Statement by Attorney General Anand Ramlogan on PHI pan and G-Pan:The primary issue in this case is the ownership of the intellectual property rights in the PHI pan and the commercial exploitation of the G-Pan and PHI-Pan by persons and entities other than the State. At my first press conference, I was asked about the amount of money made thus far by the allegedly illegal sale of these pans and I pointed out that the Government had no way of knowing this. In the circumstances, we sought an order from the court that Prof Copeland provide an account for the sale of all pans and all commercial agreements entered into. This is a separate issue from the larger and primary one of ownership of the patents and the consequential right to market and sell same. Mary King's assertion that only one G-Pan was sold is inconsistent with the information provided thus far but it would be easier and better for Prof Cope-land to provide the facts in this regard.
It is curious, to say the least, that such facts should come from a former government minister who shared a close working relationship with Prof Copeland and failed to amicably resolve this issue during her tenure. Indeed, it would be fair to say that far greater progress was made on this matter after the office of the AG assumed responsibility after Ms King's premature departure from Cabinet.Patrick Manning and several former government ministers have predictably rushed to the defence of Prof Copeland, following my announcement of proposed action against the latter in respect of the PHI pan. However, the evidence does not support Patrick Manning's assertion that the PHI Pan was invented prior to the Steelpan Initiative Project (SIP).
The legal advice I have been given following Mr Manning's statement is that the evidence clearly shows that the PHI pan was invented as part of the SIP and the intellectual property in that invention is the property of the GORTT. In the light of the proposed legal action, this will be a matter that must be left to the court to decide.Among the documents that will be placed before the court will be Cabinet Note 1897 of July 26, 2007, which is contrary to Mr Manning's assertion. The Cabinet Note at paragraph 2 sets out "the primary purpose of the SIP..." and that "...the project also addresses derivatives and offshoots of the instrument with strong marketing potential."
At page 4 of the Cabinet Note, under the title "The Master Project," the note states that "The SIP has been divided into four major sub projects and these are described below. SP1-the electronic derivative...the Percussive Harmonic Instrument (PHI). This project targets the design and commercialisation of an electronic steel pan. The project has fabricated two working prototypes and is currently completing a final market ready design." Two matters are immediately clear from this short excerpt. First, it is noteworthy that this is recorded after the G-Pan had already been developed and officially launched on July 24, 2007.
Secondly, the note is dated July 12, 2007, and clearly shows that PHI was not invented prior to the SIP but, in fact, as a sub-division of the SIP. Similarly, Cabinet Note December 20, 2005, paragraph two, mentions, "Research is ongoing into the development of innovative electrical and electronic forms of the steel pan, namely the electro-acoustic pan which is specially designed for portability and enhanced sound amplification of the bass pan... the robo pan and... the midi pan" and later in paragraph 5, the head of steel pan research is stated as "...seeking funding to undertake all necessary activities leading to the creation of electronic steel pans, namely the MIDI pan and ROBO pan..." A document entitled "Update on Steelpan Initiatives Project" will also be presented to the court. On page 2 of that document, under heading "Quick Review via Timeline," it states, "MIDI pan name changed to PHI for marketing reasons." It is clear, therefore, that the Cabinet Note of December 2005 requested funding to develop the creation of electronic MIDI pan, which subsequently was renamed the PHI-Pan.
Finally, in a document dated May 2011, entitled "Steelpan Initiatives Project," Prof Copeland states on page 3, "In addition to consideration of the traditional instrument, the SIP also targets steelpan derivatives-offshoots of the traditional instrument that utilise one or more aspects of the technology embodied in the original form. Key examples of the latter are...the PHI which extracts the physical note layout in all electronic form and which is the other major output of the SIP."
Prof Copeland's company Web site (Panadigm Innovations Ltd) states that it was established to "develop and market product streams developed under the Steelpan Initiatives Project." This includes a wide range of steelpan products. The UWI has now highlighted its intellectual property and research policy for staff members. This reinforces and supports the contention that these inventions cannot be properly claimed or owned by Prof Copeland in his own right as they were developed using public funds while he was employed by the UWI.