Intellectual Property Expert Group (ipeg)

Invent, invent, invent

“Invent, Invent, Invent” is today’s op-ed column of Thomas L. Friedman in the New York Times. Can’t be more true. Monday Note gives an interesting overview of the inventions made during recession times: 1975, in the middle of a recession, The Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) introduces the Alto, a computer featuring the first graphic user interface with windows, menus, and mouse. Four years later, Steve Jobs tours Xerox PARC and “inhales” the features we later saw into the Lisa and the Macintosh (other examples, see LayLow Edmonton’s “14 Big Businesses That Started in a Recession”). Read the rest of this entry »

Patent Morality

Is there morality in the way patents are being enforced? Has morality to do with IP and if so how does that exactly work out? It crossed my mind reading Netherlands’ morning newspaper “de Volkskrant” heading on the front page “Douane legt beslag op pillen Derde Wereld” (“Customs seizes pills destined for Third World” ).  Organizations like Medicines sans Frontieres and Oxfam Novib have lobbied the WTO and the EU Commission to complain about pharma companies using the European Border Detention Regulation (EC Regulation no. 1383/2003) to stop the transport of generic versions of patented drugs from Indian manufacturers via Rotterdam or Antwerp harbor, Frankfurt airport or via the port of Hamburg to South America and Africa. Read the rest of this entry »

An Annual Report for Technology?

The McKinsey Quarterly published an interesting read, “Memo to the CEO: Why we need an annual report for technology1

The idea is for a technology rich company to issue an annual report for technology analogous to the annual report for investors and the broader market. A take from the article: The annual report would provide an overview of the company’s ability to extract business value from technology but also substantiate that analysis with hard metrics, giving perspectives on the challenges of technology, Read the rest of this entry »

Patent Blogs, chatter, or do better?

Patent blogs are now all over, on the right side of our blog you can find some of the best, we believe. Not every blog is as interesting, informative or even complete. But blogs are like all conversations, chatter and discussions, some more informative than others, some, are like utterances in a café or pub, made after some (too many) beers, not good enough to listen let alone read, some more meaningful, educational or even academic. Hal Wegner reprehends – rarely seen in his flow of emails on patent issues – on comments made in a patent blog. He writes: Read the rest of this entry »

EPLA ’s successor UPLS, what’s in a name?

Recently the European Commission requested the Council to authorize the start of negotiations for the conclusion of an Agreement Creating a Unified Patent Litigation System. Old wine in a new bottle? EPLA (European Patent Law Agreement) intended to address the shortcomings of the present system, where a patent infringement and invalidity claim must be filed in individual European countries.  EPLA originated in the EPO and a few active members of the EPC, patent litigators and judges. Now the EU Commission produces its “Recommendation”, of course to underline this is a Commission initiative rather than an EPO one, the name is now different. Read the rest of this entry »

China Rules in 2012 – Including the IP World?

Chinese utility model holder Chint completed its major victory at the Zhejiang High People’s Court in Chint v. Schneider over French competitor Schneider through an unprecedented $ 23 million settlement (RMB 157 million), approximately half the damages awarded two years ago by the Wenzhou Intermediate People’s Court.

Interestingly, in a 2007 publication, Harold Wegner and Sharon R. Bamer explain the details of the lower court proceeding and the practical implications of Chinese utility model law protection. Read the rest of this entry »

IP Shift Happens

The “Did You Know” video clip created by Karl Fisch, and modified by Scott McLeod, on globalization and the information age, got massive attention in blogs and on YouTube. The reason, I guess , is that old-school thinking must make room for out-of-the-box action on how to turn things around for the future.  Yet another, TechFutures also provides us with mind sharpening ideas on how to turn things around for the better.

It‘s the Intellectual Property, stupid!

Sadly, the IP community has for long failed to go out telling the non-IP world – not least the top management of companies and governments alike – in simple, understandable terms what crucial role IP plays and how underestimated its potential in international trade and economic growth is. And how we must change this.

Here is an example. Technology development and technology transfer between the “have’s” and the “have-not’s” are key in obtaining global economic growth in Read the rest of this entry »

Innovation needed, Must Banks Be Forced to Finance?

In today’s Netherlands financial daily, Het Financieele Dagblad, the headline is that banks avoid financing of eco (energy saving)  projects. Investments planned for offshore wind energy production and construction of a biofuels plant have been stalled due to banks refusing to finance.  Banks will not lend because they fear borrowers will not repay; businesses will not borrow because they do not have adequate markets for their goods and services; individuals cannot and will not borrow because they do not have enough reliable income to do so. Intuition tells that the opposite as what banks are doing now, is necessary. So joining the chorus of Read the rest of this entry »

Why buying patents makes sense during recession

When reading this month’s issue of IAM magazine (nr. 34), we came across a remark allegedly made by a senior IP executive at a major high-tech company, (“The patent transaction market at a crossroads“) asking himself “how can you justify buying patents when you are laying people off” .  A rather amazing statement from the mouth of someone who should know better. Two issues are being put in the equation here that really have little to do with each other. In recession times, when demand is low, companies are laying off employees because a company’s income as a result of sales drops, as demand decreases.  Read the rest of this entry »