About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

IP Outreach Research > IP Use and Awareness

Reference

Title: Canadian Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs): Baseline Awareness of Intellectual Property
Author: Allan Gregg, Christopher Kelly, Michael Sullivan and Timothy Woolstencroft [The Strategic Counsel]
Source:

Industry Canada
http://www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/ic1.nsf/vwapj/FinalReportCIPO-SME.pdf/$file/FinalReportCIPO-SME.pdf

Year: 2007

Details

Subject/Type: IP Knowledge, IP Protection
Focus: Commercialisation, Outreach / Education
Country/Territory: Canada
Objective: To gauge overall awareness, knowledge and use of intellectual property by Canadian small and medium-sized enterprises.
Sample: 2.106 senior decision makers of Canada-based small and medium-sized enterprises
Methodology: Telephone interviews

Main Findings

Intellectual property (IP) does not figure among respondents' top rated business concerns. In line with this finding, many senior decision makers of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are not very familiar with the term "intellectual property": 41% rated themselves as "not familiar", 22% as "moderately familiar", and only 35% as "familiar". Familiarity is higher in metropolitan areas, in larger firms, in firms conducing research and development, and in some industry sectors, such as "Information and Cultural Services" (70%), "Professional, Scientific and Technical Services" (63%) and "Educational Services" (58%).

When asked to rate their familiarity with five types of IP protection, close to two fifths reported familiarity with copyright, trademark and patent protection; participants were less familiar with trade secrets (17%) and industrial design protection (15%). Themes and words most associated with the term "IP" are "ideas/information/knowledge/research" (17%), "copyright" (10%), "intelligence/intelligent people" (9%) and "ownership" (7%).

Almost two thirds of respondents could not name any formal methods or types of IP protection. Still, 19% were able to list at least one or more formal methods or types of IP protection, with copyright protection, patent protection and trademark protection most often evoked. The vast majority of senior decision makers surveyed could not correctly identify CIPO (the Canadian Intellectual Property Office) as the organisation responsible for the registration or granting of IP rights in Canada. Just 10% reported to be familiar with CIPO, whereas 73% did so for the Canada Revenue Agency and 54% for Nike.

One third of SMEs considered their company to have IP assets; license agreements, trademarks and copyrights were most often mentioned as methods used to protect these. 26% of companies with IP assets choose not to protect them, either because they consider it unnecessary or because they "just have not gotten around to it". Around 80% could not indicate any significant impediments to filing for IP protection, considering there were none (about 30%), or were unable to tell (about 50%). The top two impediments named were "cost" and "lack of information/too much research required". Knowledge about IP protection is obtained mostly via the media, school, personal/work experience, and business associations. Only a small minority reported using either free or commercial Internet IP databases.

78% of respondents did not have significant concerns over IP violation or infringement; 20% indicated that violations or infringements were a significant concern. Concern levels were highest for copyright and trademarks. When needing general information about IP, most SMEs would rely on the Internet (24%) or seek advice from a lawyer (20%); for expert advice, 40% would consult with a lawyer.

An overwhelming majority of companies surveyed (95%) reported that they had not used any CIPO products or services. Preferred sources of IP information provided by CIPO are its website, fairs, trade-shows and exhibits, and mail-out brochures.

[Date Added: Aug 18, 2008 ]