Journal of the Licensing Executives Society
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Journal of the Licensing Executives Society International
MARCH 2013 2013 SEMINAR SERIES lesles NouvellesNouvelles JOURNALJOURNAL OF OF THE THE LICENSING LICENSING EXECUTIVES EXECUTIVES SOCIETY SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL L L U.S. Trademark L Summer Patent Advanced Patent Practice Seminar Seminar & Licensing Seminar Volume XLVIII No. 1 March 2013 April 8 - 12, 2013 June 5 - 28, 2013 September 23 - October 4, 2013 A one week seminar which addresses all aspects This three and a half week seminar A two week seminar focusing on advanced of trademark practice before the United States covers all major areas of U.S. patent topics in U.S. patent law which includes LES NOUVELLES Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and the law, beginning with an overview of the workshops and problem solving in order to courts, including the preparation of trademark U.S. patent system and moving on to illustrate the more advanced concepts with applications, practice before the Trademark Trial more complex subjects such as patent regard to prosecution, claim interpretation, and Advancing the Business of Intellectual Property Globally and Appeal Board, licensing, inter partes matters prosecution, infringement litigation, validity and infringement issues. Participants including opposition and cancellation and interference practice. Includes learn how to modify and determine the scope proceedings, and the enforcement of trademark practical problems and discussion of of a granted U.S. patent, as well as how to Recent Rulings On The Entire Market Value Rule And Impacts On rights in the federal and state courts. recent cases where applicable. address significant licensing issues. Patent Litigation And Valuation ERIC PHILLIPS AND DAVID BOAg — Page 1 Visit www.bskb.comfo r further seminar details. -
The Spotlight on Patent Licensing by Patent Aggregators Niccolò Galli – ESR 3 EIPIN-IS Research Paper No
Innovation Society Research Paper Series Patent Aggregation in Europe: The Spotlight on Patent Licensing by Patent Aggregators Niccolò Galli – ESR 3 EIPIN-IS Research Paper No. 20-03 EIPIN Innovation Society Partner organisations (March 2017 - January 2021) European IP Institutes Network Cooperation among IP Institutions and students in Europe since 1999. EIPIN Innovation Society • Multidisciplinary and holistic research programme on role of IP in the innovative lifecycle • Co-supervision of doctoral research leading to joint doctorate degrees from two EIPIN partners • Tailor-made training programme prepares a new type of IP researcher who is able to ascertain and articulate the complexities of the IP system. IP as a complex adaptive system Research results • IP developed from a mere legal title • 15 PhD theses, published as into a complex adaptive system monographs • IP functions as a • International peer-reviewed articles - Business tool for value creation • Presentations at international - Vehicle for investment conferences - Relationship between right holders, • Bi-yearly conferences on the four users and society areas of research • Ambition: to enhance Europe’s capacity • Training activities on methodology, to foster innovation-based sustainable research and transferrable skills economic growth globally • Presentations and publications on • Research objective: to provide reliable establishment and management conclusions on how to deal with the of joint doctoral degree structures adaptive complexities of innovation cycles that secure economic benefits and uphold justice in the innovation society. Patent Aggregation in Europe: The Spotlight on Patent Licensing by Patent Aggregators Niccolò Galli* Abstract Patent aggregation involves the use of patents as assets rather than as technology inputs or technology-transfer instruments. -
Leveraging Law Department Metrics to Manage Costs and Improve Performance
ACC’s 2008 Annual Meeting Informed. In-house. Indispensable. Tuesday, October 21 11:00 am-12:30 pm 509 Metrics Mania: Leveraging Law Department Metrics to Manage Costs and Improve Performance Arvie J. Anderson Patent Counsel and Six Sigma Black Belt Eli Lilly & Company Eric Chung Director of Corporate Legal Affairs Atmel Corporation Mary B. Clark Vice President Law and Deputy General Counsel LexisNexis Miguel R. Rivera Sr. Associate General Counsel Wal-Mart Stores Incorporated This material is protected by copyright. Copyright © 2008 various authors and the Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC). Materials may not be reproduced without the consent of ACC. Reprint permission requests should be directed to ACC’s Legal Resources Department at ACC: 202/293-4103, ext. 338; [email protected] ACC's 2008 Annual Meeting Informed. In-house. Indispensable. Prior to joining LexisNexis, Ms. Clark practiced law as corporate counsel and in private Faculty Biographies litigation practice. Arvie Anderson Ms. Clark has shared her expertise at numerous conferences hosted by professional organizations such as the American Bar Association, LegalTech, and the Association of Arvie Anderson is a patent attorney at Eli Lilly and Company in Indianapolis. For the Corporate Counsel, and was selected by her peers as a Northern California Super Lawyer past two years, Mr. Anderson has been a Six Sigma Black Belt for the law division. He is in business law. responsible for legal process improvement projects across the department in areas such as budgeting, IT utilization, patent procurement, and litigation cost management. Beginning Ms. Clark is a graduate of the University of Kansas School of Law. -
Limiting Downstream Effects of Patent Licensing Activity in Software And
Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 91 Issue 1 Congressional Dysfunction and Executive Lawmaking During the Obama Article 14 Administration 1-29-2016 Limiting Downstream Effects of Patent Licensing Activity in Software and Electronics: An Argument for Alienability of Patent Licenses to Licensees' Business Successors Anna A. Onley IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Intellectual Property Law Commons Recommended Citation Anna A. Onley, Limiting Downstream Effects of Patent Licensing Activity in Software and Electronics: An Argument for Alienability of Patent Licenses to Licensees' Business Successors, 91 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 361 (2016). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol91/iss1/14 This Notes is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 37288-ckt_91-1 Sheet No. 188 Side A 12/28/2015 14:43:02 13 ONLEY FINAL (DO NOT DELETE) 12/24/2015 9:25 PM LIMITING DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS OF PATENT LICENSING ACTIVITY IN SOFTWARE AND ELECTRONICS: AN ARGUMENT FOR ALIENABILITY OF PATENT LICENSES TO LICENSEES’ BUSINESS SUCCESSORS ANNA A. ONLEY* Contents INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 362 THE PROBLEM ............................................................... -
Drafting Patent License Agreements
Detailed Contents Preface ............................................................................................ v Preface to the First Edition ........................................................... vii Summary Contents ........................................................................ ix Contents of Forms .......................................................................... xxiii 1 Some Premises and Commentary ................................... 1 1.00 Orientation and a Disclaimer of Legal Completeness ............................................................... 1 1.01 License Agreements as a Separate Topic .................. 2 1.02 A Pessimistic Prognosis Concerning Certainty of Draftsmanship ......................................................... 4 A. The Semantic Problem .......................................... 4 B. Uncertainty Through Human Frailty .................. 6 1. Ambiguity ......................................................... 6 2. Vagueness ......................................................... 8 3. Misplaced Modifier .......................................... 10 1.03 Contra Preferentum .................................................... 12 2 Legal Principles ................................................................... 15 2.01 Evaluating the Legal Nature of the Subject Matter .......................................................................... 15 A. The Scope of a Patent ........................................... 16 B. The Scope of Unpatented Technology ................. -
University of Copenhagen
Study on a collaboration system for commercialisation of intellectual property in the EU Radauer, Alfred ; Dudenbostel, Tobias; Bostyn, Sven; Buchtela, Georg; Patzold, Rainer; Langenberg, Lars Publication date: 2019 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Document license: Other Citation for published version (APA): Radauer, A., Dudenbostel, T., Bostyn, S., Buchtela, G., Patzold, R., & Langenberg, L. (2019). Study on a collaboration system for commercialisation of intellectual property in the EU. European Commission. Download date: 03. okt.. 2021 Study on a collaboration system for commercialisation of intellectual property in the EU Final Report 15 October 2019 Prepared by: Alfred Radauer, Tobias Dudenbostel (Technopolis) Sven Bostyn Georg Buchtela Rainer Pätzold, Lars Langenberg (Pumacy AG) The authors would like to thank the following experts for their advice on the report: Angela Siegling, Peter Pawlek, Udo Gennari EUROPEAN COMMISSION Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) Department A – COSME, H2020 SME and EMFF Unit A.1- COSME DISCLAIMER This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019 © European Union, 2019 Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Print ISBN 978-92-9202-694-3 doi:10.2826/692284 EA-02-19-894-EN-C PDF ISBN 978-92-9202-693-6 doi:10.2826/460031 EA-02-19-894-EN-N Study on a collaboration system for commercialisation of intellectual property in the EU TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................. -
Hedging Your Intellectual Property Bets
Hedge funds and IP Hedging your intellectual property bets IPOffering’s Richard Ehrlickman explains why twinning hedge funds with IP will become a more common practice Remember the IBM Selectric? Introduced in 1961, it was that typewriter that used an interchangeable “golf ball” element instead of individual levers for each letter or character. And despite its name, it was mostly mechanical and relied only slightly on electricity. In fact, its electric functions could also be performed with a hand crank. The Selectric was one of the last great mechanical patented inventions Picture: Shutterstock Picture: of the 20th century. For 15 years, IBM enjoyed a monopoly on typewriters with the “ball” element because of its patent. Only in the late 1970s, and useful arts”. Most businesses that develop new technologies patent when IBM’s patent expired, did other companies have a chance to produce them and use those patents to develop new products, open up new similar typewriters – but none came close to IBM’s success. markets, increase their competiveness, and grow their sales and profits. Senator Patrick Leahy even made reference to the Selectric during License Patents. Enterprises either license or cross license, and debate on the legislation that became the America Invents Act, “A universities often license patents, to generate additional revenue in patent system developed for a 1952 economy – before the internet, areas they are currently not practising. This process is often referred to before cellphones, before computers, before photocopiers, even before as “carrot licensing” as compared to “stick licensing” (or enforcement the IBM Selectric typewriter – needs to be reconsidered in light of 21st – more on that below). -
Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets– an Introduction to Intellectual Property for In-House Counsel
By in-house counsel, for in-house counsel.SM InfoPAKSM Intellectual Property Primer: Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets– An Introduction to Intellectual Property for In-House Counsel Third Edition Sponsored by: Association of Corporate Counsel 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036 tel 202.293.4103, fax 202.293.4701 www.acc.com 2 Intellectual Property Primer: Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets: An Introduction to Intellectual Property for In-House Counsel Intellectual Property Primer: Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets– An Introduction to Intellectual Property for In-House Counsel Third Edition July 2008 Provided by the Association of Corporate Counsel 1025 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036 Tel. 202.293.4103 Fax 202.293.4701 www.acc.com This InfoPAKSM is designed to provide corporate counsel with a general overview of intellectual property and to suggest useful practices for the handling of intellectual property issues in the corporate setting. This information should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on specific facts, or representative of the views of ACC or any of its lawyers, unless so stated. This is not intended as a definitive statement on the subject but a tool, providing practical informa- tion for the reader. We hope that you find this material useful. Thank you for contacting the Association of Corporate Counsel. This material was prepared, compiled, and updated by the Intellectual Property attorneys of Dickstein Shapiro LLP (www.dicksteinshapiro.com), edited by Kenneth W. Brothers (First, Sec- ond, and Third Editions) and Megan Woodworth (Third Edition), at the direction of the Asso- ciation of Corporate Counsel. -
ESSENTIALS of Intellectual Property
FPREF 12/13/2010 11:21:42 Page 18 FFIRS 01/12/2011 10:49:45 Page 1 ESSENTIALS of Intellectual Property Second Edition FFIRS 01/12/2011 10:49:46 Page 2 ESSENTIALS SERIES The Essentials Series was created for busy business advisory and corporate professionals. The books in this series were designed so that these busy professionals can quickly acquire knowl- edge and skills in core business areas. Each book provides need-to-have fundamentals for those professionals who must: Get up to speed quickly, because they have been promoted to a new position or have broadened their responsibility scope Manage a new functional area Brush up on new developments in their area of responsibility Add more value to their company or clients Books in this series include: Essentials of Accounts Payable by Mary S. Schaeffer Essentials of Balanced Scorecard by Mohan Nair Essentials of Business Ethics by Denis Collins Essentials of Business Process Outsourcing by Thomas N. Duening and Rick L. Click Essentials of Capacity Management by Reginald Tomas Yu-Lee Essentials of Cash Flow by H.A. Schaeffer, Jr. Essentials of Corporate and Capital Formation by David H. Fater Essentials of Corporate Fraud by Tracy L. Coenen Essentials of Corporate Governance by Sanjay Anand Essentials of Corporate Performance Measurement by George T. Friedlob, Lydia L.F. Schleifer, and Franklin J. Plewa, Jr. Essentials of Cost Management by Joe and Catherine Stenzel Essentials of Credit, Collections, and Accounts Receivable by Mary S. Schaeffer Essentials of CRM: A Guide to Customer Relationship Management by Bryan Bergeron Essentials of Enterprise Compliance by Susan D. -
Patent Assertion Entities in Europe Their Impact on Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in ICT Markets
Patent Assertion Entities in Europe Their impact on innovation and knowledge transfer in ICT markets Europe Economics Editors: Nikolaus Thumm, Garry Gabison (Joint Research Centre) 2016 EUR 28145 EN This publication is a Science for Policy report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policy- making process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. Contact information European Commission, Joint Research Centre Address: Edificio Expo. c/Inca Garcilaso, 3. 41092 Seville (Spain) E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 954488211 JRC Science Hub https://ec.europa.eu/jrc JRC103321 EUR 28145 EN PDF ISBN 978-92-79-62903-7 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2791/134702 Print ISBN 978-92-79-62902-0 ISSN 1018-5593 doi:10.2791/039681 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 © European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. How to cite: European Economics; Patent Assertion Entities in Europe; Eds: Nikolaus Thumm, Garry Gabison (Joint Research Centre), EUR 28145 EN; doi:10.2791/134702 All images © European Union 2016 Title Patent Assertion Entities in Europe Abstract Patent assertion has become a common practice in shaping the balance between technology creation and technology dissemination in the Information and Communication Industry (ICT). The importance of this practice for the functioning of ICT markets has given rise to new entities that enforce patents but do not utilise the patented technology, commonly referred to as patent assertion entities (PAEs). -
Study on Patents and the Public Domain12
E CDIP/4/3 REV./STUDY/INF/2 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: APRIL 27, 2011 STUDY ON PATENTS AND THE PUBLIC DOMAIN12 1 The views expressed in the study are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of the WIPO Secretariat or its Member States. 2 The Patents and the Public Domain part of the study was prepared by Mr. Jeremy Phillips, Professorial Fellow, Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute, University of London, London, United Kingdom. The Development Dimension: National Practices and Experiences part was prepared by: A. Mr. McLean Sibanda, Chief Executive Officer, The Innovation Hub, Pretoria, South Africa; B. Mr. Hossam El Saghir, Professor of Commercial Law and General Director of the, Regional Institute for Intellectual Property, Helwan University, and Attorney at Law, Cairo, Egypt; C. Mr. Ernesto Rengifo García, Professor, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogota, Colombia; D. Mrs. Olena Pavlina Orlyuk, Director, Scientific Research Institute of Intellectual Property, Kyiv, Ukraine; and E. Mr. Calab Gabriel, Senior Partner, K&S Partners, Intellectual Property Attorneys, Gurgaon, National Capital Region, India. CDIP/4/3 Rev./STUDY/INF/2. page i CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 2 I. PATENTS AND THE PUBLIC DOMAIN 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................. 7 2. The notion of “public domain” in relation to the patent system................................. -
Patent Assertion Entities in Europe Their Impact on Innovation and Knowledge Transfer in ICT Markets
Patent Assertion Entities in Europe Their impact on innovation and knowledge transfer in ICT markets Europe Economics Editors: Nikolaus Thumm, Garry Gabison (Joint Research Centre) 2016 EUR 28145 EN This publication is a Science for Policy report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policy- making process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. Contact information European Commission, Joint Research Centre Address: Edificio Expo. c/Inca Garcilaso, 3. 41092 Seville (Spain) E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 954488211 JRC Science Hub https://ec.europa.eu/jrc JRC103321 EUR 28145 EN PDF ISBN 978-92-79-62903-7 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2791/134702 Print ISBN 978-92-79-62902-0 ISSN 1018-5593 doi:10.2791/039681 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 © European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. How to cite: European Economics; Patent Assertion Entities in Europe; Eds: Nikolaus Thumm, Garry Gabison (Joint Research Centre), EUR 28145 EN; doi:10.2791/134702 All images © European Union 2016 Title Patent Assertion Entities in Europe Abstract Patent assertion has become a common practice in shaping the balance between technology creation and technology dissemination in the Information and Communication Industry (ICT). The importance of this practice for the functioning of ICT markets has given rise to new entities that enforce patents but do not utilise the patented technology, commonly referred to as patent assertion entities (PAEs).