Information Filled Under 'The Business of IP' Category
REPORT: Bilski: "machine or transformation" not exclusive test for patentable processes Wednesday, July 21st, 2010
In its long-awaited decision in Bilski v Kappos, the Supreme Court has held that the “machine or transformation” test is not the exclusive test for determining whether a claimed process is eligible for patenting under Section 101 of the patent statute. The opinion effectively overrules the Federal Circuit’s earlier decision.
View original post here:
REPORT: Bilski: "machine or transformation" not exclusive test for patentable processes
The Supreme People’s Court has issued the Opinion on Several Issues Regarding Administrative Adjudication of Trademark Grant and Confirmation. The opinion lays down certain general guidelines – for example, widespread use of a trademark is a factor in favour of granting or maintaining its exclusive rights, and vice versa.
Read the original:
REPORT: Judicial opinion to clarify certain trademark issues
Innovative Australian companies that do business in the United States can take comfort from the recent US Supreme Court decision in Bilski, which confirmed the availability of patent rights for processes generally and did not exclude business processes and methods.
Here is the original post:
REPORT: Why the Bilski decision matters in Australia
This morning I got a call from Paul Conroy at the press office of the UK IP Office in response to the blog I posted yesterday about the British government’s decision to axe the Strategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property (SABIP) as part of a drive to reduce overall expenditure.
See the article here:
BLOG: When it comes to IP and innovation in the UK (and elsewhere), deeds count, not words
Vince Cable, the UK’s Business Secretary, has announced that the Stategic Advisory Board for Intellectual Property (SABIP) is to be closed down and its competences assumed by the IP Office. The move comes as the government seeks to reduce costs. Given that since it came to power the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition has made it clear that it is making deficit reduction its number one priority, today’s news is not a huge surprise.
Go here to see the original:
BLOG: The UK government abolishes IP thinktank as part of deficit-reduction effort
… the PTO suffers from serious deficiencies in staffing, resources, and examination procedures that hamper its ability to conduct the sort of due diligence in patent applications that is required today. Clearly something must be done about this problem if we want to ensure the integrity of the intellectual property system in the United States
See the original post:
BLOG: Some things never change
The Waxman-Hatch Act offers opportunities to manufacturers of both brand and generic drugs in terms of market entry and exclusivity periods. A canny and fluid litigation strategy can help parties to take best advantage of the provisions available.
Continued here:
REPORT: Waxman-Hatch litigation strategies for generic and brand companies
I got the following email from the IAM blog’s old friend Nir Kossovsky today. I post it without comment, but invite others to have a say if they so wish: Recently, you posted on your blog a recap of an Ocean Tomo press release reporting that the intangible asset fraction of the average S&P500 Composite Index constituent company had climbed to 82% of market cap. Meanwhile, we reported on the Intangible Asset Finance Society blog, Mission Intangible, that the intangible asset fraction of the median public company traded on the major western markets had levelled out at 65% of market cap –…
Read this article:
BLOG: Intangible value and the herd instinct
So, just a fortnight after theBilski case was decided by the Supreme Court comes the news that NTP – of BlackBerry fame – is to sue a group of six leading IT companies, including Microsoft, Google, Apple and Motorola. It accuses them of infringing patents relating to wireless email transmissions. As all readers of this blog know, NTP successfully sued RIM, the maker of the Blackberry, winning a settlement of $612.5 million in 2006 after protracted wrangling both in and out of court.
Original post:
BLOG: Why has NTP gone on the attack now?
On the face of it, the news that Google has had its licence to operate in China renewed by the country’s government looks like a major victory for the company. As far as I can see, it will still be refusing to co-operate with censorship and related requirements that had previously been demanded of it. I can’t help feeling that if this really is the case, Google is going to reap a major reputational benefit that could well translate into something that is cash tangible
See the original post here:
BLOG: Google gets green light to stay in China, now the government must trust its citizens
After the Bilski decision was rendered by the Supreme Court, the USPTO issued a press release , stating that the PTO “will be issuing guidance further interpreting the decision as soon as possible” and that the PTO will be issuing interim guidance for the examining corps in the meantime. The interim guidelines state that the machine-or-transformation test should continue to be used as a “tool”, but if there is no “clear indication” that the invention is something other than an abstract idea, the examiners should reject the application.
BLOG: Why Micron matters Wednesday, July 7th, 2010It does not take more than a quick perusal of the IAM blog’s top stories of June 2010 to see that the series of pieces we ran on Micron during the early part of that month struck quite a few chords. Just to recap, John Desmarais – who had previously acted as an outside patent counsel for the company – told Bloomberg that he had bought a substantial portfolio of patents from Micron which he was now going to seek to monetise through an NPE named Round Rock
Read more:
BLOG: Why Micron matters
The Federal Circuit has affirmed the Eastern District of Virginia’s grant of summary judgment of no liability for false patent marking in favour of defendant Solo Cup Company in Pequignot v Solo Cup Co. The decision should help to limit exposure of patent owners to the flood of qui tam false marking lawsuits filed since last year’s decision in Forest Group, Inc v Bon Tool Co.
Read this article:
REPORT: Federal Circuit decision likely to limit patent owner liability for false marking
This much we know: a company will usually own many intangible assets, from patents and know-how, through brands, to customer lists and relationships; the way that it uses these often has a significant bearing on its overall performance; it would be very helpful for a company’s shareholders and potential investors to have a proper handle on intangibles so that they can judge its management; but it is very hard for shareholders, actual and potential, to get such a handle because intangibles are very rarely spoken about by companies; this is because most company managements do not think that much about them…
Link:
BLOG: Valuing intangibles to get mainstream board and investor buy-in – is this the way? …
The European Commission has published a draft regulation that would allow applications for the proposed EU patent to be submitted to the EPO in just one of the office’s official languages – English, French and German. The claims would have to be translated into the other two languages
Read more:
BLOG: Commission submits EU patent translation proposals, but only "a miracle" will see them fly
The opinion is out – as expected, the SCOTUS held Bilski’s application was not statutory subject matter: Petitioners’ remaining claims are broad examples of how hedging can be used in commodities and energy markets. Flook established that limiting an abstract idea to one field of use or adding token post solution components did not make the concept patentable
Read more:
(Finally!) The Bilski Decision Arrives
The US is the home of intangible value, according to a report just released by Ocean Tomo. Research published by the intellectual capital merchant bank (it used to call itself an IP merchant bank, when did that change?), claims that the implied intangible asset value of the S&P 500 reached 81% in 2009. This compares to 70% in EU markets, 73.5% in China and just 35.8% in Japan.
BLOG: Commission explores the possibility of creating a market for IP rights in Europe Thursday, June 17th, 2010Today is deadline day for interested parties to submit tenders for a service contract from the European Commission to look into the creation of a financial market for IP rights in the European Union. The aim is to explore the possibility of creating structures that would allow for much greater transparency in the buying and selling of IP; something that would create much greater predictability and, therefore, more likelihood that the true value of IP rights can be fully exploited by companies in Europe. Part 4 of the tender document explains why the Commission believes such a study is important:…
Read the original post:
BLOG: Commission explores the possibility of creating a market for IP rights in Europe
USPTO management has worked with representatives of the patent examiners union (POPA) to establish a proposal to “better align the performance standards for patent examiners with the USPTO’s goals for increasing quality in patent examination and reducing the backlog of pending patent applications.” If adopted, the changes would be the first major revision to the patent examiners’ performance appraisal plan (PAP) since 1986.
Read this article:
USPTO Close to Agreement With POPA to Overhaul Performance Review for Examiners
A dispute that has raged between mobile phone makers Motorola and Research in Motion (RIM) for more than two years was resolved last Friday with a cross-licensing deal. The two mobile telephone giants had been locked in litigation since a long-standing licensing deal expired in December 2007 and they were unable to reach a new agreement
Original post:
BLOG: Is it time for RIM to learn the ADR lesson?
A few months ago, Bruno van Pottelsberghe, the former chief economist at the EPO, produced a thought-provoking paper on the future of Europe’s patent system. He argued that current reform proposals did not go far enough and would not help European companies compete with the US, Japan and the emerging BRICs economies in terms of innovation. Now van Pottelsberghe is circulating the first draft of a new piece of work
Link:
BLOG: EPO is tops for quality, but can Kappos make a difference in the US?
Who remembers the Pirate Party? This time last year it was riding the crest of a wave after securing close to 8% of the total vote in Sweden’s elections to the European Parliament and, as a result, an MEP. In Germany, the party got 0.9% in the same election, but then in September surpassed that with a 2% share in the country’s general election; this equated to around 900,000 votes.
Read this article:
BLOG: Whatever happened to the Pirate Party?
In Cobalt Brands LLC v Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP the Federal Court has reinstated a previously expunged registration for the trademark USQUAEBACH for Scotch whisky. The court concluded that the owner of the mark, Cobalt Brands LLC, had met the criteria for special circumstances of non-use.
Link:
REPORT: Court clarifies what constitutes special circumstances in absence of use
In September 2009 Micron Technology made its annual 10-K filing to the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Part of this covered “Patents & Licenses”: In recent years, the Company has been recognized as a leader in volume and quality of patents issued
Read the original:
BLOG: The questions that Micron Technology will not answer
“Delay is preferable to error.” — Thomas Jefferson The IPO reported this morning that the Bilski v. Kappos opinion will “almost certainly be issued on one of the next three Mondays – June 14, 21, or 28.” Chief Justice Roberts stated at the recent Federal Circuit Judicial conference that the Supreme Court expects to issue opinions in all of its argued cases by the end of the current court term, which ends June 28.
See the article here:
IPO: Bilski Coming in Next Three Weeks (Really, it Is!)
The second edition of the IAM Strategy 250 – the World’s Leading IP Strategists is now online and open for inspection. It builds upon the work done in the first edition, which was published in 2009 and very well received. Essentially, the guide identifies individuals who are able to offer world-class strategic IP advice to IP owners; advice that puts them in the best position to maximise the value of what they have – either monetarily or in some other way
Original post:
BLOG: So, who made this year’s guide to the world’s leading IP strategists?
At the recent INTA meeting in Boston I took part in a session that looked at writing for lawyers and attorneys from a variety of perspectives. My job was to offer a journalist’s view on putting together an effective press release – ie, one that may lead to follow-up coverage in the media
Original post:
BLOG: A few tips on press releases and getting media coverage for you and your firm