1. The document discusses key issues around big data, AI, and intellectual property that IP educators need to explore, including potential biases in algorithms and the importance of access to data and text mining exceptions. 2. It notes statistics around lack of gender and disability inclusiveness in innovation and patenting. Surveys found most institutions lack accessibility facilities and few publish simplified or translated research. 3. The speaker calls for questioning status quos, greater data sharing rather than just downloading, and more emphasis on collaboration in the IP system and innovation process.

1. INDIA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONVENTION, APRIL 26, 2018
Dr Arul George Scaria
Co-Director, Centre for Innovation, IP and
Competition (CIIPC)
Assistant Professor, National Law University,
Delhi
Role of IP Educators in the Context of
Big Data and Artificial Intelligence

2. Objective - Highlight some of the important questions that the researchers, students, and
teachers of IP need to explore, particularly in the context of big data and AI

3. 1. BIG DATA & AI - IMPORTANCE OF ACCESS TO DATA

4.  Cognitive bias
 Statistical bias

5. One example:
Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions
(COMPAS) algorithm - Used by courts in the US to decide on prison sentences
 Racial bias in the results - why?
 How to address such bias?

6. Importance of text and data mining (TDM) exception under the copyright law

7. 2. IMPORTANCE OF EVIDENCE-BASED POLICY MAKING

8. 3. QUESTION THE STATUS QUO
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/why-do-women-inventors-win-fewer-patents#.WtIOrvdxD88.twitter

9. INCLUSIVENESS IN INNOVATION PROCESS - Gender
 Only 10% of patent-holders are women
 Life sciences - women earn more than half of new PhDs - only 15% of
inventors listed on patents are women!

10. INCLUSIVENESS IN INNOVATION PROCESS - Gender
Women inventor’s patent applications - more likely to be rejected than those filed by
teams of men
 When rejected - women’s applications 2.5% less likely to be appealed
 When granted - women’s patents often had less scope - more words added to
claims
Kyle Jensen, Balázs Kovács, and Olav Sorenso, ‘Gender differences in obtaining and maintaining
patent rights’, Nature Biotechnology 36, 307–309(2018)

11. INCLUSIVENESS IN
INNOVATION
PROCESS- PHYSICAL
DISABILITY
INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES
AVAILABLE FOR
RESEARCHERS WITH
PHYSICAL
DISABILITIES (%)
CIIPC OPEN SCIENCE
SURVEY 2017
2.66
14.95 15.61
14.29
11.3
18.27
40.86
55.48
71.76
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
n= 301Other None of the above
Flexible leave policy Disabled-friendly lab
Braille textbooks Audiobooks
Restrooms for persons with disability Wheelchair facilities
Ramp facilities

12. INCLUSIVENESS IN
INNOVATION PROCESS –
PHYSICAL DISABILITY
STEPS TAKEN BY THE
INSTITUTION TO MAKE
RESEARCH ACCESSIBLE TO
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
(%)
CIIPC OPEN SCIENCE
SURVEY 2017
76.83
14.33
8.84
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
n= 328
I don't know No Yes

13. INCLUSIVENESS IN
INNOVATION PROCESS
- ACCESSIBILITY
FREQUENCY OF
PUBLISHING SIMPLIFIED
VERSION OF RESEARCH
FINDINGS FOR
LAYPERSONS (%)
CIIPC OPEN SCIENCE
SURVEY 2017
30.64
29.19
26.59
7.51
6.07
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
n= 346
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Always

14. INCLUSIVENESS IN
INNOVATION
PROCESS –
LANGUAGE BARRIERS
FREQUENCY OF
PUBLISHING TRANSLATED
VERSION OF RESEARCH
IN REGIONAL
LANGUAGE(S) (%)
CIIPC OPEN SCIENCE
SURVEY 2017
78.86
10.29
7.43
2.29
1.14
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
n= 350
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Always

15. FOR YOUR RESEARCH, HAVE
YOU EVER USED ANY
PUBLICATIONS/ DATA
AVAILABLE OPENLY ON THE
INTERNET? (%)
CIIPC OPEN SCIENCE
SURVEY 2017 4.84 6.85
16.4
33.64
78.76
59.5
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Publications (n= 372) Data (n= 321)
I don't know No Yes
4. Question whether we should remain a “downloading nation”

16. SHARING
PRACTICES OF
RESPONDENTS
(PUBLICATIONS)
(%)
CIIPC OPEN
SCIENCE SURVEY
2017
47.22
31.6
34.03
56.6
35.07
9.72
3.82
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
n= 288Researchers working in the same team Any researcher working in the same institution
With close friends/ trusted acquaintances With anyone who asks
OA repository Personal website w/o restriction
Not shared with anyone

17. SHARING
PRACTICES OF
RESPONDENTS
(DATA) (%)
CIIPC OPEN
SCIENCE SURVEY
2017
48.67
20.35
25.22
37.17
8.41
3.1
16.37
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
n= 226
Researchers working in the same team Any researcher working in the same institution
With close friends/ trusted acquaintances With anyone who asks
OA repository Personal website w/o restriction
Not shared with anyone

18. 5. IMPORTANCE OF COLLABORATION

19. 6. IMPORTANCE OF BALANCE IN THE IP SYSTEM

20. CONTRIBUTORS – OPEN SCIENCE AND OPEN INNOVATION PROJECTS
Thank You!
arul.scaria@nludelhi.ac.in
@arulscaria
www.ciipc.org/projects/open-science-for-an-innovative-india
www.ciipc.org/projects/open-innovation
Disclosure: Open Science Project and Open Innovation
Project are supported by a grant received by CIIPC
from Qualcomm Inc. However, Qualcomm Inc. has not
been involved in any stage of the research, including
the framing of research questions and data analyses.