Intellectual Property Rights vs the Matilda effect: a struggle coming to an end?

Written by Camille Godin

Intellectual Property Law (IP Law) is a branch of law whose fundamental role is to protect all creative works: songs, paintings, inventions, medical discoveries and more. The core subjects with which IP Law deals consists of the following: copyrights, designs, patents and trademarks. But more importantly, in its essence, IP Law is about giving credit where credit is due: it’s about the recognition of one’s work.

In 2025, the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) published the following statistic: out of every 100 patent applications, only 16 come from women. The aim of this statistic is clear: raising awareness about the gender gap in Intellectual Property, not only in patent law, but also in other sections such as copyright. In itself, 16% of patent applications coming from women does not necessarily mean anything: if there are more men working in the field than women, the statistic makes sense.

However, this would be a hasty conclusion considering the following statistic alongside. Firstly, the number of female inventors has largely increased over the last ten years -- they now count for around half the workforce and college graduates worldwide according to the OECD. Out of all the patent applications, if more than 96% list at least one man as an inventor, only 33% do the same for women. This doesn't only apply to the patent sector. A similar study from the US copyright sector (2020) showed that only 38.5% of women were authors of registered works, when many more were actively involved in the creative occupation. Thus, there seems to be a fundamental gap between men and women in IP protection, and women are not seeking protection of their work. But why is that?

There are, of course, societal factors which have influenced the underrepresentation of women as inventors, such as fianncial barriers, impact of social norms etc. But although these may explain why women are less present in the creative and innovative field, not why they seem to avoid protecting their work. For a more adequate answer, we have to look at history.

In 1870, Matilda Joslyn Gage came out with a seminal paper titled "Woman as an Inventor." In this, she condemned the failure to acknowledge women's work and showed how women in the invention sector are confronted with multiple barriers to their success. One of them is the incapability of women to enjoy their accomplishments. If she did take out a patent, her father or husband would gain the money, name, and the right to use it all, instead of her. Because Matilda Gage was, at the time, considered an 'ultra-feminist', she was despised by both men and women. It's only thanks to the historian Margaret Rossiter that Gage's work gave birth to a new phenomenon: the Matilda effect. It tackles the non-recognition of women's achievements, mostly in the scientific field. One striking example is the case of Rosalind Franklin, who led the first team to create 'arguably the most important photo' as it revealed the helical structure of DNA. But when the work was published, she was not mentioned amongst the authors, and two men became famous in her place. They took credit for a woman's job, and this could not better explain the Matilda effect.

Professors Ann Bartow and Carys J. Craig reflect on how this gender gap came to appear, especially in copyright law but also in patent law. Essentially, what stands out from thier work is how the masculinist ideology, combined with the Matilda effect, led to the maginalization of women in IP. Bartow suggests that this led to women getting stuck in the domestic realm, and by getting used to men taking credit for invention or ideas that they had, women stopped trying to get their work recognized altogether.

Nevertheless, intents to get women's work recognised -- and thus patented to benefit not only themselves but also society -- are increasing. In 2023, the WIPO published a gender action plan with initiatives to protect women better in IP and reduce the disparities. That's why now, more than ever, it is fundamental to get into IP law. There is an increasing need to enhance protections and allow for women's ideas and innovations to surround and ameliorate our daily life even more.