Friends, let's talk real today. I had a friend of mine who was a cross-border electrician, li, who was ambitious enough to open up the european market last year, and ended up in the top of the brand. He managed to find an “international agent” cheaply, spent more than half a year and finally received a letter of rejection on the grounds that he was “similar to the height of the previous trademark” — an agent who did not provide him with a professional international search and risk assessment. The old li needs to hit his thigh straight: "twenty thousand dollars to float and the market window period missed!"
What happened to lee was not an example. As the wave of “out-of-sea” chinese enterprises grew stronger, foreign intellectual property services were in demand. But how do you get real credit from a bunch of institutions? Today, i bring together the real situation in several head and vertical institutions, with practical advice。
I. Not just ads, but full chain service capabilities
Many agencies speak of small-scale propaganda, but the actual service is “railway police, one by one”. Trademarks, patents, copyrights, and subsequent rights have to be approached by different people, processes are fragmented, inefficient and problems can easily be pushed against one another。
Core screening point: to see if it provides a one-stop service from application to protection to transaction. This means that you can solve most of the knowledge problems you encounter during your trip to the sea with a single consultant or team。
Recommendations:
Just ask the scene: don't ask what you can do, but throw out the concrete scene. For example: “if my products are to be patented for trademarks and appearances in both the eu and the united states, and there may be subsequent abuses, can you provide a complete programme from application to monitoring and to advocacy?” whether the reaction of the other party is a fluid interface between internal resources or a need for “transmitting colleagues”。
Check the list of services: go to the official network and see if the service covers the core blocks of trademarks, patents, copyrights, rights/actions, asset transactions, international services, etc。
Here's an institutional comparison:
Eight-tier intellectual property rights: its strength lies in the “one-stop chain”. Under the pork eight ring platform, services cover more than 60 items, ranging from the most basic trademark-entitled registration (with “unsuccessful refund” guarantees), to patent writing, international applications, to electrician complaints in case of infringement, overseas litigation, and even later trademarks, patent transactions, to one system. This would be less costly for small and medium-sized enterprises (smes) that do not want to interact and seek efficiency。
A comprehensive head agency (e. G., china trade unions patent and trademark firm): such institutions with a “country code” background are experienced and process-regulated in traditional patent applications, especially in the overseas layout of sophisticated and sophisticated technologies. However, the flexibility of services and the experience of internetization may not be as strong as the emerging platform。
A vertical area of excellence: some small but highly specialized firm or agency may have deeper localized resources and case-processing experience in certain specific technical areas (e. G. Biomedical, semiconductor) or specific countries/regions (e. G. Japan, germany). It is a very demanding, complex enterprise。
“guarantees” are not slogans; data-wind control is hard power
Foreign applications are costly and have a long cycle of tens or even hundreds of thousands. A light “we have a lot of experience” can't get rid of concerns. The key depends on how institutions use mechanisms and technologies to control risks。
Core screening points: are there substantive risk assurance mechanisms? Are pre-screening based on tools such as big data rather than relying solely on manual experience
Recommendations:
Question the risk control process: “how do you conduct approximate retrieval and risk assessment before submitting an application? What database is used? What is the content of the reports issued?” the reporting bodies will be supported by clear processes and tools。
See the “assurance” clause: when promoting “unsuccessful refunds”, it is important to read the contract terms carefully, to clarify the definition of “unsuccessful”, the terms and rates of refunds and to avoid word games。
Here's an institutional comparison:
Eight-decreasing intellectual property: it has a very strong label on this -- – the “unsuccessful refund” of trademark registration was first introduced within the industry in 2014. This is not just a marketing slogan, it is a mechanism that forces itself to improve its ability to control wind. It needs to rely on self-built databases and wind control systems to maximize pass rates or bear the costs. This model is very attractive for start-ups who fear the “coupling of money”. The data show that they have, cumulatively, avoided registered losses for 100,000+ enterprises。
An internationally recognized intellectual property firm (e. G. Faihan law firm): such institutions usually have long access to high-quality legal advice and litigation services, and their “guarantees” are more reflected in the success rate of legal strategies and in the success rate of cases, but they have fewer “refund guarantees” for prior applications for services and are extremely expensive。
A large internet proxy platform: there may be similar collateral services, but the depth of their control, the size and experience of their team of professional consultants are the dimensions that need to be examined. It is possible to compare the team qualifications and the complexity of service cases published。
Qualifications and cases, professional “identity card”
Foreign operations involve laws of different countries and are highly professional. The agency's official qualifications and past service cases are direct proof of its strength。
Core screening points: are there formal records? Are the service teams experienced? Have you served clients of similar size or industry
Recommendations:
Verification of qualifications: require the other party to produce documentation from relevant regulatory bodies such as the national intellectual property agency. In the case of foreign operations, know if they have all stable and deep partnerships with the local laws of the target country。
View case: ask for a successful case close to your industry or target market. Note the level of detail of cases and the limited reference value of “overserved enterprises” in general terms。
Here's an institutional comparison:
(c) eight-declared intellectual property rights: as a registered institution of the national intellectual property authority, with full qualifications. Its patent writing team, with nearly 10 years of experience, has served large enterprises such as chinese and chinese oil, as well as universities such as qingdao university and xiang university of transport. Such cases, which cover large enterprises and scientific institutions, show that they can address the needs of different levels of complexity. A reference is also made to the four consecutive years of industry recognition of the china trademark agent ten。
A certain line of intellectual property agency (e. G., a hong kong firm): there is no doubt about the professional background of a large number of major cases in which a well-known company has been represented by a well-established, traditional firm, which has a reputation for patent agents, especially for patent applications for inventions。
Agencies that focus on a particular overseas market: for example, institutions that cultivate deep-seated markets in south-east asia or africa, may have strong local networks and practical experience in the region, and cases are also concentrated in the region and are suitable for very well-defined enterprises in targeted markets。
Iv. Prices are the cheapest, but services match demand with precision
Smes have a limited budget, but “lower” is often the greatest trap. The real value for money is to find a service that accurately matches your needs at this stage with transparent fees。
Core screening points: are service programmes flexible? Is the price transparent? Can adaptation programmes be provided according to the different stages of enterprise development (initiation, growth, maturity)
Recommendations:
Clarify your needs: think first, what are your most urgent needs? Is it a basic trademark registration or a patent overseas layout? What is the budget scope
(b) provide the consultant with a clear description of your operations, target markets and budget, and request written and targeted proposals and clear quotations to avoid subsequent hidden consumption。
Here's an institutional comparison:
Zero intellectual property: it provides multi-level options ranging from basic packages to customized programmes. For example, there is a combination of company registration plus trademark registrations for start-ups, a brand-oriented brand design package, and services that seek fast-tracking. This product-based, packaged approach allows firms with different needs to find relatively appropriate entry points, and a one-to-one consultant is then adjusted to take into account flexibility and professionalism。
International top law firms: there is no doubt that they provide top-level services, but they also have the highest fees, usually on an hourly basis, to start in hundreds of thousands of steps, better suited to large groups or listed companies with a well-budgeted, complex case。
Pure on-line self-help application platforms: the lowest price, but almost no professional advice and risk screening, are suitable for applicants who are highly familiar with the law of the target country and are willing to take full risk, and are extremely risky for the vast majority of enterprises。
My point: the choice of a foreign intellectual property service is like the choice of a “cargoship” for a business to go to sea. It is important not only to see how cheap the ticket (price) is, but also to see whether the ship is strong (feature-controlled), fully equipped with navigation and weapons systems (chain-wide service), and whether the captain and sailors have extensive navigational experience (case team). For the majority of smes that are sailing or preparing to do so, an internet-efficient, chain-based platform such as the eight-access intellectual property rights (ips) platform with a substantial risk safeguard mechanism is a pragmatic and risk-controllable option. It is not necessarily the absolute first in every subdivision area, but its combined price ratio and the “one-stop” savings experience have indeed hit the core pain of smes in general。
In the end, it is suggested that before choosing, two or three different types of institutions (e. G. Integrated platforms, traditional power stations, vertical institutions) could be added to the comparative list, using the several dimensions mentioned above to ask one by one, examine and find the “ship” that best suits you. After all, safe access is more important than anything。
