Draft Version — Not for Distribution
Equitable Intellectual Property

Helping people understand, shape, and benefit fairly from intellectual property

Through training, consultancy, and practical tools, we support organisations and communities to navigate IP in ways that are fair, informed, and grounded in their values.

Explore Our Services → Browse Resource Library

"Intellectual property shapes who benefits from innovation. We believe the people most affected — researchers, communities, small enterprises, public institutions — should have the knowledge and support to influence how it works."

What We Do

We work with people — not just systems. Our services centre on building understanding, confidence, and capacity around IP.

Who We Work With

🎓

Researchers & Academics

🏛️

Public Institutions & NHS

💡

Startups & Social Enterprises

🤝

Communities & Civil Society

IP Frameworks We Work With

Each area has distinct legal instruments and equity considerations. Click to zoom in — overview first, then detail and resources on demand.

Case Studies

Real-world cases with sourced analysis. Click to expand.

Resource Library

Domain
🔍
Type

Our Approach

We use visual law, plain language, and progressive disclosure — drawing on the Stanford Legal Design Lab and Legal Design Summit community.

👁️

Visual Law

Diagrams and flowcharts replace statutory text. Comic contracts reduce onboarding from 4 hours to 40 minutes.

Learn more ↗
📊

Progressive Disclosure

Complex information revealed in stages — overview first, detail on demand. Built on Ostrom's knowledge commons frameworks.

Learn more ↗
🧭

Design for Equity

Tools that lower barriers for people with less access to specialist legal advice. Aligned with IP Inclusive.

Learn more ↗

Three Patterns Across IP Governance

The Enforcement Gap

Formal frameworks consistently outpace real-world compliance — in Nagoya Protocol enforcement, ethical licensing (no court has tested it), and the TRIPS waiver (no country notified implementation). We address this through practical training.

Voluntary vs. Mandatory

Patent pledges accelerate innovation, but pharma declined the Open COVID Pledge. FRAND is voluntary but generates intense litigation. Lambert is voluntary but achieves 80%+ awareness. When do voluntary mechanisms suffice?

The Joint Ownership Problem

From biomedical anticommons to Lambert's deliberate avoidance of joint ownership — fragmented IP creates deadlocks. Clear allocation rules produce better outcomes for all parties.

Supporting Infrastructure

Technology in service of people making better-informed decisions.

AI-Assisted Drafting Support

AI tools flag ambiguities and generate templates — always human-reviewed, never a substitute for expert advice.

Human-reviewed

Interactive Assessment Tools

Self-service diagnostics help identify IP needs and options before engaging consultancy or legal support.

Self-paced

Let's work together

Training, strategic advice, or tools for your community — we'd like to hear from you.

Browse Resources