The European Union regulations n°386/2012 of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council, on April 19, 2012, transforms the European counterfeiting and piracy Observatory, established in 2009, in European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights.
This Observatory is part of Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM). It is surprising to see that the first task of this Observatory is educational nature, that is to say it is evaluating and understanding the value of intellectual property rights, including also their links with the innovation. Indeed, in an ideological view (the term is not pejorative), the very idea that, by law, is set to a value of intangible properties appears to some artificial, even illegitimate, and should in principle be combated.
The first function of the Observatory that operates from May 2012 is to demonstrate the value of intellectual property rights (patents, trademarks and designs). To this function, it can be articulate the mission to assess the effectiveness of intellectual property rights, because it is can be noticed that the Observatory is not specifically on the rights, but on the "abuses".
The second function is, in accordance with the more general purpose of the Agency in which the Observatory operates, to promote the approximation of national laws. Because it is an Observatory and not a formal standard-setting tool, the idea is to gather knowledge on laws and case-laws applied.
The means are meetings between representatives of the administrations and the private sector. In addition, States have obligations to transmit information to the Observatory. This initiative, under the highest, normative form that is regulation shows no doubt the insufficient effectiveness of the Observatory created earlier in 2009, but also the balancing in Europe more and more between competition and intellectual property, because it is encouraged innovation and it must be a balance between the two.
This explains that such a regulation is derived from the services of the internal market, more sensitive to this regulatory perspective, than the competition service.