The IPR Attaché Program was formally initiated by the United State Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) in 2006. Although the aim for such Program was to promote IPR protection and enforcement domestically and abroad, to secure strong IPR provisions in international agreements and to encourage strong IPR enforcement by U.S. trading partners by deterring intellectual property theft and for the benefit of U.S. foreign, economic, and political interests, the actual achievements brought on IPR protections by such Program are unclear. Instead, there were many concerns raised within the government and by the public regarding the Program due to its inherent deficiencies in methodology and management structure.
The role and responsibilities of the attachés in relation to the International Trade Administration’s (“ITA’s”), Commercial Service (“CS”), and the US Department of State remains unclear, and the effectiveness of performances of current attachés in their respective US overseas missions cannot be guaranteed. The way the program works is that Attachés leave the USPTO and become a member of the Foreign Commercial Service (“FCS”) employees according to the memorandums of understanding between the USPTO and the FCS. As a result of this institutional crossover, expectations and priorities regarding the attachés’ responsibilities within the FCS are not clear and often overlap with duties shared by regular FCS officers. Due to lack of oversight, the performance of the attachés and their effectiveness at their intended role cannot be monitored and ensured.
Effective training on attachés should also be a critical point as the USPTO has recognized. However, though the USPTO has tailored and amended their operating plan for the Program, formal training for attachés to work on specific IPR protection related tasks in embassy is still limited. Analysis of the program has revealed that lack of a high workload, limited class openings, weekend training schedules and a general and personal lack of interest to attend specific training courses overall limit the attachés’ participation in training programs. As a result, there is very little improvement on performance of individual attachés or the larger program in performance of the core IPR protection mission.
Importantly, attachés are often sent to foreign countries along with the FCS with little to no training in the local language. Language training or proficiency is not mandatory, there is no foreign language fluency requirement. This is most puzzling given that the attachés are intended to communicate directly with local governmental officials and establish relationships with them in the host countries, with the goal of promoting the programs goals of IP protection for USA companies. One of the roles and responsibilities of the attachés is to provide training to host government officials and offer legal and technical IPR expertise at the post. Obviously there can be only extremely limited success at these goals where the attachés cannot communicate effectively in the foreign country.
In all, the USPTO has been trying hard to perfect the IPR Attaché Program for many years, but there are still many doubts and blurry fields as to the effectiveness of the function and development space for such Program.