中國在歐專利申請數大增

中文在上，對照英文在下

統計的結果簡單明瞭：在全球專利大戰中，歐洲發明家落在了後面。至於這個結果重不重要，則遠沒有那麼容易說清楚。

The statistics are straightforward: European inventors are falling behind in the global patent rush. What is far less clear is whether this matters.

過去30年的多數時間裏，專利申請數領先的國家無疑是日本和美國，歐洲則在第三位徘徊。但從2000年代初起，中國開始異軍突起。自2011年起的每一年，中國國內提交的專利申請，在數量上都超過全球各地任何其他知識產權局收到的申請。

For most of the past 30 years, the leaders in patent filing were without doubt Japan and the US, with Europe bumping along in third place. But from the early 2000s, China began to emerge as a significant force, and each year since 2011 more patent applications have been filed in China than in any other intellectual Property office around the globe.

起初，中國企業爭相申請的是國內專利。不過，它們很快就開始把目光投向國際市場。歐洲專利局(European Patent Office)最新數據顯示，去年歐盟(EU)收到的專利申請中，中國方面提交的在數量上居第四位，而不到十年前中國還僅處於第12位。

The initial rush was for domestically filed patents, but Chinese companies soon began looking for international markets, with the latest data from the European Patent Office (EPO) putting China fourth in the volume of patents filed in the EU last year, up from 12th less than a decade ago.

如今，歐洲收到的專利申請大部分來自歐洲以外，德國是唯一一個躋身前五的歐洲國家。總體上說，去年歐洲專利局收到的專利申請超過27.4萬份，是有史以來專利申請最多的年份。

The majority of applications for patents in Europe now come from outside the continent, with Germany the only European country to make it into the top five. In total, more than 274,000 patents were applied for at the EPO last year, an all-time high.

對Withers & Rogers專利律師丹尼斯•凱塞里斯(Denis Keseris)來說，文章開頭提到的那個結果是否重要，答案很簡單：當然重要。他說：“部分企業還沒有意識到知識產權的重要性。”他接着表示，爲確保歐洲在創新中佔據足夠的分量，“我們應該提交比現在多得多的專利申請”。

For Denis Keseris, patent attorney at Withers & Rogers, the answer to the question of whether this matters is simple: yes. “Some companies are not getting to grips with the importance of intellectual property,” he says, adding that for Europe’s share of innovation “we should be filing a lot more patents”.

儘管英國向歐洲專利局提交的專利申請數量在以三年來最快的速度增長，但在人均專利申請數方面，英國仍落在歐洲多數大型經濟體（意大利除外）的後面。

While the UK’s filings to the EPO grew at the fastest rate in three years, it still lags behind most large European economies (with the exception of Italy) in terms of filings per head of population.

代表英國特許專利律師協會(Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys)發表意見的專利律師馬特•狄克遜(Matt Dixon)稱：“英國企業必須清醒過來，認識到專利不僅僅是爲頭髮蓬亂的發明家設置的，還是日常創新戰略的關鍵環節。”如果自己的產品不享有法律保護，企業將處於任由他人抄襲的境地。

Matt Dixon, another patent attorney, speaking on behalf of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys in the UK, says: “British businesses need to wake up and realise that patents are not just for wild-haired inventors, but are a key part of everyday innovation strategy”. Without legal protection for their products, businesses are leaving themselves open to being copied.

中國在歐專利申請數的急劇增長，部分是出於趕超的需要。與其研發支出相比，中國的國際專利存量依然較少。中國企業要想爭取歐洲的業務，就必須確保其技術背後的知識產權爲自己所有、並且在歐盟具有合法性。

Part of the reason for the burgeoning number of Chinese patents in Europe is a need to catch up. China’s stock of international patents remains small compared with its research and development (R&D) spending. If Chinese companies are to compete for business in Europe, they will need to ensure that the IP underpinning their technology is owned by them and legal in the EU.

中國政府向中國企業在國內提交的專利申請提供補貼，2012年，它開始向中國企業在境外提交的專利申請提供額外的補貼。此舉反映了中國政府對這個問題的重視程度。

As an indication of the importance that the Chinese government attaches to the issue, in 2012 it began offering subsidies for foreign filings in addition to those it offers for domestic filings.

有一種常見的說法是，來自中國的許多專利申請質量較低。相關數據在一定程度上支持了這種說法。雖然在提交給歐洲專利局的專利申請中，中國佔了大約10%，但在獲批的專利中，中國的佔比卻滑落至2%。

The often repeated charge that many of the patent applications from China are of low quality has some support in the data. While China accounts for about 10 per cent of patents filed to the EPO, when it comes to patents granted the proportion drops to 2 per cent.

一個更難回答的問題是，專利申請乃至專利獲批情況是否能爲我們瞭解國家間的相對創新態勢提供什麼有意義的線索。

The more knotty question is whether patent applications — or even those that are granted — tell us anything meaningful about the comparative state of innovation between countries.

英國知識產權局(Intellectual Property Office)對這個問題給出了否定的答案。該局不僅負責英國知識產權的總體政策，還負責英國專利、商標和設計權的批准。

The UK’s Intellectual Property Office, which is responsible for overall UK intellectual property policy as well as granting UK patents, trademarks and design rights, thinks not.

該局一名發言人表示：“單純把專利數量作爲創新水平的近似，是在以一種一維化和有很大欠缺的方式理解創新活動所特有的廣度。”

“To approximate a level of innovation purely on patent numbers would be a one-dimensional, and woefully inadequate, way to understand the breadth of activity that characterises innovation,” according to a spokesman for the Office.

這名官員強調，專利本身不是保護創新的唯一途徑。他補充說，專利“提供正式的保護，但它不涵蓋未註冊的發明，比如商業祕密，也不考慮不基於發明的創新”。

Stressing that patents themselves are not the only way to protect innovations, the official added that patents “provide formal protection but do not account for unregistered inventions, for example trade secrets, nor do they consider non- invention-based innovation”.

倫敦卡斯商學院(Cass Business School)講師埃琳娜•諾韋利(Elena Novelli)的表態則更委婉一些，她說：“當然，專利申請數是一個衡量標準，但它不是終極衡量標準。”

Elena Novelli, lecturer at Cass Business School in London, is more measured, saying: “Certainly, the number of patents filed is a metric, but it is not the ultimate metric.”

至於到底有多少專利真的賺了錢，找不到什麼嚴格的統計數據予以說明。但Bloomberg Business表示，2000年代中期有效的150萬份美國專利中，只有大約3000份具備商業可行性。諾韋利博士強調，即使是那些賺錢的專利，各自的價值也可能大不相同，大量發明被證明並沒有多少價值，只有少數發明具有很高價值。

There are no hard and fast statistics on how many patents actually make money, but Bloomberg Business says that of 1.5m US patents in effect in the mid-2000s, only about 3,000 were commercially viable. Dr Novelli stressed that even among those which make money, their value can be very skewed, with a high number of inventions turning out not to have much value and only a few being of high value.

人們展開了不少嘗試，試圖在更大的經濟背景下考察創新，康奈爾大學(Cornell University)、歐洲工商管理學院(Insead)以及世界知識產權組織(WIPO)創立的“全球創新指數”(Global Innovation Index)就是其中之一。

One attempt of many to try to look at innovation in a wider economic context is the Global Innovation Index, created by Cornell University, Insead, the business school, and the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO).

除了研發支出和許可費收入等變量，該指數還包含各國在YouTube網站的視頻上傳數以及在維基百科(Wikipedia)網站的月編輯次數等指標。若以該指數作爲衡量指標搞個排行榜，歐洲則可大大鬆一口氣：排名前五的國家是瑞士、英國、瑞典、芬蘭和荷蘭。中國則降至第29名。

Alongside variables such as spending on R&D and licence fee receipts, it also includes such things as video uploads on YouTube and Wikipedia monthly edits in each country. Europe can rest far easier on this metric: the top five places are taken by Switzerland, the UK, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands. China is down in 29th place.