Few MPs back intellectual property

---

A Conservative MP has claimed that "very few" of his parliamentary colleagues are in favour of the protection of intellectual property.

The associate parliamentary group for design and innovation has been informed that more needs to be done to preserve the ownership of exclusive rights to intangible assets such as artistic works and designs.

Chairing the session, Mike Weatherley, MP for Hove, told attendees of his fears that many of his fellow parliamentarians were insufficiently aware of the intricacies of intellectual property rights, or were uninterested.

He said: "Very few of my parliamentary colleagues are in favour of intellectual property rights. Indeed, many uphold the belief that the internet means any sense of ownership over ideas is impossible."

For his part Weatherley, a former finance director for music mogul Pete Waterman, said that he supported intellectual property rights "absolutely".

"I come from a position of wanting to protect intellectual property absolutely. I think it should be fiercely guarded," he said.

Also speaking at the session was Chi Onwurah, shadow minister for business, innovation and skills, who noted the importance of upholding intellectual property as a means of promoting innovation and, in turn, economic growth.

Onwurah said: "Intellectual property is an essential part of incentivising innovation. If designers can be certain that ownership over their work will be protected, they are more likely to innovate.

"The growth in our economy will come from small, innovative companies. As such, innovation is a pre-requisite for growth."

Adding to the general debate, Professor Jeremy Phillips, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, argued that current legislation for the safeguarding of intellectual property was over-complicated.

Phillips noted: "There is too much law, which is too impenetrable and too expansive even for most lawyers to get to grips with."

And Dids Macdonald, chief executive of Anti-Copying in Design, emphasised the need to treat design infringement as a criminal matter.

She said: "Imitation is not flattery when it can cost designers their livelihood."

"As a community we need to persuade both politicians and the wider public that taking ideas from others is just as serious a crime as taking actual possessions."