recentpopularlog in

jerryking : patent_law   44

Opinion: How patents really work in the innovation economy - The Globe and Mail
August 8, 2019 | NATALIE RAFFOUL

The concern that patent trolls are targeting Canadian startups is also unfounded. Patent trolls aren’t concerned with pre-revenue or low-revenue-generating startups. However, profitable Canadian SMEs (that is, not startups) operating in the United States are being targeted by U.S. patent holders.

All that said, the issue of patent assertion is not as bleak a situation as many paint it to be. Many of our SMEs are successfully fending off these patent assertions by NPEs, and there are mechanisms, such as inter partes review and re-examination at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, that are a cheaper alternative to U.S. patent litigation and which enable our SMEs to invalidate weak patents.

Concerns that multiple overlapping IP claims are creating gridlock are also questionable. By definition, each patent covers a unique invention. A patent must have novelty and cannot be obvious. One idea, one patent. That said, ideas are built upon ideas. Company A may have a patent on a new product idea and then Company B develops an improvement on that product. For Company B to sell Company A’s product in combination with its improvement, Company B may need to license a product patent from Company A. Company B could also offer a license to its improvement back to Company A in a cross-licensing arrangement. If Company A refuses to license its patent to Company B, then Company B has three options: (1) if possible, invalidate Company A’s patent; (2) wait until Company A’s patent expires; or (3) develop a workaround to Company A’s patent. Most companies will innovate and choose option (3), and that is the premise of the patent system: to spur innovation.

We cannot develop a “made-in-Canada” solution for patenting Canada’s innovation. The reality is that, for most Canadian companies, a Canadian patent is really of secondary value – many of our companies don’t even bother to seek patents in Canada, and they focus their patent protection in the United States, Europe and China. Our Canadian companies are competing on a global scale and we need to play by the rules of this global patent game.

The discussion around patenting activity in Canada should also move beyond the question of whether to patent (of course they should) to one of helping our Canadian startups and SMEs with the costs associated with global patenting activity. In Quebec, the First Patent Program has been very successful in providing “matching” funds up to $25,000 to Quebec companies seeking their first patent. We should look at a similar program across Canada.

Such incentives are critical because investors are interested in funding Canadian startups that have patents or patents pending. If the startup is not successful, investors may be able to leverage the patent assets to recover some of their investment. If the startup is successful, the patents enable the startup to protect its market share and, if it so chooses, generate additional revenue through licensing the patents to competitors or companies in other fields.
Canada  Canadian  cross-licensing  intellectual_property  patents  patent_infringement  patent_law  patent_litigation  patent_trolls  USPTO  workarounds 
august 2019 by jerryking
To support Canadian startups, offer pro bono legal clinics - The Globe and Mail
Contributed to The Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Jun. 17, 2015
pro_bono  free  law  patents  patent_law  law_schools  start_ups  innovation 
june 2015 by jerryking
John Chambers and Myron Ullman: Stopping the Economy-Sapping Patent Trolls - WSJ
Feb. 16, 2015

Mr. Goodlatte’s bill includes a number of important reforms. For example, it would require disclosure of the actual basis for claims at an earlier point in the legal process; this will provide clarity, sharply reducing defense costs. It would also require transparency as to who is filing the suit, so that multiple suits from the same owner can be detected. It also would strengthen the right of winning defendants in bad cases to recover their legal costs.
patents  patent_law  Cisco  patent_trolls 
february 2015 by jerryking
Patent Wars Erupt Again in Tech Sector -
Ashby Jones
Nov. 3, 2013

After a brief hiatus for major new litigation, a joint venture owned by Apple Inc., AAPL +0.10% Apple Inc. U.S.: Nasdaq $520.53 +0.50+0.10% Nov 4, 2013 10:01 am Volume (Delayed 15m) : 9.66M P/E Ratio 13.03 Market Cap $467.89 Billion Dividend Yield 2.35% Rev. per Employee $2,127,850 52552051510a12p2p4p6p 11/03/13 Patent Wars Erupt Again in Tec... 11/01/13 Short Lines for Apple iPad Lau... 10/31/13 Morning MoneyBeat: Are Buyback... More quote details and news » Microsoft Corp. MSFT +0.49% , BlackBerry Ltd. BB.T -1.70% , Ericsson Inc. and Sony Corp. 6758.TO -11.13% launched a barrage of new lawsuits against a group of defendants that include Samsung Inc., GOOG -0.25% Samsung Electronics Co. 005930.SE -0.07% , LG Electronics Inc., 066570.SE +1.03% HTC Corp. 2498.TW +4.86% and Huawei Technologies Co.
litigation  patent_law  patents  Huawei  LG  HTC  Samsung  Google  Sony  Ericsson  BlackBerry  Microsoft 
november 2013 by jerryking
America Invents Act Patent Reform Implications for Small and Large Business
October 01, 2011 | CFO Magazine
New Patent Law Highlights the Need for Speed

The new patent reform law has sparked mixed reactions, with large companies generally in favor and small businesses opposed.
Marielle Segarra
patents  patent_law  speed 
february 2013 by jerryking
Cravath Hires David Kappos of U.S. Patent Office -
February 6, 2013 | NYT | Peter Lattman
Cravath Hires 2nd Official From Obama Administration
legal_strategies  recruiting  USPTO  law_firms  patent_law  IBM  Cravath 
february 2013 by jerryking
Following Up With Dan Brown, Inventor of the Bionic Wrench -
November 26, 2012, 7:00 (share with Paul Boldt)
Following Up With Dan Brown, Inventor of the Bionic Wrench

we definitely need some changes if our country is ever going to protect our significant investments in innovation. Most people do not know it, but we have a double standard in the protection and punishment of intellectual property theft. Without going into all of the detail, the punishment for willful copyright and trademark infringement is a criminal penalty. This is a very strong deterrent for copyright and trademark infringement. The punishment for willful patent infringement is a civil case and not a criminal case. As it stands today, this piracy model for patent theft allows infringers to proceed unchecked for years in the marketplace, often destroying the market, business, and investment of the patent rights owner. The current system forces the victim to fight a protracted and expensive legal battle. If Congress were to simply make those cases of willful patent infringement a criminal case, and we began holding the responsible individuals and officers of the companies personally accountable — as it is in willful infringement of copyrights and trademarks — I believe these infringers would think long and hard before they risked infringing a patented product....Unfortunately, the sales cycle in this business runs well ahead of the delivery cycle. Pioneering a new product into a retailer is very challenging, especially when attempting to convince a buyer whose paradigm is almost totally based on purchasing imported products at very low costs. That is why we worked so hard with Sears to prove the viability of the product and sales program.
delivery_cycle  double_standards  intellectual_property  inventors  litigation  new_products  patents  patent_infringement  patent_law  retailers  sales_cycle  Sears 
november 2012 by jerryking
In Technology Wars, Using the Patent as a Sword -
Published: October 7, 2012
Historically, the United States has awarded ownership of an innovation to whoever created the first prototype, a policy known as “first to invent.” Under the America Invents Act, ownership will be awarded to whoever submits the first application, or “first to file.”

The shift, inventors like Mr. Perlman say, makes life harder for small entrepreneurs. Large companies with battalions of lawyers can file thousands of pre-emptive patent applications in emerging industries. Start-ups, lacking similar resources, will find themselves easy prey once their products show promise........“Start-ups are where progress occurs,” “If you spend all your time in court, you can’t create much technology.”
Apple  intellectual_property  inventors  litigation  Nuance  offensive_tactics  patents  patent_law  Silicon_Valley  Steve_Lohr  USPTO 
october 2012 by jerryking
Jenkins: The Jury Has Spoken—Think Different -
August 28, 2012, 7:07 p.m. ET

The Jury Has Spoken: Think Different
Samsung's loss is Microsoft's opportunity.

Microsoft is a pygmy in the smartphone business though, unlike Google, Microsoft troubled itself to design a smartphone operating system that does everything a smartphone must without being an iPhone knockoff.

Microsoft may genuinely have believed there's a better way than Apple's of organizing a user's interaction with a mobile device. Microsoft may have concluded there was no future in merely making another Apple knockoff, then trying (thanklessly) to give birth to a third app ecosystem around it.

Maybe Microsoft was just worried about lawsuit vulnerability. Whatever the reason (how's this for irony?), Microsoft was the company to "think different" and create a mobile operating system "for the rest of us"—i.e., an alternative to Apple's vision. The result is Windows Phone 8, the operating system behind the oft-praised but slow-selling Nokia Lumia 900....a too-weak patent system can be as bad for competition as a too-strong one. Until Friday's verdict, it was just too easy for Google-Samsung to gain a dominant share by copying Apple's innovations and giving them away for free. That's especially true of the subtle feedback Apple figured out how to provide users through a touch-screen. Google's business model, Apple could be forgiven for thinking, is more like piracy than competition.

Apple's lawsuits are not without strategic design, of course. The aim is to raise the cost to handset makers of using Google's "free" Android software—one reason Samsung, not Google, was the target of Apple's legal vendetta....But the verdict has an ironic potential. With Android seeming less "free," handset makers now have more incentive to get behind real innovation, such as Microsoft's promising but negligibly patronized operating system. Sooner rather than later, in other words, we might have a choice not just between Apple and fake Apple.

Microsoft and other innovators still face a monumental hurdle, it's true, in a lack of apps. What would really hasten the icejam breakup would be more decisions like one recently from the Financial Times.

The FT has decided to stop making Android or Apple apps or other ecosystem-specific apps in favor of a universal app riding on the mobile browser layer, using the tool set known as HTML5.

Apple  Samsung  Microsoft  Holman_Jenkins  patents  patent_law  ecosystems  Android  HTML5  knockoffs  think_differently  legal_strategies  lawsuits  litigation 
august 2012 by jerryking
In Canada, the Impact of America's New Patent Law Is Seen -
August 26, 2012, 7:00 pm4 Comments
In Canada, the Impact of America’s New Patent Law Is Seen

Outlines the negative effects of passing the America Invents Act on small, innovative businesses....Under the new law, the United States, beginning in March of next year, would move from a first-to-invent system to first-to-file. Opponents of the law say the switch would favor large corporations, whose big legal staffs will likely win the paper chase to the patent office...America’s current patent system, according to Adam Mossoff, a professor at George Mason University School of Law, is intentionally biased toward small upstarts, the “new innovators that disrupt and destroy existing companies and industries.”

There is debate among economists about the role of small inventors and companies in innovation and job growth. The drift of research is that a tiny percentage of fast-growing small companies that quickly become bigger companies — sometimes called “gazelles” — account for most of the job generation and disruptive innovation.
gazelles  patents  Canada  inventors  innovation  patent_law  crossborder 
august 2012 by jerryking
How Apple Got Its Case Across -
August 26, 2012 | WSJ | By JENNIFER SMITH and STEVE EDER.
Lawyers Presented a Clear Story Line for Technology Giant; Samsung Argument Was Harder to Explain.
Apple  patent_law  law_firms  lawyers  Samsung 
august 2012 by jerryking
Mobile phones: Difference Engine: Copying the copier
Aug 6th 2012 | The Economist| by N.V.

The 73-year-old Judge Posner, who also teaches at Chicago Law School, is one of the founders of the legal school that interprets patent law in economic terms. His argument last June for refusing to ban Motorola’s products from the shelves, as Apple sought, was that “an injunction that imposes greater costs on the defendant than it confers benefits on the plaintiff reduces net social welfare”. That is the economic interpretation of patent law at work.

If, as it seems, Apple has had to resort to the courts to stifle competition and limit consumer choice, then it is a sad day for American innovation. That the company can do so with such impunity is an even sadder reflection of how dysfunctional the patent system in the United States has become.

The only reason why governments grant patents (and the monopoly rights they entail) is to promote innovation—in the hope of generating jobs and additional sources of revenue. Patents seek to do this by requiring the inventor to make prompt and full disclosure of the idea, so others may seek a licence to use it, or find ways to work around it. In exchange, the inventor is granted the right to exclude competitors for 20 years or so.

The cost to society of allowing a monopoly to flourish has long been assumed to be outweighed by the benefits that accrue from encouraging individuals to spend their own resources inventing useful things that did not exist before. In short, patents have been seen as a necessary evil for fostering innovation.

That assumption is now being challenged. Indeed, a debate has been raging in the United States over whether patents—especially those granted for protecting software ideas and business processes—help or hinder innovation.
patents  patent_law  Apple  Samsung  mobile_phones  smartphones  litigation  Richard_A._Posner  innovation  uChicago 
august 2012 by jerryking
Apple Gets Decisive Win in Patent Case -
August 24, 2012 | WSJ | By JESSICA E. VASCELLARO.

Apple, which cited more than 28 Samsung products, sued Samsung last year and accused the South Korean company of infringing seven patents. Samsung fired back, alleging that some iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch models infringed up to five patents....Apple has won big...being awarded $1.05 billion in damages and providing ammunition for more legal attacks on mobile-device rivals.

Jurors Friday found that Samsung infringed all but one of the seven patents at issue in the case—a patent covering the physical design of the iPad. They found all seven of Apple's patents valid—despite Samsung's attempts to have them thrown out. They also decided Apple didn't violate any of the five patents Samsung asserted against it.

The damage award is shy of Apple's request for more than $2.5 billion, but much larger than Samsung's estimates and still ranking among the largest intellectual-property awards on record.
litigation  Apple  Samsung  patent_law  patents  smartphones  intellectual_property 
august 2012 by jerryking
Tech Firms Crowd-Source to Fight Suits -

Article One Partners LLC crowd-sources evidence that a patent being challenged isn't novel. Proving so in court can invalidate a patent.

It's called finding "prior art" and has long been a core part of fighting patent cases. Now companies are trying a techie twist: describing the disputed technology online and giving awards of around $5,000 or so to those who find the best stuff, from photos to literary references to obscure foreign documents, to strike down the patent.
bounties  patents  patent_law  crowdsourcing  Jessica_E._Vascellaro  Microsoft  Apple  Article_One_Partners  self-employment 
may 2012 by jerryking
Intellectual property is a new kind of arms race, with patents as ammo - The Globe and Mail
john manley
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
Oct. 05, 2011 .

​To spur innovation and economic growth, Canada needs an intellectual property framework that fairly balances the rights of creators, consumers and society as a whole. In addition to passing a new copyright bill, the federal government should undertake a comprehensive IP policy review to address barriers that hinder opportunities for companies and inventors. Such a review, says the Canadian International Council, should examine “how much of an obstacle our corporations face when obtaining licences from Canadian patent holders, and the extent to which this barrier impedes innovation and growth.”

Of equal importance is the need to improve the quality of patents issued in Canada and internationally. By some estimates, close to a third of all new U.S. patents are of questionable quality, often because the invention claimed is not new or because the patent is vague or overly broad. One way to address this is to make it easier for third parties to challenge these applications without resorting to litigation.

At the same time, it’s vital to speed up the patent application process. Obtaining a patent now takes as many as three years in Canada, 3½ years in the U.S. and a decade in Europe. As the CIC points out, “Such delays hurt innovation, particularly in the informative-technology sector, where the commercial value of a patent may last only a year or two.”
John_Manley  CCCE  intellectual_property  patent_law  patent_trolls  patents  frameworks  arms_race 
october 2011 by jerryking
Analysis: U.S. Tech Companies, China Tangle Over Contracts -
APRIL 18, 2011 John Bussey. Despite an agreement between
President Obama and President Hu in January, U.S. technology companies
are again complaining about how China awards contracts...The bigger
issue, Mr. Murck adds, is that this is just one piece of China's broader
industrial policy, a large array of mostly new rules designed to speed
the growth of national champions and foster home-grown innovation.

The list is long: new patent laws that could make it easier to seize
foreign innovation; the setting of standards that require products to be
re-engineered to meet Chinese specifications; national-security
initiatives that give preferential treatment to Chinese companies in
several industries; limitations on market access for U.S. services
companies; continued weak enforcement of intellectual-property rights.
China  contracts  global_champions  home_grown  Hu_Jintao  indigenous  industrial_policies  innovation  intellectual_property  non-tariff_barriers  patents  patent_law  predatory_practices  property_rights  technical_standards  technology_transfers 
april 2011 by jerryking
Peter Huber: Digital Innovators vs. the Patent Trolls
APR.18, 2011|WSJ|PETER HUBER.U.S. patent laws have drifted way
off course.Real innovators in the digital realm add new s/w modules,
chips & ntwking capabilities to the toolkit.Biochemists do the same
in their field, isolating genes & proteins & build new tools for
re- engineering them.In these & other areas of the economy, much of
the innovation is embodied in plug-&-play building blks, which are
easily combined in different ways to perform a variety of tasks.But the
proliferation of smart building blocks makes it easier for anyone to
write a patent that simply describes what a keen invention will do,
contributing little more than a sketch for how someone might build it
from off-the-shelf parts..The issue isn't whether IP rights should be
enforced, it's whether we have a reliable process identifying who really
supplied the intellect.We don't.A sys. that issues & upholds junk
patents will devalue IP much faster than one that scrutinizes patents
carefully & enforces only the good ones.
Peter_Huber  patents  patent_law  USPTO  patent_trolls  U.S._Supreme_Court  innovation  intellectual_property 
april 2011 by jerryking
Patent Office Struggles to Catch Up With Technology -
Feb. 20, 2011|NYT| By EDWARD WYATT. At a time when a quarter of
patent applications come from California, and many of those from
Silicon Valley, the USPTO is opening its first satellite office — in
Detroit.. That is only one of the signs that have many critics saying
that the office has its head firmly in the 20th century, if not the
19th...The USPTO's delays and inefficiencies are more than a nuisance
for inventors. Patentable ideas are the basis for many start-ups and
small businesses. VC's often require start-ups to have a patent before
offering financing. That means that patent delays cost jobs, slow the
economy and threaten the ability of American companies to compete with
foreign businesses....the Internet age created a surge in
applications....and applications have also become far more complex.
patents  patent_law  USPTO  efficiencies 
february 2011 by jerryking
The Most Powerful Idea in the World
In less than a century, in a single place, human welfare and
prosperity, which had barely changed in the preceding 10,000 years,
entered an era of sustained and explosive growth that continues to this
day. The moment did not occur in 2nd century Alexandria, or 12th century
China, or Renaissance Italy, but in 18th century Britain; and, as
William Rosen chronicles in his extraordinary new history, the reason
was the power of an idea: that inventors should have ownership of their

The Most Powerful Idea in the World is the story of that idea as
expressed in the “biography” of a single invention: the steam engine.
How it came to be born; how it grew to power factories, drive other
inventions, and carry people and freight, by rail and by sea
18th_century  book_reviews  Industrial_Revolution  United_Kingdom  inventors  patent_law  patents  books  ideas  inventions  industrial_age  steam_engine  James_Watts 
december 2010 by jerryking
HP Chemists Hunt Violators of Ink Patents
Aug. 29, 2006| WSJ | by Christoper Lawton. H-P's ink-cartridge
business acts as a powerful annuity for the company. HP, which has a
market share of 50% in the U.S. and more than 4,000 patents on its ink
formulations and cartridge design, often sells its printers at a loss,
then essentially locks customers in when they have to repeatedly come
back to buy replacement ink cartridges. In fiscal 2005, H-P made more
than 80% of its $5.6 billion in operating profit from ink and toner
supplies, according to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. To protect this
franchise, increasingly under attack from rivals, H-P could sue any ink
makers it suspects are infringing on its patents. This month, it sued
China's G&G Ninestar Image Co., a cartridge manufacturer, alleging
G&G had violated seven H-P patents in cartridge design. The
complaint also targets four online retailers. H-P also asked the
International Trade Commission to open an investigation against
HP  printing  patents  patent_law  filetype:pdf  media:document 
november 2010 by jerryking
New Breed of Patent Claim Bedevils Product Makers -
SEPTEMBER 1, 2010 | Wall Street Journal | By DIONNE SEARCEY. New Breed of Patent Claim Bedevils Product Makers.
lawsuits  patents  patent_law  patent_trolls 
september 2010 by jerryking
Paul Allen Sues Apple, Google, Others Over Patents -
AUGUST 28, 2010 | Wall Street Journal | Dionne Searcey.
Patent litigation in general is on the rise, in what is becoming a
lucrative endeavor. Ocean Tomo, a Chicago-based merchant bank that
tracks the intellectual-property market, values the licensing market at
as much as $500 billion. Mr. Allen's lawsuit comes amid high-profile
successes of firms such as NTP Inc., which enforce patents without
making products and have been called "patent trolls" by critics. Courts
have tried to rein in patent litigation, with mixed results, and
Congress has yet to act on legislation that would do the same....patent
licensing strategy
Paul_Allen  patents  patent_law  Ocean_Tomo  intellectual_property  patent_trolls  lawsuits 
august 2010 by jerryking
Gordon Crovitz: Government Drops the Ball on Patents -
JULY 19, 2010 | Wall Street Journal | By L. GORDON
CROVITZ. Without guidance from Congress or the Supreme Court, industry
turns to self-help. "Patent law is a few years behind copyright when it
comes to self-help. Patents are at the tectonic plate shift between the
Industrial Age and the Information Age. That's because so much new
technology, especially software, becomes valuable only when combined
with other innovations. This is very different from protecting a new
plowshare or cotton gin."....The pharmaceutical industry, which must
invest fortunes to clear regulatory hurdles for new drugs, needs a
different approach to patents than do software companies. (See also
Larry Downes, author of "The Laws of Disruption.")
patents  patent_law  intellectual_property  L._Gordon_Crovtiz  copyright  DIY  books  seismic_shifts  industrial_age 
july 2010 by jerryking
China Toughens Rules for Foreign Companies -
MARCH 17, 2010 | Wall Street Journal | by ANDREW BROWNE And
JASON DEAN. Business Sours on China. Foreign Executives Say Beijing
Creates Fresh Barriers; Broadsides, Patent Rules. China's relationship
with foreign companies is starting to sour, as tougher government
policies and intensifying domestic competition combine to make one of
the world's most important markets less friendly to
multinationals....Signs of nationalism are evident in the grooming of
state-owned companies (SOEs) to dominate their industries as "national
champions," often at the expense of private Chinese companies as well as
foreign firms. From airlines to coal mining to dairy products,
government policies are expanding the state's role.
China  protectionism  multinationals  patent_law  economic_nationalism  SOEs  global_champions  state-as-facilitator 
march 2010 by jerryking
Inventors Have Rights, Too! -
MARCH 30, 2006 | Wall Street Journal | by NATHAN MYHRVOLD. "The
roots of this case lie in differing corporate cultures and attitudes
about the patent system. In some industries, like pharmaceuticals or
biotech, patents are crucial to the business model, so they support and
respect patent rights. Tech companies, on the other hand, win by
muscling their way to sufficient market share to become a de facto
standard (some would say monopoly). Because patents don't figure in this
business model, tech companies don't hold the patent system in high
regard. Patents are simply not a priority for many tech companies. Ebay,
for example, has only 11 issued patents."..."The patent system exists
to give economic incentive to create inventions -- not products. "
inventors  U.S._Supreme_Court  intellectual_property  patents  patent_law  Nathan_Myhrvold  Intellectual_Ventures 
december 2009 by jerryking
'Innovation' Increases Patent Law Turmoil -
APRIL 17, 2006 | Wall Street Journal | by Ogan Gurel, M.D. "Now
imagine a situation whereby a court injunction -- empowered by a claim
on just one of these components -- prevents a life-saving technology
from reaching the market. This is why this patent issue is so important.
We need to put aside the polemics and develop a system that fosters
both invention and innovation. Lives, and not just fingers tapping on
BlackBerrys, are at stake."
letters_to_the_editor  intellectual_property  patents  patent_law  innovation 
december 2009 by jerryking
Why Technologists Want Fewer Patents -
JUNE 15, 2009 | Wall Street Journal | by L. GORDON CROVITZ. A
book on the U.S. approach to patents, "Jefferson vs. the Patent Trolls"
by Jeffrey Matsuura, makes the key point that "intellectual property
rights were not goals in and of themselves, but were instead a mechanism
through which society attempted to facilitate creative collaboration."
patents  innovation  law  intellectual_property  L._Gordon_Crovtiz  patent_law  patent_trolls  books 
june 2009 by jerryking

Copy this bookmark:

to read