Perhaps the only issue that sparked some audience participation at the General Meeting of the AIPA, the Association of Israel Patent Attorneys, was the current state of affairs where there are a number of bodies offering IP services in Israel that are not licensed to do so.
The list includes:
- people that worked for a couple of years as paralegals or office managers in patent firms
- graduates of short courses offered by Israel universities
- retired Israel Patent Office Examiners who never qualified as attorneys-at-law or patent attorneys
- trainee patent attorneys who never qualified by not finishing the two years training and / or not passing the exams
- US Patent Agents or attorneys-at-law living in Israel
- prototypers, project managers etc.
- inventors who think that they know it all
I believe that patent attorneys in general, and the professional orgnizations in particular, have a duty to the public to ensure standards by combatting non-licensed, non-regulated service providers. Some cynical readers may think that this is merely self-interest, enlightened or otherwise. It is difficult to argue with such claims of course, although in my experience naive inventors looking for bargain basement services are more trouble than they are worth.
That as may be, by helping someone fill out the forms or by offering legal advice, such ’service providers’ are in contravention of Sections 29 and 30 of the Israel Bar Law, which makes it illegal for anyone to provide legal type services unless they are licensed attorneys-at-law or recognized exceptions, such as licensed accountants or tax consultants for tax law, and patent attorneys for IP Law. Rather than trying to change the law, I believe that the professional organization should uphold the law. Non-licensed practitioners are a menace, in that they provide services that they are not qualified to and not infrequently, do irreparable harm to their clients.
Even licensed and competent US patent agents may not merely know nothng about IP in Israel, but are also frequently unaware of IP Law outside of the US, and sometimes try to obtain US style claims-sets in Europe and the Far East. It is often not appreciated that US Patent Law is far and away the most ‘different’ from that of other countries. That said, under an amendment of the Law passed today, see אושרה הצעת החוק לפתיחת שוק עריכת הדין לפירמות זרות it will be legal for foreign attorneys to practice their local law in Israel and it is possible that in consequence, foreign patent firms will open branches in Israel or link up with Israeli firms.
A recent high profile case of a non-licensed charlatan was a self professed IP expert called Shneider
who was profiled on Kolboteck, the Israel TV program that uncovers fraud. Shneider (the fellow with the ultra-orthodox dreadlocks) started an academy for inventors, called the Israel School of Inventors According to the Shneider System. Actually, Shneider never patented anything. His “invention” appears to be a plastic doll called Shimileh, aimed at the ultra-Orthodox community which has had modest comercial success in this niche market, but no way qualifies him to give advice about patents, marketing, manufacturing, tax, forming companies of anything really.
Now a shneider is a tailor. Competent practioners will know that with patents there is no ‘one-size fits all’. Sometimes I counsel applicants to first file in Israel. At other times, to first file in the US or elsewhere, including the UK and on one occasion Korea. Many of the applications I draft are 12-15 pages of text and 3-5 figures. However, I have, on occasion, filed 120 page long applications. There is no one size fits all or one strategy fits all. Most importantly, as I tell my clients, the quality of the suit can only be as good as the material from which it is cut. Most applications do not make the applicant money and apart from the legality of providing patent services, the real problem is that Shneider convinced people with ideas that they could make money, offering a one-stop shop.
Competent practitioners are aware of the importance of patents to being able to stifle competition. More importantly, we can inform applicants what an application may cost, but explain to inventors that filing a patent application is by no means a guarantee to making money.
Apparently the AIPA did consider inviting such charlatans to a disciplinary hearing, but clearly, with them not being members of the organization, that brainwave was a non-starter and the idea was still-born.
On behalf of the profession, the Association of Israel Patent Attorneys could send such individuals and organizations that offer illegal IP services Cease & Desist letters, and then file private criminal charges against infringers. The Israel Bar has prevented organizations from prosecuting various claims like medical malpractice, even when using licensed attorneys to do so, and the Association of Israel Patent Attorneys could do likewise.
Members of the professional organization may feel that tackling this issue is not a reasonable use of their dues, in that the cost will be born by members, but the entire profession will benefit. Whilst membership is voluntary, there will, of course, be free-riders, however, since the annual dues are relatively modest (currently 200 NIS or approx. $50), I imagine licensed patent attorneys will support such an initiative.
I am glad to hear that this topic was enthusiastically discussed at the AIPA meeting, although I am not holding my breath as to any practical follow-up.
One matter of clarification: Shnaider (sic) was by no means a self professed IP expert. In fact, “The Shnaider Method” actually steered people away from patenting inventions. Since Shnaider almost entirely dealt with low-tech and individual inventors (as opposed to companies), he more often than not tried to convince his clients to forget about wasting time and money on a patent, because they wouldn’t have the time or money to uphold it in the future! That’s business advice, not IP advice. Rather, he would say that they should try to make the first splash in the market, and make as much money as they could with that. If someone copies the invention, which, he argued, will invariably happen, so be it. If a client insisted on patenting, Shnaider would send him to someone licensed in the field.
The problems that ultimately lead to the recent unfolding of events was entirely unrelated to the IP field. It also is not as simple as the fact that he convinced people that they could make money with their ideas.
While the theme of your post is of utmost importance, the example chosen is not relevant to the topic.
It is certainly possible you are correct on all counts.
Re the AIPA meeting; from the discussion it appears that the best idea the previous committee could come up with was to invite the offenders to a Shimuah, i.e. a hearing or “court marshal?”
Since noone was expected to voluntarily waste his time coming to such a kangaroo court and the verdict would presumably have been to suspend their non-membership of a professional organization they were inelligible to join, that idea was dropped.
As to Snheider, I confess to having missed the Colboteck episode as I was in the UK on business. I did read the talkbacks and review his website and think that in some questions he crossed the line.
The business model of manufacturing and letting others play catch up is certainly appropriate in some cases, but there were presumably reasons why he appeared on Colbotek and people want their money back. According to the website, he had the backing of a notary and attorney who was an IP expert, but the person in question specializes in copyright law.
I could certainly give other examples of protypers etc., offering IP services, but Shneider is definately the most picturesque and up to-the-minute with the recent program.
I do agree with you that holding your breadth whilst waiting for the AIPA to act is not something that I would recommend. That said, Ed Langer has joined the committee and is interested in dealing with the issue, so maybe things will move.
True confession: I’ve been in the business now for over 3 and a half years and only recently learned of the existence of the AIPA.
However, after reading your more recent blog posts, I feel compelled to stand up and be recognized as a licensed patent attorney by doing the very least I can – joining the AIPA. But here’s the rub: I am a product of our times, so once resolved I did what every other normal internet savvy professional would do: I googled the AIPA to find their site so I could find the registration information. Unfortunately, other than a few references on your blog and several CV references to AIPA membership (most conspicuously from Reinhold Cohen patent attorneys), the organization doesn’t seem to exist on the Internet. Is it possible that they don’t have a site? FWIW, I tried “AIPA”, “Association of Israel Patent Attorneys” and “איגוד עורכי הפטנטים”.
So, um, how does one contact the AIPA for membership or anything else? Do you need to know the secret handshake?
Larry, I don’t think that a secret handshake is required, but agree that the organization appears to try hard to keep a low profile, at least amongst practitioners not working for Reinhold Cohen.
Apparently RCIP pays membership for all their patent attorneys and then block votes via proxy in general meetings. It’s not a bad way to keep control over the results, but I agree, the organization could usefully try to recruit sole practitioners and patent attorneys working for the smaller firm.
The irony is, as I tried to point out to de Vries (one of the RCIP attorneys), after the GM – it is precisely the smaller firms and sole practitioners that need a professional group to promote their needs. The larger firms have enough clout to further their aims without a representative group.