IP Protection Matters
IP Protection Matters is a podcast interview series examining notable issues related to the protection of and threats to intellectual property. IP Protection Matters is a project of the Center for Individual Freedom.
Wed, 11 Sept 2024
Kelly Anderson
Kelly Anderson, Executive Director of International Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center, discusses the 2024 International IP Index, the socio-economic benefits of strong intellectual property frameworks, and the need for the United States and European Union to renew their global leadership in support of strong IP protections.

Transcription

Giachino (00:05.0429 - 00:33.0630)

Welcome to IP Protection Matters. I'm your host, Renee Giachino.

Today we are joined by Kelly Anderson, the Executive Director of International Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Innovation Policy Center. We'll be talking today about the International IP Index. And before we dive into that topic, I want to ask you, Kelly, if you could tell us a little bit more about the important work being done at the Global Innovation Policy Center.

Anderson (00:34.0540 - 01:10.0150)

Absolutely. Well, thanks so much for the opportunity to be here, Renee. I'm glad to have the chance to chat with you.

So the Global Innovation Policy Center is the Intellectual Property Division of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. As you know, that's the world's largest trade association. What we do is we work both in the U.S. and in markets around the world to advance more effective intellectual property protection on behalf of all innovative and creative industries. And I'm so glad to have the chance to talk to you about the Index today, because that really underpins the good work that we do - both in the U.S. and in global markets.

Giachino (01:10.0900 - 01:42.0830)

So as I mentioned, the Chamber recently issued its annual International Intellectual Property Index. I think it's the 12th edition. And you recently wrote about it in an article titled, "Decoding Global Protection. A deep dive into the 2024 International IP Index and Trademark Trends. Well, we certainly could spend all day diving deeply into this piece and the issue. But in the interest of time, let's jump into the shallow end. And can you give us a brief overview of what the Index examines and demonstrates?

Anderson (01:43.0580 - 02:50.0809)

Yeah, absolutely. So, as you noted, we've done the Index for 12 years now. We started the Index back in 2012 with just 11 economies, across 25 different indicators. We've grown the index tremendously over the last 12 years that now benchmark the IP environment in 55 global economies, across 50 indicators that represent all forms of intellectual property industries. So we look at things like patent protection, copyright protection, trademark enforcement, things of that nature. And the goal here really was to create a data driven metric that creates an overall snapshot of what an economy's IP framework looks like.

The companies that we work with look at a range of different types of IP protection when they're considering investment decisions in global markets. And so we wanted to create a piece of research that can help examine what the intellectual property frameworks look like in some of these countries when companies are considering where to, to introduce their innovative and creative goods.

Do you want me to talk about some of the findings at a high level from, from the Index?

Giachino (02:50.0880 - 03:06.0479)

I would love that. Yeah, definitely. You know what I want to touch on as well is, of course, the position that the U.S. is in compared to some of these other 55 economies that you examined, Are we losing our position in IP protection?

Anderson (03:07.0210 - 04:18.0399)

Well, so in all 12 editions at the Index, the U.S. has ranked number one overall. I think one year they were within 1/10 of a point of the U.K. So, the U.K. nearly bested us. But we're still at the top of the rankings. But I do think the thing that we've seen at a very high level, both in the U.S. and in the EU, frankly, is that we're starting to see a step away from the U.S. and the EU's global leadership position on intellectual property policy.

I think we see different proposals coming through Congress, different regulatory proposals being put forth that really step back from the U.S.'s long-standing position supporting intellectual property policy. And that to us is very concerning. Right? I think the U.S. has been a leader and has produced the most innovative and creative goods for years. And we are worried that when we take a step back, who else will fill the void? So, it's been one of our top priorities in the Index to highlight some of the areas where we see a potential regression of intellectual property standards here in the U.S.

Giachino (04:19.0410 - 04:38.0329)

So you reference, and the Index represents this, that Saudi Arabia, which surprised me a little bit. I don't know why. But it's one of the emerging markets noted in the Index. Is it any coincidence that Saudi Arabia also has made a very conscious policy choice to invest in stronger IP protection?

Anderson (04:38.0809 - 05:27.0679)

Yes, absolutely. I think Saudi had the largest improvement in overall score this year. And that is, I would say, a pretty direct reflection of the fact that the Saudi government is very interested in attracting investment into the country. And I think they have realized that having a robust intellectual property framework in place is one way to help do that. So over the last couple of years, we've seen the Saudi government, through a relatively new Saudi IP authority which has been in place for perhaps six years or so, to take some pretty concrete steps to try to strengthen their intellectual property framework. We worked very closely with the Saudi government over the last couple of years to identify some areas where they can improve their Index score. And they're always very enthusiastic to see the results.

Giachino (05:28.0890 - 06:00.0140)

So you note in the article that you wrote that there's been a remarkable increase in the number of counterfeit products sold online. I mean, goodness sakes. You can hit Temu, Amazon, anything. You're never quite sure exactly what you're getting. And in today's global marketplace, the question that I'm curious about is, is this access to blame or what role does IP protection or the lack thereof play in this devastating statistic?

Anderson (06:01.0160 - 07:03.0609)

Yeah, I think trademark protection is key to giving consumers some certainty that the goods that they are buying are safe and legitimate. Right? And in the markets where we see trademark protection lagging behind is also where we see an increase of counterfeit goods being sold and exported around the world.

Obviously, China is number one on the list in terms of the counterfeits that are emerging from the market. I think it's something like almost 90% of counterfeits come from China or Hong Kong. And while the Chinese government has taken some steps to try to improve trademark protection - they're considering I think some different rules now that could take steps to do that - just the scale of the problem there is so significant that it's going to take quite a bit of work to really enhance the trademark framework enough to see the scale of counterfeit goods decrease significantly.

Giachino (07:04.0489 - 07:21.0109)

So, let's turn this coin over and talk about some of the economic benefits that come from a robust IP protection regime. I don't expect you to have numbers right at your fingertip. But if you do that would be ... I think it's very telling as well.

Anderson (07:21.0779 - 09:13.0859)

Yeah, absolutely. So I think one of the things that we really try to do with the Index is not just show where countries' IP frameworks stand relative to one another and what their strengths and weaknesses are, but we also want to use this report to tell a story about why it matters that governments invest in strong IP protection. Right? Because I think ultimately for countries to take steps to strengthen their patent, copyright or trademark framework, they need to know what's in it for them.

So we have a supplemental statistical annex that goes with the Index that shows the different socio-economic benefits that countries can receive if their governments make a conscious policy choice to invest in stronger IP protection. So, in that report we have very kind of high-level correlations that we demonstrate. So, for example, the countries with the most effective IP frameworks in place are 40% more attractive to foreign direct investment.

And then we also drill down into some more specific findings. In the pharmaceutical space, it talks about how countries with strong IP protection have over 10 times more clinical trial activities and over 10 times more clinical research on biologic therapies.

There's also a number of findings in the creative content space about how countries with strong copyright protection have twice the online and mobile content that countries with strong copyright protection have. And again, we really just use this to show the many benefits that countries can receive when they decide to invest in stronger IP to make the case that it's not just good for the U.S. business community that wants to come and invest in your country, but it's good for the domestic innovator and creator and general consumer as well.

Giachino (09:15.0159 - 10:09.0869)

I want to change the subject ever so slightly and focus on something that I found fascinating as I was preparing for our discussion today. I watched your appearance with the World IP Day event from last year: Women and IP, Accelerating Innovation and Creativity. And in that webinar, you told some very personal stories about your relationship with - and the impact that IP protects you and some medical innovation - that they've had on you individually. Do you mind sharing one of those stories again with us? Because I think when we think about IP protection and why does IP protection matter? I mean, oftentimes we don't always have those real-life stories, like you were able to tell. Or we don't see the connection that strong IP has in our own personal lives.

Anderson (10:10.0299 - 11:37.0460)

Yes. Absolutely. Always happy to share my story.

I have several different autoimmune diseases. And at the time I was diagnosed with two of them, they didn't have anything that was FDA approved for those medicines. So everything that we were using was off label. Now for one of them, it's a disease called Alopecia that makes your hair fall out, they have found a number of different medicines that actually work. And the thing that's cool is those medicines were originally used for rheumatoid arthritis. And now the companies are doing a bit more research to figure out what other autoimmune diseases they can be treated for.

I bring that up because we talk a lot about the importance of incremental innovation. When we are talking about IP, I think some people think incremental innovation is a bad thing. ... It extends the exclusive rights given by a patent, but to me, incremental innovation is what is delivering new treatments for medical ailments that didn't necessarily have anything before. So I joke, intellectual property is not only important to me in my professional life, but I really do believe that it underpinned the investment in the treatments that give me a pretty fabulous cut of hair now, which I did not have five years ago. So it's cool to see how that incremental innovation can really deliver benefits to patients like me.

Giachino (11:38.0500 - 12:20.0219)

And it's amazing to me. As I listen to all of the panelists, I was fascinated learning early in the program how IP rights really do impact our daily lives in so many different ways. I mean, the example was given of recipes and music, and so many different ways. If we were to go back and just, if you could highlight the focus of that year - World IP Day event was Women in IP - can you talk about that a little bit? And the impact that having a strong IP regime, the impact that maybe has on women and extends down to families as well.

Anderson (12:20.0580 - 13:53.0409)

Yeah, absolutely.

We've done a bit of work in this space. We also held an event in Geneva last year where we had the heads of five different intellectual property offices from around the world who were all female talking about the importance of intellectual property protection in each of their countries. And particularly in the developing world, I think intellectual property is a key tool to empower women to strike out on their own and to set up a business. ... And they need some certainty that whatever they are investing in is going to be protected. And intellectual property is one way to do that. I think it's equally true obviously in developed markets as well. But some of the heads of IP offices that we've worked with have a really good story to tell about how the changes that they've made when it comes to intellectual property protection have been able to help empower female consumers to lift their families out of poverty. Because they are able to strike out on their own instead of a small business or something like that. So it's incredibly powerful.

And then here in the U.S. and in developed economies, I think one of the things the Chamber would really like to see is more diverse communities investing in and knowing about the importance of intellectual property. I think patent holders in the U.S. are overwhelmingly male and college educated. We would like to see representatives of all different kinds of communities know how intellectual property can benefit them. And so that's one of the things that we strive to do in our engagement around the U.S.

Giachino (13:54.0330 - 14:13.0880)

Our guest is Kelly Anderson, Executive Director of International Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Innovation Policy Center. Kelly, I'll close out with one final question. I know that you've alluded to a lot of this. But if you would speak more directly to it, what do you believe are the biggest threats to IP protection today?

Anderson (14:14.0979 - 15:09.0419)

I think, going back to what we talked about before, this regression of IP standards in the U.S. and the EU is extremely concerning. ... If our two markets don't lead the way, I think we are going to see intellectual property standards take a significant step back everywhere else as well. We also keep a very close eye on everything that's happening in the multilateral organizations. Over the last couple of years, there was a discussion over a waiver of the trade related aspects of intellectual property rights at the WTO. That threat has subsided now that COVID-19 is a little bit more behind us, but I think we are ever vigilant to the different ways that economies may try to undermine global IP standards through the multilateral rules-based system. We'll actually be over in Geneva next week talking a little bit more about this. So that is certainly one of the threats that is top of mind for us here at the Chamber.

Giachino (15:10.0400 - 15:58.0200)

Well thank you for keeping all of this at the top of mind, for all of the work that you do at the Global Innovation Policy Center and the work of your colleagues. I've had the pleasure of chatting with some of them as well. And again, it's remarkable to me, all the work that has been done, but all the work that needs to continue to be done particularly so that we're not rolling back the clock on this IP protection that has allowed us to be a global leader when it comes to technology and medical advancement. So again, I thank you for your time - for the time that you and your colleagues have devoted and continue to devote to this issue. And I wish you safe travels and hopefully some more good news coming out of Geneva next week.

Anderson (15:58.0349 - 16:00.0640)

Let's hope. Thank you again for having me today.