
The advantages of using JIPAC include that it
takes less time and cost compared toinfringement litigation, and that the procedures
are kept confidential.
8

Activities for promoting patent transfer/licensing (improvement of the patent
licensing/technology transfer market)

The NCIPI conducts the following activities
toward promoting patent transfer/licensing inorder to support utilization of IP of SMEs,
venture companies, universities, and research
institutes.
As activities for promoting patent transfer/● 74 ●

licensing, the NCIPI dispatches patent licensing
advisors (to local governments or TLOs), holds
seminars for promoting patent transfer/licensing,and holds patent business fairs.
As activities for promoting provision and useof information on licensable patents, the NCIPI iscreating a free patent licensing database(*1) inwhich licensable patents are registered, provides
collected examples of use of licensable patents,
which incorporate ideas for new products and new
businesses, offers patent licensing support charts(patent maps) that have concretely visualized thematurity level of technology and the trend ofmeans for solving the problems for eachtechnology theme, and dispatches advisors forsupporting utilization of patent information, whoprovide consultation services on how to searchand use patent information and hold workshops.
As activities for improving the IP transaction
environment, the NCIPI provides a database on
IP transaction agents, holds international patent
licensing seminars, and provides training
programs for developing IP transaction agents invarious locations nationwide.
9

Current status
insuranceandoutlookofIP

IP-related insurance is not used very actively
in Japan or other countries such as the United
Kingdom and the United States. This is due to thefundamental difficulty of covering the risks
concerning IP infringement by insurance.
If a company makes insufficient effort toavoid infringement, it would be difficult to deeman act of IP infringement to be an accident. In
addition,recognitionofoccurrenceofinfringement itself requires a high-level of expert
knowledge, and sometimes the conclusion must
be gained through litigation. This makes it
difficult for an insurance company toindependently recognize “occurrence of damage.”This point needs to be theoretically resolved
when designing insurance against damage from IP
infringement.
Apart from this, there is also a need toaddress the following problems: the lack ofstatistical data that will enable the frequency andsize of accidents to be measured; the securing ofa large number of policyholders;(*2) and the
problem of adverse selection where only people
facing high accident risk purchase insurance
policies, and those facing less risk do notpurchase policies.

Possible countermeasures would be to havethe policies purchased by a group of companies,
such as an association consisting of individualcompanies, which are potential policyholders, orto combine the insurance system with the mutual
benefit system of a group. Furthermore, backup
by a public system would also have to beconsidered.

Ⅵ New Attempts to Support IP of
SMEs and Venture Companies
1

Regional IP strategy of Ota CityThe Ota City Industrial Promotion
Organization (OCIPO) provides IP consultation
services for Ota City and IP-related support
services for Metropolitan Tokyo. In July 2004, it
launched a comprehensive IP consultation service
for Ota City to provide a more in-depth
consultation service. While offering an accesspoint for consultation, the OCIPO aims to provide
a one-stop service through this new framework
for IP acquisition, measures against infringement,
and IP utilization regarding IP rights of SMEs in
Ota City.
Furthermore, in order to establish a regional
IP strategy, it has started to make an effort torestrain IP infringement through the use of an “IPtrust” scheme. This is a scheme to secure proper
enforcement of local SMEs’ IP by having within alocal support organization a certain level ofexecutive ability over IP infringement in addition
to the various measures for IP protection andutilization provided by the national government,
prefectural
governments,
andIP-relatedorganizations. To this end, the OCIPO uses theabilities of various related organizations bygaining cooperation from a trust bank and acomprehensive law office.
2

Efforts toward development of IP trust

With the entry into force of the amended
Trust Business Law, it became possible to accept
IP rights on trust, and it became possible toestablish an organization that manages a businessgroup’s IP in a centralized manner and undertake
IP management and IP transfer/licensing
operations of SMEs and venture companies byusing the trust system.
In IP trust, care must be taken so that theassets in trust are not only managed separately,
but the interests of the trustors do not conflict(*1) The database registered about 55,000 licensable patents (on which 15,000 were patents of universities and research
institutes) as of the end of fiscal 2003.
(*2) If the level of the premium rate is assumed to be 0.1 percent of the sum insured, at least several thousands toseveral tens of thousands of the parental population will be required in order to gain rather stable statistical data on
the loss ratio.
● 75 ●IIP Bulletin 2005

with each other. Since the risk of conflict ofinterests will increase if the IP trust business isconducted nationwide, the business should be
carried out by establishing a framework for asingle regional unit.
Even if the framework encompasses thewhole regional unit, it is not intended to manage
the IP of individual SMEs and venture companies
in a centralized manner, so the scheme is likely tobe able to meet the needs of individual companies.
Efforts should be made to have SMEs andventure companies use the necessary functions oftrust banks as if they were their own IP divisions.
If the trust scheme contributes tostrengthening the defense capability for SMEs
and venture companies, the scheme is expected
to serve as a restraint against infringement as aresult of announcing such an aspect.
3

Support measures expected from JFBA
in the future

The Central Board on Intellectual Property
Rights of the JFBA launched the following two
projects:- a project to develop specialized attorneys at law(A Project); IP law training sessions were held
three times each in Tokyo and Osaka; IP special
training hosted by the Japan Law Foundation washeld in Tokyo and Osaka; and- a project to facilitate access to attorneys at law(B Project); a nationwide network of attorneys atlaw (IP network of attorneys at law [tentativename]) will be established with the aim of
securing the quality and quantity of humanresources and improving legal access (planned tobe established in April 2005).
The Justice Support Center of Japan isplanned to be established and to start operation inline with the promulgation of the Comprehensive
Legal Support Law. At present, the Central Board
on Justice Support Center of Japan is studying thefollowing matters.
- Examination is being made on how to sort out
the requests for consultation, the scope of
consultation, and formulation of a manual for the
consultation
accesspoint,
aswell
asestablishment of an introduction system and a
database of attorneys at law who have goodknowledge on specialized fields.
- Consideration is being made on expanding thescope of cases subject to civil legal aid toalternative dispute resolution (ADR) proceedings,
reviewing the requirements for support (easing
the income level requirements), and expanding
the scope of cases subject to other types of
support.
- Since nonprofit corporations are able to entrust

operations to the support center, (*3) the support
center can conduct operations that meet new
demands in the future.

Ⅶ Conclusion
Lack of management resources such as
human resources and funds as well as lack of thenecessary information are pointed out as
impediments for SMEs and venture companies in
conducting “IP management,” and various
support measures are already being taken by
public support institutions. However, overall thelevel of recognition and the degree of use of theexisting support measures are low, so the primarytask would be to widely publicize information on
the public support measures available.
In the “IP creation” phase, companies are
expected to upgrade their invention-incentive
programs for employees and make further
collaborations and interchanges with thegovernment and universities or with otherindustries. In addition, they are expected toutilize the support measures provided by the
SMEA, the Development Bank of Japan, the Japan
Finance Corporation for Small Business, and soon.
In the “IP protection” phase, the lack ofhuman resources and funds for filing IP
applications and acquiring IP was pointed out. As
support measures, public organizations provide
consultation services and hold workshops, and as
financial assistance, there is a system to reduceor exempt the patent annual fees and patent priorsearch support for SMEs. Meanwhile, informationon the Intellectual Property Digital Library(IPDL), advisors for supporting utilization ofpatent information, and prior art search support(utility models) are available, so companies are
expected to strategically acquire IP by using
these services.
In the “IP utilization” phase, various
activities are conducted for promoting patenttransfer/licensing, such as patent licensing fairs,
patent licensing advisors, and support foreffective IP utilization (Development Bank ofJapan).
Public organizations provide access points
for consultation on IP infringement, and financial
support measures are also available, such as thesubsidy for investigation of infringement overseas
provided by the Tokyo Metropolitan GovernmentIntellectual Property Center. As new efforts,
regional IP strategies, IP trust, and theassociation system have the potential for
providing effective support measures. In addition,
mediation and arbitration by ADR are also
considered to be effective means.

(*3) Article 30(2) of the Comprehensive Legal Support Law.

IIP Bulletin 2005

● 76 ●

At present, measures including enhancementof collaboration between organizations, provisionof a one-stop service, and development of humanresources for IP management are being
considered as future comprehensive IP support
measures for SMEs and venture companies. In
order to promote the use of these support
measures, institutional improvements andawareness-raising activities should be continued
in the future. It is hoped that the achievements ofthis study group will be helpful in considering
future support measures for strategic IP
management of SMEs and venture companies.
(Senior Researcher: Shuichi Harajiri)● 77 ●IIP Bulletin 2005