IFIA International Jury Board
IFIA International Jury Board is made up of IFIA professional members from different states. The following members are appointed to evaluate the inventions showcased for choice the best inventions and inventors in IFIA Official Events:
- Dr. John Calvert – USA
- Prof. Dr. Michal Szota – Poland
- Dr. Mahmoud Hafez – Egypt
- Dr. Marcelo Vivacqua – Brazil
- Dr. Zengpei Xuan – China
- Dr. Aynampudi Subbarao – India
- Dr. Radwan Chouaib – Lebanon
- Dr.Adnan Al-Ramzani Al-Naimi – Qatar
- Dr. Andrei Victor SANDU – Romania
- DR. Agnieszka Mikołajska – Poland
- Mr. Mladen Karic – Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Mr. Zoran Barisic – Croatia
- Mr. David Taji-Farouki – Switzerland
- Mr. Winfried Sturm – Germany
- Mr. Hossein Vaezi – Iran
- Mr. Kyoungho Shin – South Korea
- Ms. Luncu Tanya – Moldova
- Ms. Vivi Akjaer – Denmark
- Mr. Lukas Zmeskal – Czech Republic
- Mr. Cenneth Lindkvist – Sweden
Meanwhile, the below criteria is utilized by IFIA International Jury Board to assess the inventions:
1. Has the inventor gained national, international patent, or PCT?
Based on the number and type of patents the score giving differs. 0 is considered for an invention without patent, 1 for an invention with one national patent, 2 for two national patents, 3 for one PCT and one national patent, and 4 for an invention with one national, one international (EPO, USPTO) and one PCT.
2. Is the invention green or eco-friendly?
The invention is evaluated considering its impact on environment. In case the invention causes pollution, 0 will be granted to it. 1 is considered for an invention which does not cause any pollution. Regarding the extent of mitigating pollution, the jury should allocate a number between 2 to 4.
3. At what stage of development is it? Is it a Poster? Poster with 3D image? Animated film? Prototype made? An invention ready for market?
Exactly like the order which is given in the question, the score of 0 is devoted to Poster, 1 to Poster with 3D image, 2 to animated film, 3 to Prototype and 4 to an invention ready for market.
4. Has the invention been granted scientific certification?
Some of the inventions do not require scientific certification; in this case the jury must review the possibility of putting the claimed invention into practice. If the invention needs a scientific certification,then regarding the validity and the number of certifications, a score between 0 and 4 is dedicated to the invention.
5. Is there a public demand for the invention?
The popularity of invention should be estimated by the jury. If the invention is seasonal or it can be used in limited geographical territories, lower score will be devoted to it.
6. Does the invention involve high technology?
The jury members are required to evaluate the extent of technologies applied in the invention. A higher score will be allotted to an invention in which modern technologies have been utilized.
7. Is the invention more useful than the existing products?
Depending on the extent of innovation used in the invention in comparison to the available products in the market, a score within the range of 0 to 4 must be granted to the invention.
8. Does the invention have an economic impact or potential for economic impact?
The jury members should estimate how much the commercialization of this invention can be income rising and accordingly rate the invention.
9. Is the invention ready to be commercialized?
The possibility of invention commercialization shall be evaluated and rated by the Jury between 0 and 3. In case it has the Feasibility Study Report, the score of 4 must be considered for it.
10. Has the invention been awarded an international prize?
Considering the number of international awards, as well as their importance, the invention will be rated.