538.   We thank the co-sponsor of document IP/C/W/692 for the submission. Our delegation has consulted with stakeholders about this submission. The feedback we received is as follows: 539.   It is important to interrogate the factual scenario in order to provide a realistic reflection of what is to follow. Therefore, the following 8 comments are submitted from a South African perspective: a. Imagine that a young PhD student at a technical faculty of a renowned university comes up with a promising invention. Comment as follow - if that is the case the university's intellectual property policy would apply and the university rather than the student, would be the owner of both invention and resulting intellectual property, she would merely be named as inventor and have a share of the profits b. Comment two: thanks to university modules she attended on how to deal with intellectual property (IP), she applies for and is granted a patent for her invention. Comment to the follows: the university's technology transfer office would do the application. She would never be the one applying. Only a patent attorney can file a final patent specification. c. Comment three: now, together with the university technology transfer office, she would like to bring the invention to market. The comment to the follows: again, quite simplistic, the technology transfer office would do this probably through a spin-off company. d. Comment four: when writing a business plan, she soon realises that the funds she needs greatly exceed her family's and her university's financial capacity. The comment to the follows: a technical university would have access to the necessary funds and if not, some state entity would assist - in South Africa the technology innovation agency would assist – one example is the Durban University of Technology which has a University Technology Fund which would fund this scenario}. e. Comment five: where can she find funding? The comment to the follows: the question should be, where would the university find such funding? That would be the real question. f. Comment six: various studies show that young companies that have an active and a well-managed IP portfolio to show to potential investors to obtain more funds and grow faster than those without. The comment to the follows: how has she morphed into a young company? Again, the applicant would be the university or its spin-off. g. Comment seven: so, if the PhD student from our example seeks IP protection for her invention, she will stand a much better chance of finding the necessary funds to turn her idea into a business. The comment is she would not own the IP. h. Comment eight: in addition to protecting intellectual assets from free riders, intellectual property rights are a potentially useful means of raising money, especially for start-ups. In the above example, IP is used as a signal to investors that there is considerable substance in the young company. Furthermore, IP can be used as leverage or collateral for borrowing, or for sale to prospective buyers through sale-leaseback transactions. The comment to the follows: in theory, it would be good if a start-up could protect its inventions/creations with IP. This indeed would give them the opportunity to raise funds, set collaborations etc. In our context, the financial services sector is very risk averse and as a result, use of IP as security is very uncommon, particularly in relation to MSMEs). Furthermore, it would be good to investigate, whether IP protection (of larger companies) can actually prevent start-ups from exploiting their inventions. In some industries, such as complex technologies, the number of patents is so high that it is very difficult to get through patent thickets of thousands of patents for a small startup (e.g., mobile industry). To actually get something to the market, a company would need to have a portfolio of hundreds of patents to be able to negotiate cross-licences. So yes, the nice picture of a PhD student inventing something, patenting it, and then developing a successful business sounds like a very good example. But the reality may be more complicated. 540.   The scenario would benefit from taking into account, the reality of university intellectual property policies, Bayh-Dole type legislation and the actual practice at universities. That concludes the statement. 541.   With regard to the request that you are deliberating upon we would certainly need time to consult but one element that would be taken into consideration in our consultation would be over the inclusion of a mandated issue such as the Work Programme on E-commerce and the 1998 mandate we have and the contribution of this particular Council. Some delegations may be of the view that we should take those into consideration before bringing a new permanent item.