Patent landscape report on assistive devices for visually and hearing impaired persons
ACADEMIC VERSUS CORPORATE PATENT ACTIVITY
Download 13.52 Mb.
|
5.2 ACADEMIC VERSUS CORPORATE PATENT ACTIVITYA further model of the type of organization active in the landscape is to review the patent applicants and identify whether they are academic or government research institutions or corporations. The figure below shows that just 8% of the activity in the landscape comes from academic or government entities, with just over 68% of the activity in the landscape originating from for-profit organizations. The timeline view in Figure 52 shows however that academic patent activity is growing steadily, and on a normalized basis (comparing activity distribution), far more rapidly. 
Figure 54 - Assessment of Patent Applicant Type and Distribution across the Assistive Devices and Technologies for Visually and Hearing Impaired Persons Landscape; Academic or Government Applicant Vs Corporate Applicant  
Figure 55 - Timeline of Assistive Devices and Technologies for Visually and Hearing Impaired Persons Landscape Patent Activity by Applicant Type, Academic or Government Applicant versus Corporate Applicant; Charts show both absolute numbers per earliest first filing year and activity trend on a normalized scale (% of total activity filed in any given year) The growth rate in academic patent activity implies to tie to the high growth rates emanating from some BRICS countries including China and Russia, and this does appear to be the case. Figure 53 show that these jurisdictions have a larger proportion of activity in the academic & government patent landscape. Spain, Taiwan, Province of China and South Korea research institutions also contribute significantly to the academic patent innovation total in this technology field. 
Figure 56 - Breakdown of Academic and Government or Corporate Activity by Office of First Filing Location; As % of Activity per Applicant Sector Raw data for Figure 56 shown as Academic Government / Corporate: Australia: 10%/70%, Austria: 3%/52%, Brazil: 10%/18%, Canada: 5%/45%, China: 21%/33%, Denmark 1%/88%, EPO: 4%/89%, France: 4%/63%, Germany: 2%/66%, Italy: 2%/71%, Japan: 1%/74%, Netherlands: 2%/70%, PCT: 7%/80%, Russia: 25%/56%, South Korea: 20%/52%, Spain: 33%/21%, Sweden: 0%/76%, Switzerland: 0%/74%, Taiwan Republic of China: 27%/43%, United Kingdom: 7%/59%, United States: 7%/78%. Figure 57 highlights the spread of academic or government research institutions or corporations by technology classification. Generally, vision related applications appear to be favored and more heavily focused upon by academic and government entities with vision assistance, intraocular devices and general vision care all strong performers in this technical space. Corporate entities however dominate all aspects of this technology field. 
Figure 57 – Analysis of Recent Patent Activity Trends in the Assistive Devices and Technologies for Visually and Hearing Impaired Persons Landscape by Major Subject Matter. Directory: edocs edocs -> Commissioner ajit pai edocs -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D edocs -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D edocs -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D edocs -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D edocs -> Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D edocs -> Federal Communications Commission fcc 15-77 Before the Federal Communications Commission edocs -> Statement of commissioner ajit pai Download 13.52 Mb. Share with your friends:
|