By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
Septemper 18, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
So, you need an investor. Probably to start a new business and launch a new product. Here's a very short yet useful guide.
Get a distributor. Yes, they don't sound like investors, but it helps to see them that way. Why so? A typical one will bear the costs in some way, and help sell the product. These things are what a good investor would do. Typically, with a new product, you can expect to get anywhere from 2 to 9 percent of the selling price, though this can vary.
Sell though a TV marketing company – you know the ones. You see them on late night television, or on cable channels that sell goods. And yes, they don't sound like investors, but it will help to look at them that way. A typical one will help with the costs in come way, and perhaps even with the development and testing of the product.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Getting-Investors-Ultra-Quick-Tips.html
Nike Files Patent to Launch ‘Cryptokicks’ Cryptocurrency
By: Varun Nair
Nike has filed a trademark and service mark application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for protection over the brand ‘Cryptokicks.’ The document reveals the company’s intention to launch its own cryptocurrency and associated services.
Nike Intends to Launch Own Cryptocurrency
Nike Inc., one of the leading and most popular manufacturers of shoes in the entire world, has filed a trademark and service application seeking protection over the “Cryptokicks” brand on April 19th.
The document’s filing basis falls within section 1B, which means that it’s filed based on the company’s bona fide intention to use the trademark in commerce.
As the identification of some of the services Nike intends to work on, the document outlines “financial services, namely, providing a digital currency or digital token for use by members of an online community via a global computer network.”
Commenting on the matter was trademark attorney Josh Gerben, who said:
There has to be somewhat of a business idea behind it. If you submit things just for the purpose of submitting things, it will tie up the trademark system unnecessarily. Nike does not have a history of filings that are speculative.
Reportedly, the attorney has also said that there’s a 30-day period to appeal the application. If approved, however, Nike would have reserved the “Cryptokicks” name for a period of four years, during which it would need to launch a commercial product with that name.
Gerben added:
There’s a requirement that you commercially use a trademark to get the rights to it.
Read more >> https://www.allaboutlifehacks.com/nike-files-patent-to-launch-cryptokicks-cryptocurrency/
Nike has filed a trademark and service mark application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office for protection over the brand ‘Cryptokicks.’ The document reveals the company’s intention to launch its own cryptocurrency and associated services.
Nike Intends to Launch Own Cryptocurrency
Nike Inc., one of the leading and most popular manufacturers of shoes in the entire world, has filed a trademark and service application seeking protection over the “Cryptokicks” brand on April 19th.
The document’s filing basis falls within section 1B, which means that it’s filed based on the company’s bona fide intention to use the trademark in commerce.
As the identification of some of the services Nike intends to work on, the document outlines “financial services, namely, providing a digital currency or digital token for use by members of an online community via a global computer network.”
Commenting on the matter was trademark attorney Josh Gerben, who said:
There has to be somewhat of a business idea behind it. If you submit things just for the purpose of submitting things, it will tie up the trademark system unnecessarily. Nike does not have a history of filings that are speculative.
Reportedly, the attorney has also said that there’s a 30-day period to appeal the application. If approved, however, Nike would have reserved the “Cryptokicks” name for a period of four years, during which it would need to launch a commercial product with that name.
Gerben added:
There’s a requirement that you commercially use a trademark to get the rights to it.
Read more >> https://www.allaboutlifehacks.com/nike-files-patent-to-launch-cryptokicks-cryptocurrency/
GETTING INVESTORS – SURPRISING TYPES
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
September 16, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
So, you need an investor. Probably to start a new business and launch a new product. Here's a very short yet useful guide to some surprising types of investor.
Get a distributor. Yes, they don't sound like investors, but it helps to see them that way. Why so? A typical one will bear the costs in some way, and help sell the product. These things are what a good investor would do. Typically, with a new product, you can expect to get anywhere from 2 to 9 percent of the selling price, though this can vary.
Sell though a TV marketing company – you know the ones. You see them on late night television, or on cable channels that sell goods. And yes, they don't sound like investors, but it will help to look at them that way. A typical one will help with the costs in come way, and perhaps even with the development and testing of the product. These are things a good investor might do. Typically, one might expect anywhere from 2 to 4 percent of the selling price.
Go to an investment club. There are surprisingly many if you look. Try online searches, and word-of-mouth if necessary. Ask around, especially in local businesses, where the owner might well belong to such an investment club. A good investor will take about 10 to 50 percent of your business, in exchange for investment money and possibly expertise. A good investor will know how to help you succeed!
Press releases! There are companies that do those. The more press releases, the better. Put up a web site so investors reading the press releases can find you.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Getting-Investors-Surprising-Types.html
September 16, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
So, you need an investor. Probably to start a new business and launch a new product. Here's a very short yet useful guide to some surprising types of investor.
Get a distributor. Yes, they don't sound like investors, but it helps to see them that way. Why so? A typical one will bear the costs in some way, and help sell the product. These things are what a good investor would do. Typically, with a new product, you can expect to get anywhere from 2 to 9 percent of the selling price, though this can vary.
Sell though a TV marketing company – you know the ones. You see them on late night television, or on cable channels that sell goods. And yes, they don't sound like investors, but it will help to look at them that way. A typical one will help with the costs in come way, and perhaps even with the development and testing of the product. These are things a good investor might do. Typically, one might expect anywhere from 2 to 4 percent of the selling price.
Go to an investment club. There are surprisingly many if you look. Try online searches, and word-of-mouth if necessary. Ask around, especially in local businesses, where the owner might well belong to such an investment club. A good investor will take about 10 to 50 percent of your business, in exchange for investment money and possibly expertise. A good investor will know how to help you succeed!
Press releases! There are companies that do those. The more press releases, the better. Put up a web site so investors reading the press releases can find you.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Getting-Investors-Surprising-Types.html
United States: What You Should Ask About Intellectual Property Before Investing In A Cannabis Company: An IP Due Diligence Primer
By: Rod Berman and Jessica Bromall Sparkman
The cannabis industry is the new investment frontier. Consider the capital investment by Constellation Brands in Canada's Canopy Growth, Aurora Cannabis's acquisition of Mexico's Farmaciea Magistrales, Coca-Cola's discussions with Aurora Cannabis to develop CBD infused drinks, CannaCraft and Lagunitas' co-branded launch of HiFi Hops, an IPA-inspired cannabis sparkling beverage, GUINNESS® owner Diageo's discussions to explore releasing a line of cannabis infused drinks, and Molson Coors Brewing and The Hydropothecary Corporation joint venture to develop cannabis drinks. And, with the decline of cigarette smoking, even Philip Morris is interested in the business. It is reported that other huge companies want to participate in cannabis deals, including BASF, DuPont, and Royal Dutch Shell, as well as Beau Wrigley who has invested in Suterra Wellness, a medical marijuana company with plans to enter the domestic market.
But what important assets do these cannabis companies own or control that justify an investment? In the typical investment scenario, a target's intellectual property is a key bankable asset and questions about the strength and scope of the target's intellectual property are critical. Does the company own any patented technology, and if so, are the patents valid and enforceable? How about company brands? Does the company own its brands? Where does the company stand in terms of the risk of being sued for infringement? What about employee-created intellectual property? Does the company own it? Does it matter if the deal is structured as an asset purchase or an equity transaction?
These and other intellectual property related due diligence topics are discussed below.
Trademarks
A trademark is typically (though not always) a word, phrase, symbol, sound, smell or design that uniquely identifies and distinguishes the source of goods or services. Examples of word trademarks include JUUL®, ROORTM, EPIDIOLEX® or GG4TM. A "service mark" is a mark that identifies services rather than goods, such as EAZE®, LEAFLY®, FLOWHUB®, and MASSROOTS®. The distinction between trademarks and service marks, however, is one without a difference. They function in the same way and, from a legal stand point, are treated in the same way, and the term "trademark" (or sometimes just "mark") is often used to refer to both trademarks and service marks (as is the case in this article). Similarly, "trade dress" refers to a trademark that consists of the appearance – the "look and feel" – of a product and/or its packaging, e.g., the look and feel of the PAX® vaporizer (shown below).
Read more >> http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/798550/Trademark/What+You+Should+Ask+About+Intellectual+Property+Before+Investing+In+A+Cannabis+Company+An+IP+Due+Diligence+Primer
The cannabis industry is the new investment frontier. Consider the capital investment by Constellation Brands in Canada's Canopy Growth, Aurora Cannabis's acquisition of Mexico's Farmaciea Magistrales, Coca-Cola's discussions with Aurora Cannabis to develop CBD infused drinks, CannaCraft and Lagunitas' co-branded launch of HiFi Hops, an IPA-inspired cannabis sparkling beverage, GUINNESS® owner Diageo's discussions to explore releasing a line of cannabis infused drinks, and Molson Coors Brewing and The Hydropothecary Corporation joint venture to develop cannabis drinks. And, with the decline of cigarette smoking, even Philip Morris is interested in the business. It is reported that other huge companies want to participate in cannabis deals, including BASF, DuPont, and Royal Dutch Shell, as well as Beau Wrigley who has invested in Suterra Wellness, a medical marijuana company with plans to enter the domestic market.
But what important assets do these cannabis companies own or control that justify an investment? In the typical investment scenario, a target's intellectual property is a key bankable asset and questions about the strength and scope of the target's intellectual property are critical. Does the company own any patented technology, and if so, are the patents valid and enforceable? How about company brands? Does the company own its brands? Where does the company stand in terms of the risk of being sued for infringement? What about employee-created intellectual property? Does the company own it? Does it matter if the deal is structured as an asset purchase or an equity transaction?
These and other intellectual property related due diligence topics are discussed below.
Trademarks
A trademark is typically (though not always) a word, phrase, symbol, sound, smell or design that uniquely identifies and distinguishes the source of goods or services. Examples of word trademarks include JUUL®, ROORTM, EPIDIOLEX® or GG4TM. A "service mark" is a mark that identifies services rather than goods, such as EAZE®, LEAFLY®, FLOWHUB®, and MASSROOTS®. The distinction between trademarks and service marks, however, is one without a difference. They function in the same way and, from a legal stand point, are treated in the same way, and the term "trademark" (or sometimes just "mark") is often used to refer to both trademarks and service marks (as is the case in this article). Similarly, "trade dress" refers to a trademark that consists of the appearance – the "look and feel" – of a product and/or its packaging, e.g., the look and feel of the PAX® vaporizer (shown below).
Read more >> http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/798550/Trademark/What+You+Should+Ask+About+Intellectual+Property+Before+Investing+In+A+Cannabis+Company+An+IP+Due+Diligence+Primer
Let's Sue That patent Infringer - Or Maybe Not!
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
August 23, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Someone is infringing your patent. Now you want to rush out and sue them! Let's stop and talk about that for a minute.
The best reason to wait: that infringer is promoting your product, which takes time, money and effort before it pays off. So, let them do it for a while, and then swoop in! You shouldn't wait too long, perhaps a year or two or three, although some case law suggests that you can wait six years to sue. Don't rely on that, of course - in a specific case your patent attorney should verify and recommend specific deadlines.
Let's just mention that there can be a number of defenses to a patent lawsuit. Such defenses depend on the answers to the following (and possibly other) questions, such as: Was the infringer actually the first to use it? Can your patent be challenged? Were you actually damaged? Is the alleged infringer's device/product really close enough to your patent to infringe its claims?
Now let's say there are no defenses to the lawsuit, and victory is absolutely certain. This is very hypothetical, of course, since there is always some uncertainly. But, assuming this perfect situation, should you still go ahead and sue? The answer may be “no” for a number of reasons!
So don't sue? Why not? Well, for starters, if the infringement was for a small number of products, you are unlikely to get meaningfully large damages. It is very easy to spend more money that you can recover. That's right, you can win the lawsuit and yet get little or no cash.
If the court finds in your favor, you can ask for actual damages, and/or lost profits, and/or attorneys fee, and/or costs, among other things. Notice I said you can ask! However, asking is not the same as getting. Worse, it can be difficult to prove lost profits or actual damages.
Even in a good case, with ample proof, it can be difficult to get a damage award that really compensates for the time and effort of litigation. Money is not the only cost of litigation. And, a damage award is not the same as actually receiving money, since defendants may not have assets to cover the damage award, may declare bankruptcy, and may even simply hide their money.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Lets-Sue-That-patent-Infringer.html
August 23, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Someone is infringing your patent. Now you want to rush out and sue them! Let's stop and talk about that for a minute.
The best reason to wait: that infringer is promoting your product, which takes time, money and effort before it pays off. So, let them do it for a while, and then swoop in! You shouldn't wait too long, perhaps a year or two or three, although some case law suggests that you can wait six years to sue. Don't rely on that, of course - in a specific case your patent attorney should verify and recommend specific deadlines.
Let's just mention that there can be a number of defenses to a patent lawsuit. Such defenses depend on the answers to the following (and possibly other) questions, such as: Was the infringer actually the first to use it? Can your patent be challenged? Were you actually damaged? Is the alleged infringer's device/product really close enough to your patent to infringe its claims?
Now let's say there are no defenses to the lawsuit, and victory is absolutely certain. This is very hypothetical, of course, since there is always some uncertainly. But, assuming this perfect situation, should you still go ahead and sue? The answer may be “no” for a number of reasons!
So don't sue? Why not? Well, for starters, if the infringement was for a small number of products, you are unlikely to get meaningfully large damages. It is very easy to spend more money that you can recover. That's right, you can win the lawsuit and yet get little or no cash.
If the court finds in your favor, you can ask for actual damages, and/or lost profits, and/or attorneys fee, and/or costs, among other things. Notice I said you can ask! However, asking is not the same as getting. Worse, it can be difficult to prove lost profits or actual damages.
Even in a good case, with ample proof, it can be difficult to get a damage award that really compensates for the time and effort of litigation. Money is not the only cost of litigation. And, a damage award is not the same as actually receiving money, since defendants may not have assets to cover the damage award, may declare bankruptcy, and may even simply hide their money.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Lets-Sue-That-patent-Infringer.html
The Truth Nobody Tells You About Startup Budgeting
By: Tracy Leigh Hazzard
So many startups are so eager to throw money into anything they believe will speed up the launch process. More seasoned experts know that intellectual property, patents, trademarks, copyrights, content, and products should all be assets that hold value, rather than sinkholes. You need to have an investment plan for all of this. That means every single spending point along the way should be detailed in your investment plan and budget. The problem with this is that, unless you are spending thousands on an expert, which you probably cannot afford in the beginning, who knows how much you should budget for things like patents, marketing, prototyping, research, and design? This is what we are going to break down today.
Scrounging and Spending: Why? What? When?
The first thing you need to be able to determine is whether or not an item is an asset or a liability, so you can learn when to scrounge, and when to spend, and when you are spending, how much you should be dropping. Remember, when discerning between the two, assets always add value while liabilities oftentimes eat up resources without adding value back in.
The Importance of Research and Design
It is no secret that startups that spend on research and design, especially forward-thinking research and design in their product categories, out-profit every other brand in their category. Every other brand in their category has less value both in the marketplace and in sales. As you build your brand, compare yourself to bigger brands in your category. If you're competing in a marketplace with Apple, for example, then you're going to have to spend a pretty steep amount on research and design. Apple spends between 20 and 25 percent of its overall revenue budget on research and design. In my early days at Herman Miller, they had an entire research division that built assets for the business.
Content-based assets. Research and white papers that help to boost the sales of existing products would be considered assets. Herman Miller researched the power of ergonomics, the comfort levels of office chairs, and so on, with the hope that this research might lead to aha! moments in which they might come up with new ideas and new projects to initiate. They also knew this content would help sell existing products.
Proprietary technologies. Any competitive advantage that is specific to what you are selling has an extreme value because that doesn't expire in 17 to 20 years. So in this case, the more research and design you put into your proprietary technologies and processes, the more value your company has.
Read more >> https://www.inc.com/tracy-leigh-hazzard/how-to-budget-your-startup-so-you-dont-run-out-of-money.html
So many startups are so eager to throw money into anything they believe will speed up the launch process. More seasoned experts know that intellectual property, patents, trademarks, copyrights, content, and products should all be assets that hold value, rather than sinkholes. You need to have an investment plan for all of this. That means every single spending point along the way should be detailed in your investment plan and budget. The problem with this is that, unless you are spending thousands on an expert, which you probably cannot afford in the beginning, who knows how much you should budget for things like patents, marketing, prototyping, research, and design? This is what we are going to break down today.
Scrounging and Spending: Why? What? When?
The first thing you need to be able to determine is whether or not an item is an asset or a liability, so you can learn when to scrounge, and when to spend, and when you are spending, how much you should be dropping. Remember, when discerning between the two, assets always add value while liabilities oftentimes eat up resources without adding value back in.
The Importance of Research and Design
It is no secret that startups that spend on research and design, especially forward-thinking research and design in their product categories, out-profit every other brand in their category. Every other brand in their category has less value both in the marketplace and in sales. As you build your brand, compare yourself to bigger brands in your category. If you're competing in a marketplace with Apple, for example, then you're going to have to spend a pretty steep amount on research and design. Apple spends between 20 and 25 percent of its overall revenue budget on research and design. In my early days at Herman Miller, they had an entire research division that built assets for the business.
Content-based assets. Research and white papers that help to boost the sales of existing products would be considered assets. Herman Miller researched the power of ergonomics, the comfort levels of office chairs, and so on, with the hope that this research might lead to aha! moments in which they might come up with new ideas and new projects to initiate. They also knew this content would help sell existing products.
Proprietary technologies. Any competitive advantage that is specific to what you are selling has an extreme value because that doesn't expire in 17 to 20 years. So in this case, the more research and design you put into your proprietary technologies and processes, the more value your company has.
Read more >> https://www.inc.com/tracy-leigh-hazzard/how-to-budget-your-startup-so-you-dont-run-out-of-money.html
What Does A Patent Lawsuit Cost ?
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
August 23, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Patent infringement is a highly charged subject, and I have seen how it affects the patent owner. A lawsuit would seem like a wonderful solution. But, what should it cost?
Though I have heard many numbers, it is all just hearsay. Even so, it may be helpful to say it.
A contingency attorney might take the case, but may require an ownership interest in your company of 50 percent or higher. Is it worth it? Maybe so, if that's the only way to go forward. And why the high ownership interest? Easy – to have control to ensure payment in event of a victory.
A very small law firm or individual attorney will often charge less than a large firm. I have heard stories wherein a plaintiff might pay somewhere between 20k and 60k, depending on if/when it settles. Higher numbers are possible when it goes to trial and there are many issues. Is this a good value? That depends – if you can only afford that much, then there's simply no choice.
A big company practically must use a large law firm for its reputation and size. There is great variation, but one should expect to pay for that large size and reputation. I have heard a number of experienced litigators say to simply add a zero to the numbers used for a small law firm. Is it worth it? That depends, but I have seen examples where it was well worth having a large firm do the litigation.
Where's that money go, anyway? Well, a portion goes to filing or answering the Complaint; attending to discovery and motions related to discovery; depositions and court reporter costs; various court hearings where attendance is required; and finally for the trial itself (if it goes that far).
If you're the plaintiff, you'll have some control over the costs. If you raise more issues, then the cost will be higher. Or, if you challenge everything using Motions, then your costs will skyrocket.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/What-Does-A-Patent-Lawsuit-Cost.html
August 23, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Patent infringement is a highly charged subject, and I have seen how it affects the patent owner. A lawsuit would seem like a wonderful solution. But, what should it cost?
Though I have heard many numbers, it is all just hearsay. Even so, it may be helpful to say it.
A contingency attorney might take the case, but may require an ownership interest in your company of 50 percent or higher. Is it worth it? Maybe so, if that's the only way to go forward. And why the high ownership interest? Easy – to have control to ensure payment in event of a victory.
A very small law firm or individual attorney will often charge less than a large firm. I have heard stories wherein a plaintiff might pay somewhere between 20k and 60k, depending on if/when it settles. Higher numbers are possible when it goes to trial and there are many issues. Is this a good value? That depends – if you can only afford that much, then there's simply no choice.
A big company practically must use a large law firm for its reputation and size. There is great variation, but one should expect to pay for that large size and reputation. I have heard a number of experienced litigators say to simply add a zero to the numbers used for a small law firm. Is it worth it? That depends, but I have seen examples where it was well worth having a large firm do the litigation.
Where's that money go, anyway? Well, a portion goes to filing or answering the Complaint; attending to discovery and motions related to discovery; depositions and court reporter costs; various court hearings where attendance is required; and finally for the trial itself (if it goes that far).
If you're the plaintiff, you'll have some control over the costs. If you raise more issues, then the cost will be higher. Or, if you challenge everything using Motions, then your costs will skyrocket.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/What-Does-A-Patent-Lawsuit-Cost.html
THIS STARTUP COULD SELL YOU CRYPTO TOKENS—WITH SEC BACKING
By: Gregory Barber
INITIAL COIN OFFERINGS have gotten a bad rap—in many cases, deservedly so. Sure, there were blockchain projects with sound dreams and solid business plans. But as the bitcoin bubble swelled in late 2017, ICOs became synonymous with predation: get-rich-quick schemes that involved taking money from anyone who was willing, in return for worthless crypto tokens.
Since then, the Securities and Exchange Commission has been trying to clean up the mess. The rules are vague, but this much has become clear: Most ICOs are securities offerings, and require all the protections and disclosures of selling stocks. That basically takes them off the table for ordinary investors. Blockchain startups now typically fund themselves with sales of shares (or tokens) to so-called accredited investors, institutions, and wealthy individuals.
But now one blockchain startup thinks it’s found a way to get you and me involved again in token sales—with the SEC’s blessing.
“I hate the term ICO,” says Muneeb Ali, cofounder and CEO of Blockstack, which is building a platform for decentralized apps. Last week, the company filed an application with the SEC to sell its tokens, called Stacks, under an exemption called Regulation A+. The pathway came into being as part of the JOBS Act passed by Congress in 2012, and allows businesses to raise $50 million each year from ordinary investors. Blockstack believes that, if approved by the SEC, it would be the first to use the exemption to sell a crypto token.
Tucked in the filing was a disclosure about another Blockstack investor: Harvard Management Company, which oversees the university’s endowment. It’s listed alongside two other investors that together hold a stake valued at about $11 million, purchased in an earlier token sale (Harvard’s exact share wasn’t disclosed). Though a few big institutions, including Yale and two Virginia pension plans, have invested in crypto-focused funds, Harvard’s involvement is unusual in that it appears to have taken a direct interest in the tokens of a blockchain network. Harvard Management Company declined to comment.
Read more >> https://www.wired.com/story/startup-sell-you-crypto-tokens-with-sec-backing/
INITIAL COIN OFFERINGS have gotten a bad rap—in many cases, deservedly so. Sure, there were blockchain projects with sound dreams and solid business plans. But as the bitcoin bubble swelled in late 2017, ICOs became synonymous with predation: get-rich-quick schemes that involved taking money from anyone who was willing, in return for worthless crypto tokens.
Since then, the Securities and Exchange Commission has been trying to clean up the mess. The rules are vague, but this much has become clear: Most ICOs are securities offerings, and require all the protections and disclosures of selling stocks. That basically takes them off the table for ordinary investors. Blockchain startups now typically fund themselves with sales of shares (or tokens) to so-called accredited investors, institutions, and wealthy individuals.
But now one blockchain startup thinks it’s found a way to get you and me involved again in token sales—with the SEC’s blessing.
“I hate the term ICO,” says Muneeb Ali, cofounder and CEO of Blockstack, which is building a platform for decentralized apps. Last week, the company filed an application with the SEC to sell its tokens, called Stacks, under an exemption called Regulation A+. The pathway came into being as part of the JOBS Act passed by Congress in 2012, and allows businesses to raise $50 million each year from ordinary investors. Blockstack believes that, if approved by the SEC, it would be the first to use the exemption to sell a crypto token.
Tucked in the filing was a disclosure about another Blockstack investor: Harvard Management Company, which oversees the university’s endowment. It’s listed alongside two other investors that together hold a stake valued at about $11 million, purchased in an earlier token sale (Harvard’s exact share wasn’t disclosed). Though a few big institutions, including Yale and two Virginia pension plans, have invested in crypto-focused funds, Harvard’s involvement is unusual in that it appears to have taken a direct interest in the tokens of a blockchain network. Harvard Management Company declined to comment.
Read more >> https://www.wired.com/story/startup-sell-you-crypto-tokens-with-sec-backing/
Patent Application – What to Expect After You File One
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
June 21, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
So you're an inventor with a patent application! What happens now that it has been filed with the US Patent Office? Here's what to expect.
First, you'll get your Official Filing Receipt – it is actually pretty important. Sure, you'll get an electronic filing receipt if you filed it online. But, that's not what matters. The Official Filing Receipt is the easiest and fastest way to get your foreign filing license. And you'll want that, if you ever intend to file in other countries and need your US priority date.
If the US Patent Office has any objections to the drawings, specification, or abstract, they'll (usually) notify you at the same time they send the Official Filing Receipt. Formal drawings are the main type of objection – you'll need those.
After a period of time, typically anywhere from six months to two years, you'll get your first Office Action. That's typically where the patent examiner reads the case, searches for the claimed invention, and applies the prior art to the claims. This is also where the examiner can make objects, for example objections to claim language, to errors in the specification or drawings, or other things.
The first Office Action could, of course, be an allowance. Those are not that common. If your application is allowed, there is an Issue Fee due that varies depending on your inventorship status (micro entity, small entity, or non-small entity). There is also a publication fee due, too (if the application was published).
Assuming you didn't get an allowance, then you'll have the option to respond to the First Office Action. Typically, your Response would meet any objections by amending the offending parts. And, your Response typically would provide remarks in support of patentability, such as explaining how the invention as claimed differs from the applied references. Your Response likely will also include an amendment to the claims to recite a feature not found in the applied reference, and this is one way to overcome an applied reference.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/What-to-Expect-After-You-File-One.html
June 21, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
So you're an inventor with a patent application! What happens now that it has been filed with the US Patent Office? Here's what to expect.
First, you'll get your Official Filing Receipt – it is actually pretty important. Sure, you'll get an electronic filing receipt if you filed it online. But, that's not what matters. The Official Filing Receipt is the easiest and fastest way to get your foreign filing license. And you'll want that, if you ever intend to file in other countries and need your US priority date.
If the US Patent Office has any objections to the drawings, specification, or abstract, they'll (usually) notify you at the same time they send the Official Filing Receipt. Formal drawings are the main type of objection – you'll need those.
After a period of time, typically anywhere from six months to two years, you'll get your first Office Action. That's typically where the patent examiner reads the case, searches for the claimed invention, and applies the prior art to the claims. This is also where the examiner can make objects, for example objections to claim language, to errors in the specification or drawings, or other things.
The first Office Action could, of course, be an allowance. Those are not that common. If your application is allowed, there is an Issue Fee due that varies depending on your inventorship status (micro entity, small entity, or non-small entity). There is also a publication fee due, too (if the application was published).
Assuming you didn't get an allowance, then you'll have the option to respond to the First Office Action. Typically, your Response would meet any objections by amending the offending parts. And, your Response typically would provide remarks in support of patentability, such as explaining how the invention as claimed differs from the applied references. Your Response likely will also include an amendment to the claims to recite a feature not found in the applied reference, and this is one way to overcome an applied reference.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/What-to-Expect-After-You-File-One.html
Rivalry can bring out the best in a startup
By: Alison Coleman
A novel business idea can quickly attract competition, but there are many ways to turn this into an advantage
You’re about to launch your new business when you find a rival with an almost identical idea. How do you respond? Give up? Rethink it? Or race to be the first to market?
That was the scenario facing entrepreneurs Massimiliano Gritti and Elliott Aeschlimann Perales right before their business went live. They planned to launch Bombinate as an online marketplace for new brands to sell men’s clothing and accessories. And by last December they had secured 30 suppliers from seven countries. Then, in January – a month away from the planned launch – they attended the Pitti menswear fair in Florence, Italy where they encountered a nasty surprise – another business competing for the same customers and brands.
“The future of our soon-to-launch company was now in question,” says Gritti. After the initial shock, the founders worked to make their offering more compelling. As well as an online marketplace, they decided to offer other services to their sellers.
These included helping them to create digital content, such as videos and photography, for their websites by connecting them with trusted content agencies and photographers. Bombinate would then promote the content on social media and analyse the traffic it received. With this new model complete, Bombinate is launching this month.
Leon Ifayemi and Omar Fahmi are the founders of SPCE, a search app for student accommodation. They also had to rework their business idea in its early stages. While crowdfunding in March they were contacted by two larger competitors with a view to working together. But they declined, instead using the interest to strengthen their business.
Read more >> https://www.theguardian.com/small-business-network/2017/may/04/arch-rival-success-fledgling-startup-entrepreneurs
A novel business idea can quickly attract competition, but there are many ways to turn this into an advantage
You’re about to launch your new business when you find a rival with an almost identical idea. How do you respond? Give up? Rethink it? Or race to be the first to market?
That was the scenario facing entrepreneurs Massimiliano Gritti and Elliott Aeschlimann Perales right before their business went live. They planned to launch Bombinate as an online marketplace for new brands to sell men’s clothing and accessories. And by last December they had secured 30 suppliers from seven countries. Then, in January – a month away from the planned launch – they attended the Pitti menswear fair in Florence, Italy where they encountered a nasty surprise – another business competing for the same customers and brands.
“The future of our soon-to-launch company was now in question,” says Gritti. After the initial shock, the founders worked to make their offering more compelling. As well as an online marketplace, they decided to offer other services to their sellers.
These included helping them to create digital content, such as videos and photography, for their websites by connecting them with trusted content agencies and photographers. Bombinate would then promote the content on social media and analyse the traffic it received. With this new model complete, Bombinate is launching this month.
Leon Ifayemi and Omar Fahmi are the founders of SPCE, a search app for student accommodation. They also had to rework their business idea in its early stages. While crowdfunding in March they were contacted by two larger competitors with a view to working together. But they declined, instead using the interest to strengthen their business.
Read more >> https://www.theguardian.com/small-business-network/2017/may/04/arch-rival-success-fledgling-startup-entrepreneurs
Startups with Patents are the Ultimate Anti-Monopoly
By: Paul Morinville
Patents are often referred to as monopolies. But that is a fundamental misunderstanding of how patents work to enhance competition. The truth is that a patent is a natural anti-monopoly.
In a functioning patent system, inventions become investible assets when they are patented, and the value of the invention increases as market demand increases. Because of the direct relationship between market demand and patent value, a patented invention can attract enough investment to compete with entrenched incumbents in the market for the invention.
This effect introduces new competitors into the market who are protected against incumbents for a long enough period that they can survive after the patent expires. Thus, patents act to increase competition by introducing new competitors into the market and thereby create competitive markets. But perhaps even more important, some inventions deliver a strong dose of creative destruction to monopolistic incumbents who did not innovate fast enough, causing those companies to fail and clearing the market of dead weight, thus opening the market to innovative new companies.
Patents are the ultimate anti-monopoly in a free market. But for this to work, the market must function undisturbed by crony laws and regulations. A patent must be a presumed valid “exclusive Right.”
The Exclusive Right Creates Market Scarcity
Like any free market, the value of an invention is determined by variations in supply and demand. Demand for an invention cannot be increased or decreased for an invention except by market effects outside of the invention. But supply is different.
If supply for an invention is unlimited, the value of the invention is zero no matter how high demand goes. Therefore, an invention with unlimited supply has no value and can never attract investment. The problem of unlimited supply was corrected by the Founders, who wisely constructed a patent as an “exclusive Right” in the U.S. Constitution. (The word Right is used only once in the Constitution and capitalized in the original.)
The exclusive Right creates scarcity in the market for the invention—it prevents anyone other than the inventor from commercializing an invention protected by a patent. This limits supply so that demand can act to increase the patent’s value. Thus, the exclusive Right creates an investible asset that can be collateralized to attract enough investment to commercialize an invention and supply it at a level that meets demand.
Read more >> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/04/09/startups-with-patents-are-the-ultimate-anti-monopoly/id=108102/
Patents are often referred to as monopolies. But that is a fundamental misunderstanding of how patents work to enhance competition. The truth is that a patent is a natural anti-monopoly.
In a functioning patent system, inventions become investible assets when they are patented, and the value of the invention increases as market demand increases. Because of the direct relationship between market demand and patent value, a patented invention can attract enough investment to compete with entrenched incumbents in the market for the invention.
This effect introduces new competitors into the market who are protected against incumbents for a long enough period that they can survive after the patent expires. Thus, patents act to increase competition by introducing new competitors into the market and thereby create competitive markets. But perhaps even more important, some inventions deliver a strong dose of creative destruction to monopolistic incumbents who did not innovate fast enough, causing those companies to fail and clearing the market of dead weight, thus opening the market to innovative new companies.
Patents are the ultimate anti-monopoly in a free market. But for this to work, the market must function undisturbed by crony laws and regulations. A patent must be a presumed valid “exclusive Right.”
The Exclusive Right Creates Market Scarcity
Like any free market, the value of an invention is determined by variations in supply and demand. Demand for an invention cannot be increased or decreased for an invention except by market effects outside of the invention. But supply is different.
If supply for an invention is unlimited, the value of the invention is zero no matter how high demand goes. Therefore, an invention with unlimited supply has no value and can never attract investment. The problem of unlimited supply was corrected by the Founders, who wisely constructed a patent as an “exclusive Right” in the U.S. Constitution. (The word Right is used only once in the Constitution and capitalized in the original.)
The exclusive Right creates scarcity in the market for the invention—it prevents anyone other than the inventor from commercializing an invention protected by a patent. This limits supply so that demand can act to increase the patent’s value. Thus, the exclusive Right creates an investible asset that can be collateralized to attract enough investment to commercialize an invention and supply it at a level that meets demand.
Read more >> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/04/09/startups-with-patents-are-the-ultimate-anti-monopoly/id=108102/
Why Worry About Infringement – Things To Do First
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
June 3, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
You've seen the topic of patent infringement in the news. Should you be worried? If you are, here's some things to do that should minimize your risk.
If your product needs a component that is patented, you have two options. One is to buy that component from the patent owner or from an official licensee. Why? It carries an implied license. The other option is to contact the patent owner and negotiate a license, in which case fees may be small.
What if there's nothing out there like your product, how will you know if you should worry? You can do a right-to-use patent search. This is different from a normal patentability search, because you're not worried about patentability – you're worried about infringement. In a right-to-use patent search, you will search for patents that are expired, meaning more than 17 years old. If you can find the component or feature that is of interest, then you can rely on it and have a right-to-use. For a quick and easy patent search, try going to any patent site that allows searching, such as the official uspto site or Google® patents.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Why-Worry-About-Infringement.html
June 3, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
You've seen the topic of patent infringement in the news. Should you be worried? If you are, here's some things to do that should minimize your risk.
If your product needs a component that is patented, you have two options. One is to buy that component from the patent owner or from an official licensee. Why? It carries an implied license. The other option is to contact the patent owner and negotiate a license, in which case fees may be small.
What if there's nothing out there like your product, how will you know if you should worry? You can do a right-to-use patent search. This is different from a normal patentability search, because you're not worried about patentability – you're worried about infringement. In a right-to-use patent search, you will search for patents that are expired, meaning more than 17 years old. If you can find the component or feature that is of interest, then you can rely on it and have a right-to-use. For a quick and easy patent search, try going to any patent site that allows searching, such as the official uspto site or Google® patents.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Why-Worry-About-Infringement.html
5 Ways To Manage Intellectual Property For Startups
By: Imdpremiere
Intellectual property (IP) is a primary business component for many entrepreneurs. However, intellectual property differs from other company assets in the way that it is not tangible. Since it is not a piece of physical property, many entrepreneurs neglect to realize its value. As a result, they fail to protect it and lose any advantage they had over their competitors.
However, intellectual property protection is very important in entrepreneurship. To refrain from making the common mistakes, here are the best ways to protect intellectual property for startups.
1. Develop An IP Strategy.
In order to protect intellectual property properly, you need to develop an IP strategy. As with many business plans, there are many necessary elements to include in your strategy. For instance, your first step must be to determine all of your intellectual property assets. Such assets can include copyrights, trademarks, and industrial designs. Then, create timelines for how you will protect your assets and how you will enforce any infringements on your property. Develop an IP strategy so you have a set plan to follow throughout your startup. If done well, your strategy will ensure IP protection.
2. Conduct A Trademark Search.
Another way to protect intellectual property for startups is to conduct a trademark search. Many entrepreneurs run into legal issues when they fail to conduct a search. They put themselves in a vulnerable situation. If you design a trademark that has already been registered, you could create a liability. Consumers will have a hard time differentiating your business from the other business with the same trademark. Furthermore, the company who had already registered the trademark could take legal measures to eliminate this conflict. Protect intellectual property and your startup as a whole by conducting a trademark search before creating new claims.
Read more >> https://imdpremiere.wordpress.com/2019/04/08/5-ways-to-manage-intellectual-property-for-startups/
Intellectual property (IP) is a primary business component for many entrepreneurs. However, intellectual property differs from other company assets in the way that it is not tangible. Since it is not a piece of physical property, many entrepreneurs neglect to realize its value. As a result, they fail to protect it and lose any advantage they had over their competitors.
However, intellectual property protection is very important in entrepreneurship. To refrain from making the common mistakes, here are the best ways to protect intellectual property for startups.
1. Develop An IP Strategy.
In order to protect intellectual property properly, you need to develop an IP strategy. As with many business plans, there are many necessary elements to include in your strategy. For instance, your first step must be to determine all of your intellectual property assets. Such assets can include copyrights, trademarks, and industrial designs. Then, create timelines for how you will protect your assets and how you will enforce any infringements on your property. Develop an IP strategy so you have a set plan to follow throughout your startup. If done well, your strategy will ensure IP protection.
2. Conduct A Trademark Search.
Another way to protect intellectual property for startups is to conduct a trademark search. Many entrepreneurs run into legal issues when they fail to conduct a search. They put themselves in a vulnerable situation. If you design a trademark that has already been registered, you could create a liability. Consumers will have a hard time differentiating your business from the other business with the same trademark. Furthermore, the company who had already registered the trademark could take legal measures to eliminate this conflict. Protect intellectual property and your startup as a whole by conducting a trademark search before creating new claims.
Read more >> https://imdpremiere.wordpress.com/2019/04/08/5-ways-to-manage-intellectual-property-for-startups/
Costly Misconceptions About Trademarks
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
June 8, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Getting a trademark is a great idea, but things may not be that simple. There are some misconceptions that can cost time, money, or even loss of rights.
One common misconception is that a registered trademark is necessary to have enforceable trademark rights. We are all familiar with registered trademarks – the kind with the ® registration symbol. But, trademark rights normally arise from actual use, even for unregistered trademarks. State courts can enforce such rights arising from actual use, even in the absence of a federally registered trademark. No registration, no problem – sometimes.
Getting a registered trademark requires filing a trademark application. Choices need to be made right at the start: actual use or intent-to-use; type of goods/services; logo or word mark. These choices can have profound consequences. Even the U.S. Trademark Office recommends having an experienced trademark attorney help with those choices – you'll see the warning for that in the online trademark application filing forms and elsewhere.
Actual use sounds better than intent-to-use. Maybe so - unless there is a conflict with another trademark filed on an intent-to-use basis. Then, surprisingly, the owner of the intent-to-use to application is permitted to introduce evidence of events that show an intent-to-use that has occurred before the application's filing date. The actual-use applicant does not have the same rights. Such evidence of intent-to-use can be scant: a mere mention at a business meeting, or an order for design of the mark, for example. This is peculiar to federal trademarks; state courts can apply their own standards and might well decide specific cases differently.
Choice of goods/services is important: more is better, right? Not so fast. Listing multiple catergories is all good and well, until you have to prove actual sales. Sure, a Statement of Use might work with the U.S. Trademark Office, but at a cost: forfeiture of rights if untrue. When it comes time to enforce your trademark rights against an infringer, it may become necessary to have proof of use in specific categories of goods. Listing a few categories of goods is fine, and once you get your trademark registered your future use in other categories will allow you to file further trademark applications for those additional uses.
Logos are great: typically a logo is a design plus words. Better than just the plain words, right? Not exactly. A plain, ordinary word mark – once registered – covers variations and logos, and sometimes can even cover translations into other languages. But, again, things are not always simple. A complex logo might be registrable when the word mark by itself would not be registrable, but those situations do not seem to be very common. The word mark is a very good way to go.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Costly-Misconceptions-About-Trademarks.html
June 8, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Getting a trademark is a great idea, but things may not be that simple. There are some misconceptions that can cost time, money, or even loss of rights.
One common misconception is that a registered trademark is necessary to have enforceable trademark rights. We are all familiar with registered trademarks – the kind with the ® registration symbol. But, trademark rights normally arise from actual use, even for unregistered trademarks. State courts can enforce such rights arising from actual use, even in the absence of a federally registered trademark. No registration, no problem – sometimes.
Getting a registered trademark requires filing a trademark application. Choices need to be made right at the start: actual use or intent-to-use; type of goods/services; logo or word mark. These choices can have profound consequences. Even the U.S. Trademark Office recommends having an experienced trademark attorney help with those choices – you'll see the warning for that in the online trademark application filing forms and elsewhere.
Actual use sounds better than intent-to-use. Maybe so - unless there is a conflict with another trademark filed on an intent-to-use basis. Then, surprisingly, the owner of the intent-to-use to application is permitted to introduce evidence of events that show an intent-to-use that has occurred before the application's filing date. The actual-use applicant does not have the same rights. Such evidence of intent-to-use can be scant: a mere mention at a business meeting, or an order for design of the mark, for example. This is peculiar to federal trademarks; state courts can apply their own standards and might well decide specific cases differently.
Choice of goods/services is important: more is better, right? Not so fast. Listing multiple catergories is all good and well, until you have to prove actual sales. Sure, a Statement of Use might work with the U.S. Trademark Office, but at a cost: forfeiture of rights if untrue. When it comes time to enforce your trademark rights against an infringer, it may become necessary to have proof of use in specific categories of goods. Listing a few categories of goods is fine, and once you get your trademark registered your future use in other categories will allow you to file further trademark applications for those additional uses.
Logos are great: typically a logo is a design plus words. Better than just the plain words, right? Not exactly. A plain, ordinary word mark – once registered – covers variations and logos, and sometimes can even cover translations into other languages. But, again, things are not always simple. A complex logo might be registrable when the word mark by itself would not be registrable, but those situations do not seem to be very common. The word mark is a very good way to go.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Costly-Misconceptions-About-Trademarks.html
What Every Startup Should Know Before Filing A Patent
By: Shimrit Tzur-David
Anyone who has led a technology company or been in the startup scene will tell you that most startups share a number of challenges. Key among them is the need to prove to investors and potential customers that what the company offers is unique and that barriers to entry exist that preclude anyone else from encroaching on their idea or market. As a co-founder and CTO, I have been involved in numerous pitches and discussions, both with investors and with customers, where we have had to demonstrate how our technology, approach and business model are unique. Based on this experience, I have come to appreciate the value of a patent.
If you go the patent route, it’s important to do it properly from the outset. Filing a poor patent, even a provisional one (more on this later), can end up costing so much that sometimes it’s worse than filing no patent at all.
Jumping In
If you’ve invented a solution to a problem that differentiates you from the competition or provides a competitive advantage, seriously consider filing a patent application before making your solution available to the public. In many countries, public disclosure prior to filing a patent application can make it more difficult to obtain or enforce a patent.
There are three main types of patent applications: the provisional, the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and filing a full patent application directly in the country of your choice (usually the U.S., but often in Europe or China). Filing any of these applications allows you to mark your product as patent pending. A provisional application never gets examined and never matures into a patent, but it acts as a placeholder and gives you a one-year grace period to file a PCT or a full patent application that will date back to when you filed the provisional.
Provisional applications are generally recommended for technology that is still under development and technology that a company wants to test commercially before investing significant resources in obtaining patent protection. Most startups file a provisional application first. It testifies to the fact that your company filed the specific patent for a certain technology, which is critical in light of the U.S. patent system switching from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system in 2013. While the requirements for filing a provisional patent are less stringent than those for a full patent, it’s best to file as robust an application as possible. If you do decide to file a provisional application, do it as early as possible so you avoid being locked out by someone else who files first.
Read more >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/theyec/2018/07/09/what-every-startup-should-know-before-filing-a-patent/#598b022ac3ed
Anyone who has led a technology company or been in the startup scene will tell you that most startups share a number of challenges. Key among them is the need to prove to investors and potential customers that what the company offers is unique and that barriers to entry exist that preclude anyone else from encroaching on their idea or market. As a co-founder and CTO, I have been involved in numerous pitches and discussions, both with investors and with customers, where we have had to demonstrate how our technology, approach and business model are unique. Based on this experience, I have come to appreciate the value of a patent.
If you go the patent route, it’s important to do it properly from the outset. Filing a poor patent, even a provisional one (more on this later), can end up costing so much that sometimes it’s worse than filing no patent at all.
Jumping In
If you’ve invented a solution to a problem that differentiates you from the competition or provides a competitive advantage, seriously consider filing a patent application before making your solution available to the public. In many countries, public disclosure prior to filing a patent application can make it more difficult to obtain or enforce a patent.
There are three main types of patent applications: the provisional, the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and filing a full patent application directly in the country of your choice (usually the U.S., but often in Europe or China). Filing any of these applications allows you to mark your product as patent pending. A provisional application never gets examined and never matures into a patent, but it acts as a placeholder and gives you a one-year grace period to file a PCT or a full patent application that will date back to when you filed the provisional.
Provisional applications are generally recommended for technology that is still under development and technology that a company wants to test commercially before investing significant resources in obtaining patent protection. Most startups file a provisional application first. It testifies to the fact that your company filed the specific patent for a certain technology, which is critical in light of the U.S. patent system switching from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system in 2013. While the requirements for filing a provisional patent are less stringent than those for a full patent, it’s best to file as robust an application as possible. If you do decide to file a provisional application, do it as early as possible so you avoid being locked out by someone else who files first.
Read more >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/theyec/2018/07/09/what-every-startup-should-know-before-filing-a-patent/#598b022ac3ed
Three Things You Should Look For In A Patent Attorney, With Handy How-To Guide
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
June 3, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Getting a patent attorney or patent firm? Get the name of the individual attorney who will personally do the work on your case. You'll wish to know whether the patent attorney is registered; is qualified in the relevant technical arts; and has a successful track record. The following explains how.Why do we care about this? Because once a patent application is filed, it will be examined by a patent examiner. Most applications receive an official action with some kind of rejection or objection. Many such rejections and objections can be overcome, some more easily than others. Not every patent application is allowed, and therefore the skill of the individual patent attorney comes into play. The patent attorney must be capable of making convincing legal and technical arguments in support of patentability. And, the patent attorney must be skilled at claim drafting: amending a claim skillfully may overcome a rejection or objection. Failure to skillfully respond can result in greater expense and may fail to result in obtaining an issued patent.
Is your attorney/firm experienced, with many good results? Since the attorney or law firm name is printed on the front of issued U.S. Patents, you can easily find out what type of patents they handle, and how many have issued. You can find out by using the patent search feature on the site www.google.com/advanced_patent_search; type in the name of the attorney in the top blank. It should find all issued patents with that name in it. You can do this more precisely at the official U.S. Patent Office site www.uspto.gov, by going to that site and in the upper right corner click the button “search for patents” where you'll get several databases to choose from.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Three-Things-You-Should-Look-For-In-A-Patent-Attorney.html
June 3, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
Getting a patent attorney or patent firm? Get the name of the individual attorney who will personally do the work on your case. You'll wish to know whether the patent attorney is registered; is qualified in the relevant technical arts; and has a successful track record. The following explains how.Why do we care about this? Because once a patent application is filed, it will be examined by a patent examiner. Most applications receive an official action with some kind of rejection or objection. Many such rejections and objections can be overcome, some more easily than others. Not every patent application is allowed, and therefore the skill of the individual patent attorney comes into play. The patent attorney must be capable of making convincing legal and technical arguments in support of patentability. And, the patent attorney must be skilled at claim drafting: amending a claim skillfully may overcome a rejection or objection. Failure to skillfully respond can result in greater expense and may fail to result in obtaining an issued patent.
Is your attorney/firm experienced, with many good results? Since the attorney or law firm name is printed on the front of issued U.S. Patents, you can easily find out what type of patents they handle, and how many have issued. You can find out by using the patent search feature on the site www.google.com/advanced_patent_search; type in the name of the attorney in the top blank. It should find all issued patents with that name in it. You can do this more precisely at the official U.S. Patent Office site www.uspto.gov, by going to that site and in the upper right corner click the button “search for patents” where you'll get several databases to choose from.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Three-Things-You-Should-Look-For-In-A-Patent-Attorney.html
Protecting Intellectual Property: An Easy Guide for Startups
By: Todd Baker
What Is Intellectual Property?
Intellectual property (IP) is a general term for the rights recognized by U.S. law for creations of the mind, including:
> Patents – rights granted to inventors for novel and useful inventions.
> Trademarks – rights granted to businesses relating to the branding of their goods and services (company, product and service names).
> Copyrights – rights granted to authors for tangible expressions of ideas (art, literature, music, software code, architectural plans).
> Trade secrets – rights granted to businesses relating to their unique and valuable intangible assets (business processes, client and customer lists, procedures, practices, formulae, research notes, market data).
Types of Patents
There are three types of patents that every startup should be aware of:
Utility Patents – According to the USPTO, utility patents are for inventions, “… of a new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or a new and useful improvement thereof.” Utility patents are for the protection of how an invention is used and works.
Business Method Patents – Business methods are also protectable under U.S. patent law. A business method patent is actually a form of utility patent that protects new methods of doing business, such as those used, for example, in banking, tax compliance, and e-commerce, to name a few.
Design Patents – Design patents, as described by the USPTO, are “Issued for a new, original, and ornamental design embodied in or applied to an article of manufacture.” A design patent, “permits its owner to exclude others from making, using, or selling the design.” A design patent may provide protection for IP when a utility patent is unavailable.
Read more >> https://www.upcounsel.com/blog/protecting-intellectual-property-easy-guide-startups
What Is Intellectual Property?
Intellectual property (IP) is a general term for the rights recognized by U.S. law for creations of the mind, including:
> Patents – rights granted to inventors for novel and useful inventions.
> Trademarks – rights granted to businesses relating to the branding of their goods and services (company, product and service names).
> Copyrights – rights granted to authors for tangible expressions of ideas (art, literature, music, software code, architectural plans).
> Trade secrets – rights granted to businesses relating to their unique and valuable intangible assets (business processes, client and customer lists, procedures, practices, formulae, research notes, market data).
Types of Patents
There are three types of patents that every startup should be aware of:
Utility Patents – According to the USPTO, utility patents are for inventions, “… of a new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or a new and useful improvement thereof.” Utility patents are for the protection of how an invention is used and works.
Business Method Patents – Business methods are also protectable under U.S. patent law. A business method patent is actually a form of utility patent that protects new methods of doing business, such as those used, for example, in banking, tax compliance, and e-commerce, to name a few.
Design Patents – Design patents, as described by the USPTO, are “Issued for a new, original, and ornamental design embodied in or applied to an article of manufacture.” A design patent, “permits its owner to exclude others from making, using, or selling the design.” A design patent may provide protection for IP when a utility patent is unavailable.
Read more >> https://www.upcounsel.com/blog/protecting-intellectual-property-easy-guide-startups
Get a Patent, Sue Competitors – Can it Really be that Easy?
By: Michael J Foycik Jr.
May 27, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
True, a patent confers a sort of monopoly. Also true, one of the intentions of patent law is to reward an inventor with a competitive advantage. But, exactly what does that mean, and is it that easy?
Patent rights are defined by their claims. A competitor infringes a patent if their competing product has each and every recited element of at least one claim of the patent. That competing product will still infringe if it has more elements, but not if it has fewer than recited in that claim. Sometimes, an element in a patent claim can be stretched a bit by a court of law, to cover equivalent structures. So far, so good.
But, there are defenses to allegations of patent infringement. For example, the competitor might be able to show their product is the same as that shown by an expired patent. So, expired patents can provide protection to your competitor, since once a patent expires it becomes part of the public domain. Other defenses may also arise from a competitor's own prior patent. Or, the competitor may be able to invalidate your patent, for example based on other prior art or issues of fraud. Just owning a patent might not be enough in these cases.
Let's say your competitor does infringe, has no valid defenses, and cannot invalidate your patent. Great, right? Not so fast – patent litigation costs real money, sometimes big money, so if you sue it has to be worth it. Small time infringement would likely result in very small damages, and your litigation costs could easily exceed the damages you recover. It may pay to wait until damages have mounted, or it may be necessary to simply overlook small or token infringements.
If a big company infringes in a big way, it may well pay to sue them for patent infringement. Let's say the big company is infringing, is making big money, and has no valid defenses. They still have two main options: offer you a license fee, or engage in a long and protracted litigation and hope you run out of money. The costs of litigation include discovery costs, motions and answers, depositions and interrogatories, and more. That adds up fast, even if your litigation attorney works for free, which is not likely. Contingency litigators are scarce in the patent field, are in high demand, and can command exorbitant rewards if they are successful.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Get-a-Patent-Sue-Competitors.html
May 27, 2013
The author is a patent attorney with over 28 years experience in patents and trademarks. For further information, please email at IP1lwyr@gmail.com, or call at 877-654-3336.
True, a patent confers a sort of monopoly. Also true, one of the intentions of patent law is to reward an inventor with a competitive advantage. But, exactly what does that mean, and is it that easy?
Patent rights are defined by their claims. A competitor infringes a patent if their competing product has each and every recited element of at least one claim of the patent. That competing product will still infringe if it has more elements, but not if it has fewer than recited in that claim. Sometimes, an element in a patent claim can be stretched a bit by a court of law, to cover equivalent structures. So far, so good.
But, there are defenses to allegations of patent infringement. For example, the competitor might be able to show their product is the same as that shown by an expired patent. So, expired patents can provide protection to your competitor, since once a patent expires it becomes part of the public domain. Other defenses may also arise from a competitor's own prior patent. Or, the competitor may be able to invalidate your patent, for example based on other prior art or issues of fraud. Just owning a patent might not be enough in these cases.
Let's say your competitor does infringe, has no valid defenses, and cannot invalidate your patent. Great, right? Not so fast – patent litigation costs real money, sometimes big money, so if you sue it has to be worth it. Small time infringement would likely result in very small damages, and your litigation costs could easily exceed the damages you recover. It may pay to wait until damages have mounted, or it may be necessary to simply overlook small or token infringements.
If a big company infringes in a big way, it may well pay to sue them for patent infringement. Let's say the big company is infringing, is making big money, and has no valid defenses. They still have two main options: offer you a license fee, or engage in a long and protracted litigation and hope you run out of money. The costs of litigation include discovery costs, motions and answers, depositions and interrogatories, and more. That adds up fast, even if your litigation attorney works for free, which is not likely. Contingency litigators are scarce in the patent field, are in high demand, and can command exorbitant rewards if they are successful.
Read more >> http://internationalpatentservice.com/Get-a-Patent-Sue-Competitors.html
Startup Myths: The Company Without IP
By: Mary Juetten
As we discussed last time in the first in the series here, myths and misconceptions are part and parcel with nearly every human endeavor, and business is no exception. Myths take hold where knowledge is lacking, until such point where they are misperceived as knowledge itself. Occasionally these myths can be harmless, but education is needed for those that can do real harm to people working under these false assumptions.
One of the most pernicious startup myths — indeed, one that often persists well past the startup stage— is the idea that there are companies or fields in which intellectual property (IP) doesn’t exist, or at least not to the extent that it matters in decision making. And while there’s no basis for that assumption, it’s easy to understand how the idea might take hold among the uninitiated. Intellectual property often applies to real things, but itself is intangible, and in fields that concern themselves solely with the tangible assets they deal in, it must be easy to forget or ignore what you can’t see in front of you.
As I’ve written about many times before,IP is something that exists in every business and serves as the backbone of what they do. And the most successful companies in the world recognize the importance of patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. They know that a strong IP portfolio is a platform from which they can continue to build and innovate, and that is why they devote the resources to protecting their intangible assets. It’s not a coincidence that the most frequent applicants for IP protection are the companies considered leaders in innovation and creativity.
Nevertheless, there are undoubtedly some who, despite this evidence, still refuse to see the relevance of IP in their own businesses. Patents are the province of the Elon Musks of the world, with their rockets to Mars, copyrights the domain of Disney and their blockbusters. Particularly among small businesses, the notion that your own venture or enterprise doesn’t rise to the level needed to have what would be considered IP can be prevalent in the absence of a greater understanding on the topic.
Read more >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryjuetten/2019/03/12/startup-myths-the-company-without-ip/#3d58c94d3b63
As we discussed last time in the first in the series here, myths and misconceptions are part and parcel with nearly every human endeavor, and business is no exception. Myths take hold where knowledge is lacking, until such point where they are misperceived as knowledge itself. Occasionally these myths can be harmless, but education is needed for those that can do real harm to people working under these false assumptions.
One of the most pernicious startup myths — indeed, one that often persists well past the startup stage— is the idea that there are companies or fields in which intellectual property (IP) doesn’t exist, or at least not to the extent that it matters in decision making. And while there’s no basis for that assumption, it’s easy to understand how the idea might take hold among the uninitiated. Intellectual property often applies to real things, but itself is intangible, and in fields that concern themselves solely with the tangible assets they deal in, it must be easy to forget or ignore what you can’t see in front of you.
As I’ve written about many times before,IP is something that exists in every business and serves as the backbone of what they do. And the most successful companies in the world recognize the importance of patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. They know that a strong IP portfolio is a platform from which they can continue to build and innovate, and that is why they devote the resources to protecting their intangible assets. It’s not a coincidence that the most frequent applicants for IP protection are the companies considered leaders in innovation and creativity.
Nevertheless, there are undoubtedly some who, despite this evidence, still refuse to see the relevance of IP in their own businesses. Patents are the province of the Elon Musks of the world, with their rockets to Mars, copyrights the domain of Disney and their blockbusters. Particularly among small businesses, the notion that your own venture or enterprise doesn’t rise to the level needed to have what would be considered IP can be prevalent in the absence of a greater understanding on the topic.
Read more >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryjuetten/2019/03/12/startup-myths-the-company-without-ip/#3d58c94d3b63
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)