mer., 28 janv. 2015 18:41:00 +0000

Some truths on the Macron law, INPI and Infogreffe

The draft law of Mr. Macron is aimed at the reform of regulated professions.

For reduction of the resources of the Commercial Court clerks, Mr. Macron may only modify their rates upon the determination of the Ministry of Justice.

Mr. Macron therefore uses another approach: INPI, placed under the administrative supervision of Bercy.


Because INPI is supposed to centralise the entirety of commercial and company registries maintained locally by the Commercial Court clerks.

Yet, since 2009, INPI no longer centralises anything as it possesses neither judicial nor technical authority.

Mr. Macron intends to ride the wave of open data, in the spirit of the times, to restart the centralisation role of INPI.


The draft law under examination by the deputies whose aim is modification of the conditions of this centralisation" with a view towards facilitating public access to the data contained in these registries and allowing reuse of such data. ". To accomplish this, the clerks must transmit, free of charge, data controlled by them.

The proposed aim of Bercy is to allow re-utilisation of data in an open digital format and to favour their inter-operability.

Yet, such access already exists.

Reuse of public data already exists. But for a fee.

How much does INPI cost companies?

INPI requires payment, through a licensing system for use of the data contained in the Trade and Companies Register, of more than €230,000, by companies hoping to reuse such data.

Since 2009, at the request of INPI, reuse licenses have been established by the court clerks, from the data controlled and certified by them, and are directly addressed to the license holders by the clerks' EIG (Infogreffe) which, before transmittal, undertakes a consolidation, an inter-registry audit (local) and a structural harmonisation of the data which results in increased quality.

INPI is therefore not part of the technical circuit.

Bercy hopes to reintegrate INPI into this circuit for a sole and unique raison: the tax which weighs directly on company finances.

In effect, INPI gathers, each year, more than 14 million euros paid by entrepreneurs for the formalities which are filed with registries (5.90 euros per formality).

And, to date, to fund INPI, the rate of the clerks fix compensation for them: this represents almost 11 million euros per year.

What purposes do these 25 million euros serve today? Nothing. Nothing at all.

This centralisation role was justified 20 years ago, at a time when computers were in their infancy and when the risk of fire and flood put in peril paper documents.

Today, after 30 years of technical investment, the Commercial Court registries have available three servers to safeguard company data: with the registry, on a remote server and with Infogreffe.

In such an environment, INPI serves no purpose.

The Court of Auditors moreover reminded at the beginning of the month that INPI should focus with priority its efforts for the implementation of the European Patent.

What do the clerks and Infogreffe propose?

The Commercial Court clerks are not opposed to the provision of company data. Such provision consists of creation of numeric data files in open data format allowing their reutilisation.

Legally speaking, the clerks, who receive company declarations and control their legal validity, are naturally the only ones able to subscribe to an open data policy of the companies under their sole responsibility and with strict respect of the "CADA" and "CNIL" laws and European directives.

These texts govern the reutilisation of public data and of personal data. Furthermore, this protection is one of the preoccupations of the National Assembly for which the digital commission recently recalled:

"Within the next few years, in the context of the explosion in the use of personal data and Big Data, legislatures must reinforce the protection of fundamental rights in the face of the utilisation of such data for industrial and commercial purposes and the control by individuals of their personal data. "
This concern fully justifies that clerks, with their status as public and ministerial officers, be the natural players for the dissemination of digital data of companies in open data.

Clerks therefore propose:

- the elimination of the centralisation role of INPI;
- the return of 25 million euros to companies;
- to themselves centralise, via their National Council and its Infogreffe EIG, and the National Register of Commercial Companies, and to directly release, free of charge, company data (with the exception of personal data).

In conclusion, we recall that the economic model for commercial justice is based on users, and not on an authority or public funding.

This model is efficient and recognised by all. It should remain so.