By: Greg Kirsch
Tech startup companies often rely on patents and other types of intellectual property (IP) rights to help safeguard against competition, protect their investors and increase their chance of executing on their business model.
However, in many cases there are fundamental misunderstandings among the individuals and companies who invest in startups as to how to best use IP rights. Either the wrong attributes of the startup’s products and services are protected, or IP is forgotten altogether.
There is no better way to learn how best to protect and exploit IP than by examining the successes — and miscues — of others. Here are two stories based on the real-life experience of practicing IP law for almost three decades.
True Story Number One: The Bad Investment
How an investor may ask IP questions, but not the right ones
About 10 years ago, I received a call from a general partner at a well-known VC firm. The firm had recently made a large investment in a startup, which we’ll call “Acme Corp.,” which had a large patent portfolio. My friend wanted me to take a quick look at the Acme patent portfolio.
My first thought was, “Why is he calling me after the investment has closed, rather than before the investment was finalized?” Nevertheless, I told him I’d take a look.
The patents looked interesting and appeared to cover a technology (“Technology A”) fairly well. A few days later, I called my VC friend back. I walked him through Acme’s various patents, including some of the patent claims, which specifically define the invention covered by the patent.
“Are you sure that’s what the patents cover?” he asked, completely surprised by the nature of the patent portfolio owned by the company in which his firm had just invested a large sum of money.
The investor explained that Acme’s current business model was completely based on another technology, Technology B. They used to have products that used Technology A, but had pivoted away from that business three years prior.
Read more >> https://hypepotamus.com/community/two-cautionary-true-stories-patent-law/
Showing posts with label Startups. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Startups. Show all posts
More Patent Trolls Are Targeting Startups. Here's What You Can Do.
By: Nathaniel Borenstein
Startups aren't typically founded by lawyers, so patent law isn't usually a front line issue for them. But I've come to realize that patent protection is at best No. 11 on the top 10 list of things for startups to focus on -- something they generally understand is important, but not quite important enough. Part of that is because the headlines focus on big lawsuits lobbed at big companies, which creates a false sense of security. As an inventor and a computer scientist with 25-plus years of practical experience, I'd like to think I've navigated the murky, complicated world of patents and come out on the other side wiser and more informed. And, as such, there is something I want entrepreneurs, inventors and early-stage businesses to know. Yes, you are a potential target for patent trolls, and yes, there is something you can do about it. Today.
Related: If Your Startup Really Is Disruptive, Expect to be Sued By a Patent Troll.
Here's what everyone thinks they know.
It is generally understood patent trolls are typically "shell" companies that do no real business but simply pursue a business strategy of suing businesses over their patents. They typically sue for a large amount of money but settle for an amount they estimate will cost the victims less than a court fight. They do no good for anyone in the world but themselves, and they can be extremely costly (in time and money) to their victims. Too many people believe patent trolls are only after big names -- big companies with big wallets. The smaller suits, the ones aimed at startups and mid-sized businesses, might not make headlines, but they do untold damage.
Startups are targets for trolls, and grow more so over time.
Startups are often targets for trolls, but many entrepreneurs are unaware of this reality. With so many things to think about -- building a product, hiring a staff, fundraising, marketing, sales -- protecting against patent trolls is not likely to be high on a founder's list of priorities, but it should still be a consideration. A company gets hit with a suit and has to respond, but by then, it's too late. The mere presence of the suit is itself a drain on limited resources, to the tune of several million dollars that startups can't afford. This is why being proactive is essential.
Read more >> https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/310648
Startups aren't typically founded by lawyers, so patent law isn't usually a front line issue for them. But I've come to realize that patent protection is at best No. 11 on the top 10 list of things for startups to focus on -- something they generally understand is important, but not quite important enough. Part of that is because the headlines focus on big lawsuits lobbed at big companies, which creates a false sense of security. As an inventor and a computer scientist with 25-plus years of practical experience, I'd like to think I've navigated the murky, complicated world of patents and come out on the other side wiser and more informed. And, as such, there is something I want entrepreneurs, inventors and early-stage businesses to know. Yes, you are a potential target for patent trolls, and yes, there is something you can do about it. Today.
Related: If Your Startup Really Is Disruptive, Expect to be Sued By a Patent Troll.
Here's what everyone thinks they know.
It is generally understood patent trolls are typically "shell" companies that do no real business but simply pursue a business strategy of suing businesses over their patents. They typically sue for a large amount of money but settle for an amount they estimate will cost the victims less than a court fight. They do no good for anyone in the world but themselves, and they can be extremely costly (in time and money) to their victims. Too many people believe patent trolls are only after big names -- big companies with big wallets. The smaller suits, the ones aimed at startups and mid-sized businesses, might not make headlines, but they do untold damage.
Startups are targets for trolls, and grow more so over time.
Startups are often targets for trolls, but many entrepreneurs are unaware of this reality. With so many things to think about -- building a product, hiring a staff, fundraising, marketing, sales -- protecting against patent trolls is not likely to be high on a founder's list of priorities, but it should still be a consideration. A company gets hit with a suit and has to respond, but by then, it's too late. The mere presence of the suit is itself a drain on limited resources, to the tune of several million dollars that startups can't afford. This is why being proactive is essential.
Read more >> https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/310648
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/
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
These top female-founded startups in the Netherlands are doing big things in 2019
By: Akansha Srivastava
With the changing times, women entrepreneurs are now strongly embarking on the satisfying path of entrepreneurship. Kylie Jenner has officially become the youngest self-made billionaire at the age of 21, following the footsteps of some of the most famous billionaires in the world, including Mark Zuckerberg and Evan Spiegel, who passed the $1 billion benchmark before age 30.
Considering this paradigm shift and on the occasion of women’s day, just like last year, this year too, Silicon Canals has compiled a list of the most successful female-founded startups from the Netherlands that you should watch out for in 2019 and beyond. We have made this list based on the fundings these women-led startups have raised in the past couple of years. Go ahead and check out! and Happy women’s day to all the influential women reading this post on behalf of the whole Silicon Canals team!
Closure
Founder – Chantal van der Velde & Graciëlla van Hamersveld
Funding raised: €300K seed funding
Based out of Rotterdam, Closure is an online platform for completing subscriptions, contracts and accounts after death. The platform was founded in 2017 and aims to resolve the emotional as well as digital processing of your deceased loved ones’ online accounts and subscriptions.
The Great Bubble Barrier
Founders – Anne Marieke Eveleens, Francis Zoet and Saskia Studer
Funding raised: €500K
Based out of Amsterdam, this startup was founded with a single purpose to put an end to the plastic trash ending up in the sea. Founded in 2017, this Dutch startup creates a barrier to stop the plastics from flowing past, while letting fishes and ships pass through.
Read more >> https://siliconcanals.nl/news/startups/these-top-female-founded-startups-in-the-netherlands-are-doing-big-things-in-2019/
With the changing times, women entrepreneurs are now strongly embarking on the satisfying path of entrepreneurship. Kylie Jenner has officially become the youngest self-made billionaire at the age of 21, following the footsteps of some of the most famous billionaires in the world, including Mark Zuckerberg and Evan Spiegel, who passed the $1 billion benchmark before age 30.
Considering this paradigm shift and on the occasion of women’s day, just like last year, this year too, Silicon Canals has compiled a list of the most successful female-founded startups from the Netherlands that you should watch out for in 2019 and beyond. We have made this list based on the fundings these women-led startups have raised in the past couple of years. Go ahead and check out! and Happy women’s day to all the influential women reading this post on behalf of the whole Silicon Canals team!
Closure
Founder – Chantal van der Velde & Graciëlla van Hamersveld
Funding raised: €300K seed funding
Based out of Rotterdam, Closure is an online platform for completing subscriptions, contracts and accounts after death. The platform was founded in 2017 and aims to resolve the emotional as well as digital processing of your deceased loved ones’ online accounts and subscriptions.
The Great Bubble Barrier
Founders – Anne Marieke Eveleens, Francis Zoet and Saskia Studer
Funding raised: €500K
Based out of Amsterdam, this startup was founded with a single purpose to put an end to the plastic trash ending up in the sea. Founded in 2017, this Dutch startup creates a barrier to stop the plastics from flowing past, while letting fishes and ships pass through.
Read more >> https://siliconcanals.nl/news/startups/these-top-female-founded-startups-in-the-netherlands-are-doing-big-things-in-2019/
Dos and Don’ts of IP Protection for Tech Startups
By: CHINH H. PHAM
The launch of a startup is an exciting time for any tech entrepreneur. As you embark on this adventure, it is critical to establish a strong legal foundation that protect your intellectual property (IP) and tech innovation. Unfortunately, many tech startups underestimate just how integral a strong IP strategy is to commercial success and revenue generation. In order to safeguard its IP, a tech startup should consider the following dos and don’ts.
Do Avoid Public Disclosure of Your Innovation
Public disclosure of your innovation can be dangerous for a tech startup. Even if unintentional, any public disclosure can delay or even end the patent process, especially when you seek to pursue patent protection outside the U.S. To avoid inadvertently disclosing your innovation to the public, tech startups should be careful not to do the following:
> Don’t Conduct Research & Development in the Open: With the growth of co-working spaces, conducting research and development (R&D) in the open should be avoided. Many developers are unaware that conducting R&D in the open is technically considered a public disclosure and can foreclose patent protection in most countries. While the United States does allow a one-year grace period for filing for patent protection, it is still a best practice to avoid any type of public R&D.
> Don’t Discuss Plans for Future Innovations: Even after a tech startup has filed a patent application, it is critical to limit any presentations or discussions to only the subject matter that exists in the filed patent application. Discussing future innovations – even in the context of a brainstorming session – can be construed as a public disclosure, which may preclude patent protection. Tech startups can avoid this undesired outcome by simply choosing not to partake in discussions about future innovations. If pressed, you can simply state that a patent application is in process to protect the innovation, and once filed, you will be happy to discuss.
> Don’t Unveil Your Innovation Too Early: All too often, tech entrepreneurs inadvertently place themselves at risk of unveiling their innovation too early, such as at fundraising meetings with potential investors who typically do not to sign an NDA. In order to best protect its IP, a tech startup should make certain that its innovation is filed with the USPTO as soon as possible – and preferably before investor meetings.
Do Know Which Type of IP Offers the Right Protection
Before pursuing any kind of IP strategy, a tech startup should become familiar with the different protections offered by different IP options. In general, IP can be categorized as one of the following:
> Patent protects the idea.
> Copyright protects the expression of the idea and requires memorialization on a tangible medium.
> Trademark protects the logo or the name and acts as an identifier of the source of the product or services associated with the logo or name.
> Trade Secret protects anything confidential or proprietary.
When considering intangible assets, tech startups need to understand what it is they are looking to protect, and then decide which IP regime to implement. If the goal is to protect an inventive concept, a decision to either pursue a patent strategy or pursue trade secret protection must be considered. Every type of IP is different, and incorrectly pursuing the wrong IP to protect your asset can place your product at risk. It is a best practice to seek the advice of an IP attorney.
Read more >> http://vc-list.com/ip-protection-tech-startups/
The launch of a startup is an exciting time for any tech entrepreneur. As you embark on this adventure, it is critical to establish a strong legal foundation that protect your intellectual property (IP) and tech innovation. Unfortunately, many tech startups underestimate just how integral a strong IP strategy is to commercial success and revenue generation. In order to safeguard its IP, a tech startup should consider the following dos and don’ts.
Do Avoid Public Disclosure of Your Innovation
Public disclosure of your innovation can be dangerous for a tech startup. Even if unintentional, any public disclosure can delay or even end the patent process, especially when you seek to pursue patent protection outside the U.S. To avoid inadvertently disclosing your innovation to the public, tech startups should be careful not to do the following:
> Don’t Conduct Research & Development in the Open: With the growth of co-working spaces, conducting research and development (R&D) in the open should be avoided. Many developers are unaware that conducting R&D in the open is technically considered a public disclosure and can foreclose patent protection in most countries. While the United States does allow a one-year grace period for filing for patent protection, it is still a best practice to avoid any type of public R&D.
> Don’t Discuss Plans for Future Innovations: Even after a tech startup has filed a patent application, it is critical to limit any presentations or discussions to only the subject matter that exists in the filed patent application. Discussing future innovations – even in the context of a brainstorming session – can be construed as a public disclosure, which may preclude patent protection. Tech startups can avoid this undesired outcome by simply choosing not to partake in discussions about future innovations. If pressed, you can simply state that a patent application is in process to protect the innovation, and once filed, you will be happy to discuss.
> Don’t Unveil Your Innovation Too Early: All too often, tech entrepreneurs inadvertently place themselves at risk of unveiling their innovation too early, such as at fundraising meetings with potential investors who typically do not to sign an NDA. In order to best protect its IP, a tech startup should make certain that its innovation is filed with the USPTO as soon as possible – and preferably before investor meetings.
Do Know Which Type of IP Offers the Right Protection
Before pursuing any kind of IP strategy, a tech startup should become familiar with the different protections offered by different IP options. In general, IP can be categorized as one of the following:
> Patent protects the idea.
> Copyright protects the expression of the idea and requires memorialization on a tangible medium.
> Trademark protects the logo or the name and acts as an identifier of the source of the product or services associated with the logo or name.
> Trade Secret protects anything confidential or proprietary.
When considering intangible assets, tech startups need to understand what it is they are looking to protect, and then decide which IP regime to implement. If the goal is to protect an inventive concept, a decision to either pursue a patent strategy or pursue trade secret protection must be considered. Every type of IP is different, and incorrectly pursuing the wrong IP to protect your asset can place your product at risk. It is a best practice to seek the advice of an IP attorney.
Read more >> http://vc-list.com/ip-protection-tech-startups/
The 7 Lessons That Proptech Startups Can Learn From Biotech
By: MAUREEN MENGEL
Happy New Year, Forbes readers! For this first column of 2019, I decided to do something a bit different to the articles that I typically write.
Last night, I attended a presentation in Rome (which is where I’m based half of the time), hosted by LUISS university and Confindustria Young Entrepreneurs , by esteemed MIT professor Robert Langer. For those of you who, like myself until a short while ago, had never heard of Professor Langer, he runs the largest biomedical engineering lab in the world, holds the world record for number of patents (over 1350 between those granted and pending) and is the among the 7 most cited individuals in history.
You may be wondering why I’m writing about a chemical engineer in a PropTech column. The reason is this. In the course of his career spanning over four decades, Professor Langer has founded over 40 startups in his field, only one of which is no longer operational. Of the majority that survived, several have been very successful, with record breaking IPOs and multi billion dollar industry exits. The title of his presentation was “what I’ve learned from founding more than 40 startups”, so I decided to see how (if!) these lessons from biotech can translate to PropTech.
IMAGE DISTRIBUTED FOR THE QUEEN ELIZABETH PRIZE FOR ENGINEERING – In this image released on Monday, Oct. 26, 2015, Dr Robert Langer of MIT, who was announced as the 2015 Winner of the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering (QEPrize). The QEPrize today released the inaugural Create the Future Report, an international survey of attitudes towards engineering surveying respondents in global centres for engineering including the US, Germany, Japan, Turkey, India and Brazil. The report shows that an overwhelming majority of the public in each of the 10 countries surveyed agree that engineering has driven progress in society in the past and will do so in future. To mark the occasion business leaders will meet at a luncheon hosted by the Lord Mayor and the City of London Corporation at Mansion House to honour the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering and 2015 winner Dr Robert Langer. Press release available at http://goo.gl/4Rbtzc. (Jason Alden/Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering via AP Images)AP Images for Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering
Professor Langer gave us several “science lessons” for a nascent biotech startup. I’m going to try to formulate the PropTech equivalent for the ones I think our sector’s startups can learn from.
Read more >> https://maureenmengel.wordpress.com/2019/01/10/the-7-lessons-that-proptech-startups-can-learn-from-biotech/
Happy New Year, Forbes readers! For this first column of 2019, I decided to do something a bit different to the articles that I typically write.
Last night, I attended a presentation in Rome (which is where I’m based half of the time), hosted by LUISS university and Confindustria Young Entrepreneurs , by esteemed MIT professor Robert Langer. For those of you who, like myself until a short while ago, had never heard of Professor Langer, he runs the largest biomedical engineering lab in the world, holds the world record for number of patents (over 1350 between those granted and pending) and is the among the 7 most cited individuals in history.
You may be wondering why I’m writing about a chemical engineer in a PropTech column. The reason is this. In the course of his career spanning over four decades, Professor Langer has founded over 40 startups in his field, only one of which is no longer operational. Of the majority that survived, several have been very successful, with record breaking IPOs and multi billion dollar industry exits. The title of his presentation was “what I’ve learned from founding more than 40 startups”, so I decided to see how (if!) these lessons from biotech can translate to PropTech.
IMAGE DISTRIBUTED FOR THE QUEEN ELIZABETH PRIZE FOR ENGINEERING – In this image released on Monday, Oct. 26, 2015, Dr Robert Langer of MIT, who was announced as the 2015 Winner of the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering (QEPrize). The QEPrize today released the inaugural Create the Future Report, an international survey of attitudes towards engineering surveying respondents in global centres for engineering including the US, Germany, Japan, Turkey, India and Brazil. The report shows that an overwhelming majority of the public in each of the 10 countries surveyed agree that engineering has driven progress in society in the past and will do so in future. To mark the occasion business leaders will meet at a luncheon hosted by the Lord Mayor and the City of London Corporation at Mansion House to honour the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering and 2015 winner Dr Robert Langer. Press release available at http://goo.gl/4Rbtzc. (Jason Alden/Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering via AP Images)AP Images for Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering
Professor Langer gave us several “science lessons” for a nascent biotech startup. I’m going to try to formulate the PropTech equivalent for the ones I think our sector’s startups can learn from.
Read more >> https://maureenmengel.wordpress.com/2019/01/10/the-7-lessons-that-proptech-startups-can-learn-from-biotech/
How to Protect Intellectual Property - Strategy for Startups
By: Bhumesh Verma
> Introduction
Intellectual property protection should be one of the foremost concerns of a nascently set up entity, particularly a startup.
Intellectual property refers to innovative creations arising out of one’s or a team’s intellectual exercise. It includes not only innovative products and processes but also logos and images. Some key intellectual property rights are:
a) Patents: Inventions involving both innovative products and processes which contribute to technological development and simplify everyday lives are called patents. A patent-holder has the exclusive right to use or license his patented product or process.
b) Copyright: Ideas cannot be copyrighted, but if these ideas are articulated in a permanent form then the creator may be entitled to a copyright over his/her work. Copyright generally exists over books, films, music etc.
c) Trademark: A trademark is a distinctive sign or symbol used by companies to enable the consumers to identify their goods. Logos of companies are trademarks.
IP rights and their protection is essential for companies. Especially, a startup which is just starting out requires its reputation to be built over years and its ideas to be protected in order to gain competitive advantage over its rivals.
In this article, we discuss and lay down an ideal IP protection strategy that may be adopted by startups.
What needs to be protected??
An entity ideally needs to protect the following components of its IP:
a) Trade secrets/confidential information: Trade secrets are information essential and valuable to the business being run. It may include documents such as sales charts, product specifications or any other information which may give the company a competitive edge over its rivals. The first step towards efficient protection of trade secrets is to have a strong contractual clause built in all the contracts being / to be executed by the entity, including employment contracts which impose strong confidentiality obligations. A separate confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement may also be entered into with business partners, customers and employees.
b) Patent protection: Being new in the industry, startup enterprises need to devise a strategy which gives them an edge over the extant market players.
The following steps may be kept in mind while devising a strategy for the protection of patents:
> Filing an application for patents needs to be done immediately after the product or process is ready.
> The product or process for which the patent is being filed should not be published or disclosed.
> The application may be filed with a provisional specification as well. However, complete specification needs to be filed within 12 months of the filing.
> Patents are territorial in nature. Hence, filing for patents in multiple jurisdictions simultaneously may help the startup in gaining competitive advantage.
c) Trademarks: Trademarks create a company’s brand. For instance, google is known and identified by its logo. It is important for companies to protect their logos and trademarks. The first step towards an efficient trademark protection should be to register the trademarks. A registered trademark enjoys a higher protection than an unregistered trademark. An infringement suit can be filed only for the violation of a registered trademark.
What should an ideal IP Strategy encompass
While strategy of each start-up may differ according to the services rendered or the products marketed by them, certain issues run central to all efficient IP strategies.
While formulating an IP strategy, the following things need to be kept in mind:
> An IP strategy must include a training policy wherein the employees, customers and partners of the company are made aware of the various kinds of IP the company owns and the importance of maintaining confidentiality and protection of these rights.
Read More >> https://www.lawyered.in/legal-disrupt/articles/how-protect-intellectual-property-strategy-startups/
> Introduction
Intellectual property protection should be one of the foremost concerns of a nascently set up entity, particularly a startup.
Intellectual property refers to innovative creations arising out of one’s or a team’s intellectual exercise. It includes not only innovative products and processes but also logos and images. Some key intellectual property rights are:
a) Patents: Inventions involving both innovative products and processes which contribute to technological development and simplify everyday lives are called patents. A patent-holder has the exclusive right to use or license his patented product or process.
b) Copyright: Ideas cannot be copyrighted, but if these ideas are articulated in a permanent form then the creator may be entitled to a copyright over his/her work. Copyright generally exists over books, films, music etc.
c) Trademark: A trademark is a distinctive sign or symbol used by companies to enable the consumers to identify their goods. Logos of companies are trademarks.
IP rights and their protection is essential for companies. Especially, a startup which is just starting out requires its reputation to be built over years and its ideas to be protected in order to gain competitive advantage over its rivals.
In this article, we discuss and lay down an ideal IP protection strategy that may be adopted by startups.
What needs to be protected??
An entity ideally needs to protect the following components of its IP:
a) Trade secrets/confidential information: Trade secrets are information essential and valuable to the business being run. It may include documents such as sales charts, product specifications or any other information which may give the company a competitive edge over its rivals. The first step towards efficient protection of trade secrets is to have a strong contractual clause built in all the contracts being / to be executed by the entity, including employment contracts which impose strong confidentiality obligations. A separate confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement may also be entered into with business partners, customers and employees.
b) Patent protection: Being new in the industry, startup enterprises need to devise a strategy which gives them an edge over the extant market players.
The following steps may be kept in mind while devising a strategy for the protection of patents:
> Filing an application for patents needs to be done immediately after the product or process is ready.
> The product or process for which the patent is being filed should not be published or disclosed.
> The application may be filed with a provisional specification as well. However, complete specification needs to be filed within 12 months of the filing.
> Patents are territorial in nature. Hence, filing for patents in multiple jurisdictions simultaneously may help the startup in gaining competitive advantage.
c) Trademarks: Trademarks create a company’s brand. For instance, google is known and identified by its logo. It is important for companies to protect their logos and trademarks. The first step towards an efficient trademark protection should be to register the trademarks. A registered trademark enjoys a higher protection than an unregistered trademark. An infringement suit can be filed only for the violation of a registered trademark.
What should an ideal IP Strategy encompass
While strategy of each start-up may differ according to the services rendered or the products marketed by them, certain issues run central to all efficient IP strategies.
While formulating an IP strategy, the following things need to be kept in mind:
> An IP strategy must include a training policy wherein the employees, customers and partners of the company are made aware of the various kinds of IP the company owns and the importance of maintaining confidentiality and protection of these rights.
Read More >> https://www.lawyered.in/legal-disrupt/articles/how-protect-intellectual-property-strategy-startups/
What Start-ups Need to Know About Intellectual Property
By: Michael J. Kasdan
As any entrepreneur is well aware, the early stages of a new business venture are an incredibly busy time. Entrepreneurs must focus on building the core team, structuring the company, attracting investors, developing the product/service, and developing key partnerships, sales channels and marketing plans. These tasks are typically all-consuming for the founders, taxing both their financial and time resources.
During this time, it may be a challenge to simultaneously focus on intellectual property issues. However, this early time period is also a critical time for ensuring that a business takes steps to protect its core intellectual property and avoids the risk of third party intellectual property issues. Today, more than ever, having a solid understanding of intellectual property and developing an IP strategy that aligns with the business is a crucial part of building a new venture on a solid foundation.
This article includes an overview of the different types of intellectual property and provides advice to start-up companies on how to secure their own intellectual property as well as protect against intellectual property risks from others.
The three basic types of intellectual property that startups should understand are:
> Patents
> Trademarks
> Copyrights
Patents
Not every startup business will be best-served by investing its resources in building a patent portfolio, but the question of whether to pursue patent protection warrants a hard and early look. Knowledge of the role of patents is critical for two reasons:
> To protect your own business and inventions from your competitors
> To avoid the risk of being exposed to assertions of patent infringement by competitors and other third parties
It is important for startups to understand the different kinds of patent protection and how they fit into their business.
Utility patents can be obtained for processes, machines, articles of manufacture, or compositions of matter that are deemed new, useful and non-obvious. The traditional subject matter of such utility patents covers tangible, technical inventions, such as improvements to client-server systems, motors, radios, computer chips and various technical product features. For example, Boeing's US Patent No. 6,227,447 is a patent that covers methods of remotely controlling a vehicle. Patents can also be directed at new product features and functions. As another example, Facebook's US Patent No. 8,171,128, titled "Communicating a newsfeed of media content based on a member's interactions in a social network environment," protects its News Feed feature.
A separate category of patent, the design patent, may be sought to protect ornamental (non-functional) designs. Some examples of notable design patents include Apple's D 604,305 covering the design of its iPhone interface and Lululemon's design patent covering its yoga pants.
The role of patents
Although patents are the most expensive and time-consuming type of intellectual property to obtain, they also provide the best scope of protection. A patent provides its holder with the exclusive right to make, use or sell an invention. This means that it can exclude a competitor from making or selling the patented invention, irrespective of whether or not the competitor copied the invention or even previously knew of the patent. For this reason, a patent that covers an important feature that drives consumer demand and/or distinguishes one’s product or service from that of competitors, can be very valuable.
Read More >> https://www.natlawreview.com/article/what-start-ups-need-to-know-about-intellectual-property
As any entrepreneur is well aware, the early stages of a new business venture are an incredibly busy time. Entrepreneurs must focus on building the core team, structuring the company, attracting investors, developing the product/service, and developing key partnerships, sales channels and marketing plans. These tasks are typically all-consuming for the founders, taxing both their financial and time resources.
During this time, it may be a challenge to simultaneously focus on intellectual property issues. However, this early time period is also a critical time for ensuring that a business takes steps to protect its core intellectual property and avoids the risk of third party intellectual property issues. Today, more than ever, having a solid understanding of intellectual property and developing an IP strategy that aligns with the business is a crucial part of building a new venture on a solid foundation.
This article includes an overview of the different types of intellectual property and provides advice to start-up companies on how to secure their own intellectual property as well as protect against intellectual property risks from others.
The three basic types of intellectual property that startups should understand are:
> Patents
> Trademarks
> Copyrights
Patents
Not every startup business will be best-served by investing its resources in building a patent portfolio, but the question of whether to pursue patent protection warrants a hard and early look. Knowledge of the role of patents is critical for two reasons:
> To protect your own business and inventions from your competitors
> To avoid the risk of being exposed to assertions of patent infringement by competitors and other third parties
It is important for startups to understand the different kinds of patent protection and how they fit into their business.
Utility patents can be obtained for processes, machines, articles of manufacture, or compositions of matter that are deemed new, useful and non-obvious. The traditional subject matter of such utility patents covers tangible, technical inventions, such as improvements to client-server systems, motors, radios, computer chips and various technical product features. For example, Boeing's US Patent No. 6,227,447 is a patent that covers methods of remotely controlling a vehicle. Patents can also be directed at new product features and functions. As another example, Facebook's US Patent No. 8,171,128, titled "Communicating a newsfeed of media content based on a member's interactions in a social network environment," protects its News Feed feature.
A separate category of patent, the design patent, may be sought to protect ornamental (non-functional) designs. Some examples of notable design patents include Apple's D 604,305 covering the design of its iPhone interface and Lululemon's design patent covering its yoga pants.
The role of patents
Although patents are the most expensive and time-consuming type of intellectual property to obtain, they also provide the best scope of protection. A patent provides its holder with the exclusive right to make, use or sell an invention. This means that it can exclude a competitor from making or selling the patented invention, irrespective of whether or not the competitor copied the invention or even previously knew of the patent. For this reason, a patent that covers an important feature that drives consumer demand and/or distinguishes one’s product or service from that of competitors, can be very valuable.
Read More >> https://www.natlawreview.com/article/what-start-ups-need-to-know-about-intellectual-property
Einfolge Technologies makes patenting research easy for startups and corporates
By: Vishal Krishna
Naveen Kanan is a researcher at Bangalore University studying electrolyte composition in modern-day lithium ion panels and figuring out how to make batteries more efficient. He wished to know if he could patent his research but was confused as to whether he had to approach a lawyer or an industry expert. He was desperately in search of a platform that has all the data of global patent research, and which could help him discover whether his research could be patented or not. This is where a startup like Einfolge Technologies comes in handy. Founded by Ruhan Rajput and Binod Singh in 2014, the firm runs an active platform that allows researchers to use patent analytics and market research fields to help them discover their research patent worthiness.
If you are an astute technology person, you would know the importance of filing a patent and getting it granted. But any technocrat can tell you that filing a patent can be cumbersome, time consuming and requires patience, which means you have to spend money for the best IP lawyers. If you are a new startup or a researcher then chances are you may not have too much funds. So what if a platform can do this for you and take all the pressure off filing?
Einfolge’s platform helps clients to streamline operations, reduce cost and enhance business efficiencies through its expert solutions. Say, a startup wants to patent a communication protocol. Einfolge crunches data and is able to let the startup know whether the protocol has already been patented or has similar technologies that require some technical answers. That’s when Ruhan and Binod also offer personalised and customised services in the form of consulting with strict adherence to deadlines.
“We work with various organisations such as startups, pharma companies, SMEs, scientists, the agricultural sector and PSUs through customised solutions in patent and intellectual property rights (IPR). Starting from the initial research to the filing of the patent is done by an expert team that understands the hurdles faced by the startups in the initial stage and accordingly tailors solutions to meet their requirements,” says Binod Singh, Co-founder of Einfolge Technologies.
In short, Einfolge plays a crucial role for all those who deal with innovations and wish to protect their IPs across the globe.
Ruhan has a background in Computer Engineering and worked in corporates for a decade. He had worked for JP Morgan besides IT companies like Wipro, and Mastek in Oracle-based database developments projects. He is the technology brain behind Einfolge.
Binod has a M Phil degree in Biotech and also a PGD in Patent Laws from Bangalore University. He worked in the patent sector for 14 years and consulted for independent inventors, CEOs of many large companies and experts from a number of publicly traded companies and research heads of institutes.
Read More >> https://yourstory.com/2018/05/einfolge-technologies-makes-patenting-research-easy-startups-corporates/
Naveen Kanan is a researcher at Bangalore University studying electrolyte composition in modern-day lithium ion panels and figuring out how to make batteries more efficient. He wished to know if he could patent his research but was confused as to whether he had to approach a lawyer or an industry expert. He was desperately in search of a platform that has all the data of global patent research, and which could help him discover whether his research could be patented or not. This is where a startup like Einfolge Technologies comes in handy. Founded by Ruhan Rajput and Binod Singh in 2014, the firm runs an active platform that allows researchers to use patent analytics and market research fields to help them discover their research patent worthiness.
If you are an astute technology person, you would know the importance of filing a patent and getting it granted. But any technocrat can tell you that filing a patent can be cumbersome, time consuming and requires patience, which means you have to spend money for the best IP lawyers. If you are a new startup or a researcher then chances are you may not have too much funds. So what if a platform can do this for you and take all the pressure off filing?
Einfolge’s platform helps clients to streamline operations, reduce cost and enhance business efficiencies through its expert solutions. Say, a startup wants to patent a communication protocol. Einfolge crunches data and is able to let the startup know whether the protocol has already been patented or has similar technologies that require some technical answers. That’s when Ruhan and Binod also offer personalised and customised services in the form of consulting with strict adherence to deadlines.
“We work with various organisations such as startups, pharma companies, SMEs, scientists, the agricultural sector and PSUs through customised solutions in patent and intellectual property rights (IPR). Starting from the initial research to the filing of the patent is done by an expert team that understands the hurdles faced by the startups in the initial stage and accordingly tailors solutions to meet their requirements,” says Binod Singh, Co-founder of Einfolge Technologies.
In short, Einfolge plays a crucial role for all those who deal with innovations and wish to protect their IPs across the globe.
Ruhan has a background in Computer Engineering and worked in corporates for a decade. He had worked for JP Morgan besides IT companies like Wipro, and Mastek in Oracle-based database developments projects. He is the technology brain behind Einfolge.
Binod has a M Phil degree in Biotech and also a PGD in Patent Laws from Bangalore University. He worked in the patent sector for 14 years and consulted for independent inventors, CEOs of many large companies and experts from a number of publicly traded companies and research heads of institutes.
Read More >> https://yourstory.com/2018/05/einfolge-technologies-makes-patenting-research-easy-startups-corporates/
UNICEF Funds 6 Blockchain Startups to ‘Solve Global Challenges’
By: Nikhilesh De
The United Nations’ charity arm for children, UNICEF, is funding research into blockchain tech.
Announced Monday, UNICEF is investing $100,000 in six blockchain startups to “solve global challenges using blockchain technology,” ranging from healthcare delivery transparency to managing finances and resources.
The investments are part of a broader program which already funds 20 technology startups, according to a press release.
These are UNICEF’s latest investments in blockchain startups through its innovation fund, which first hinted at the move as far back as February 2016, and put out a call for firms in the space explicitly at the beginning of this year.
Each of these startups is based in a developing economy, with firms based out of Argentina, Mexico, India, Tunisia and Bangladesh.
The six recipients are Atix Labs and Onesmart, which are developing platforms for tracking finances; Prescrypto, which is building a platform to track patient histories; Statwig, which is working to ensure vaccine delivery with a supply chain platform; Utopixar, which is working on a social collaboration tool; and W3 Engineers, which is looking to develop an offline networking system that does not require internet access.
UNICEF Innovation principal advisor Chris Fabian explained in a statement that the fund invests in projects “when our financing, technical support, and focus on vulnerable populations can help a technology grow and mature in the most fair and equitable way possible.”
He added:
“Blockchain technology is still at an early stage – and there is a great deal of experimentation, failure, and learning ahead of us as we see how, and where, we can use this technology to create a better world.”
On top of the funding, UNICEF will provide assistance with the products and technology, as well as share access to its network of partners and experts.
The companies are expected to deliver open-source prototypes of their projects over the next 12 months.
UNICEF has been looking into blockchain for years, investing in an identity-focused startup two years ago and trialing smart contracts for transactions.
UNICEF image via JPstock / Shutterstock
The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.
Source >> https://www.coindesk.com/unicef-funds-6-blockchain-startups-to-solve-global-challenges
The United Nations’ charity arm for children, UNICEF, is funding research into blockchain tech.
Announced Monday, UNICEF is investing $100,000 in six blockchain startups to “solve global challenges using blockchain technology,” ranging from healthcare delivery transparency to managing finances and resources.
The investments are part of a broader program which already funds 20 technology startups, according to a press release.
These are UNICEF’s latest investments in blockchain startups through its innovation fund, which first hinted at the move as far back as February 2016, and put out a call for firms in the space explicitly at the beginning of this year.
Each of these startups is based in a developing economy, with firms based out of Argentina, Mexico, India, Tunisia and Bangladesh.
The six recipients are Atix Labs and Onesmart, which are developing platforms for tracking finances; Prescrypto, which is building a platform to track patient histories; Statwig, which is working to ensure vaccine delivery with a supply chain platform; Utopixar, which is working on a social collaboration tool; and W3 Engineers, which is looking to develop an offline networking system that does not require internet access.
UNICEF Innovation principal advisor Chris Fabian explained in a statement that the fund invests in projects “when our financing, technical support, and focus on vulnerable populations can help a technology grow and mature in the most fair and equitable way possible.”
He added:
“Blockchain technology is still at an early stage – and there is a great deal of experimentation, failure, and learning ahead of us as we see how, and where, we can use this technology to create a better world.”
On top of the funding, UNICEF will provide assistance with the products and technology, as well as share access to its network of partners and experts.
The companies are expected to deliver open-source prototypes of their projects over the next 12 months.
UNICEF has been looking into blockchain for years, investing in an identity-focused startup two years ago and trialing smart contracts for transactions.
UNICEF image via JPstock / Shutterstock
The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.
Source >> https://www.coindesk.com/unicef-funds-6-blockchain-startups-to-solve-global-challenges
IP Tips for Startups
By: Mary Juetten
Startups and their founders have a lot on their plates and a lot of issues that loudly announce themselves as front-of-mind. You need to hire the right people — can’t hope to grow without them. You need an attractive, functional and professional website to create a positive first profession. Finding an office space is high on the list — not everyone’s going to fit in the garage on card tables. And customers, they’re pretty important too; that is, unless a billionaire benefactor is willing to buy you out without even proof of concept, but you should not hold your breath on that!
On that list of priorities, intellectual property (IP) probably rates as a middling concern if you’re somewhat conscientious of the topic, less so if you’re more of an ideas person content to leave the difficult business aspects of running a company to others. But intellectual property is as important as any other priority on your list, if not more so. IP represents the foundation, the backbone of your work; and often the bulk of the company’s value.
Ignoring your intellectual property is a mistake, and the well-intentioned procrastination we all engage in (“I’ll tackle that next week/next month/when things calm down a bit”) doesn’t equal action. The process of handling your intellectual property should start as soon as you begin laying the groundwork for your business. But where to start if you’re an IP novice? Here are some helpful tips for getting started.
Identify. Clearly, you need to understand what your IP is if you intend to take the necessary steps to protect it. Most are able to easily point out the most obvious examples, the prototypes and other physical manifestations of what you’ve created or hope to create. But if that is the scope of your view on IP, you’re missing a lot. That logo you’ve created for your business is your IP, and as an identifying mark for your business to the public, it’s worth quite a bit to you. The same goes for the tagline you use for your product, or the copy you’ve written for your website. All of these things are valuable identifiers of you and your product, and all run the risk of being stolen if you’re not careful.
Identifying your IP doesn’t have to be a difficult or painful process. Sit down and make a list of all of your creative assets, whether you’ve used them or not. Once you have a comprehensive list, consider the status of each item; have you filed the patents, trademarks, or copyrights that you need? Are you keeping your trade secrets private? It should be a relatively simple exercise, but it is an important one for taking the next steps.
Remember this first step also is more challenging if you have moved into hiring employees or contractors as we outline below.
Protect. Once you have a handle on what your IP is, you need to take the necessary steps to protect it. It seems simple enough, right? But getting the right protection can be complicated if you don’t know what you’re doing.
The first step that many forget is to make sure that you’re not infringing upon anyone else’s IP. We often like to think of ourselves as entirely unique innovators, but there is always the risk that someone else might’ve happened upon the same idea for a product or design or logo. Before you go to the trouble of filing any type of registration, make sure that you’ve conducted a search of the respective databases for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office or the U.S. Copyright Office to see what others have already registered.
Read More >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryjuetten/2018/08/23/ip-tips-for-startups/#3beb14344ed6
Startups and their founders have a lot on their plates and a lot of issues that loudly announce themselves as front-of-mind. You need to hire the right people — can’t hope to grow without them. You need an attractive, functional and professional website to create a positive first profession. Finding an office space is high on the list — not everyone’s going to fit in the garage on card tables. And customers, they’re pretty important too; that is, unless a billionaire benefactor is willing to buy you out without even proof of concept, but you should not hold your breath on that!
On that list of priorities, intellectual property (IP) probably rates as a middling concern if you’re somewhat conscientious of the topic, less so if you’re more of an ideas person content to leave the difficult business aspects of running a company to others. But intellectual property is as important as any other priority on your list, if not more so. IP represents the foundation, the backbone of your work; and often the bulk of the company’s value.
Ignoring your intellectual property is a mistake, and the well-intentioned procrastination we all engage in (“I’ll tackle that next week/next month/when things calm down a bit”) doesn’t equal action. The process of handling your intellectual property should start as soon as you begin laying the groundwork for your business. But where to start if you’re an IP novice? Here are some helpful tips for getting started.
Identify. Clearly, you need to understand what your IP is if you intend to take the necessary steps to protect it. Most are able to easily point out the most obvious examples, the prototypes and other physical manifestations of what you’ve created or hope to create. But if that is the scope of your view on IP, you’re missing a lot. That logo you’ve created for your business is your IP, and as an identifying mark for your business to the public, it’s worth quite a bit to you. The same goes for the tagline you use for your product, or the copy you’ve written for your website. All of these things are valuable identifiers of you and your product, and all run the risk of being stolen if you’re not careful.
Identifying your IP doesn’t have to be a difficult or painful process. Sit down and make a list of all of your creative assets, whether you’ve used them or not. Once you have a comprehensive list, consider the status of each item; have you filed the patents, trademarks, or copyrights that you need? Are you keeping your trade secrets private? It should be a relatively simple exercise, but it is an important one for taking the next steps.
Remember this first step also is more challenging if you have moved into hiring employees or contractors as we outline below.
Protect. Once you have a handle on what your IP is, you need to take the necessary steps to protect it. It seems simple enough, right? But getting the right protection can be complicated if you don’t know what you’re doing.
The first step that many forget is to make sure that you’re not infringing upon anyone else’s IP. We often like to think of ourselves as entirely unique innovators, but there is always the risk that someone else might’ve happened upon the same idea for a product or design or logo. Before you go to the trouble of filing any type of registration, make sure that you’ve conducted a search of the respective databases for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office or the U.S. Copyright Office to see what others have already registered.
Read More >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryjuetten/2018/08/23/ip-tips-for-startups/#3beb14344ed6
Why Intellectual Property is critical for startups
By: Vikram Upadhyaya
When entrepreneurs embark on that unique business idea that they have no doubt would be a commercial success in the market, their prime focus initially is how to actually start giving shape to the venture.
In the midst of numerous things that go into building a startup from scratch, the word ‘Intellectual Property’ (IP) is often not their priority. And even if they consider IP protection, it seems too expensive a proposition for a startup to act on.
But what entrepreneurs should remember is that assessing IP implications is not just about protecting the work you are doing. It is also to check if someone else has an IP for similar work. Often, there could be others in different parts of the globe working on a similar idea, which you may not be even aware of.
What will happen if you find out one day that someone else has already patented that idea or product or solution that you have painstakingly developed?
Importance of IP protection
In today’s competitive and dynamic environment, IP can be a unique selling proposition (USP) of the product or service, and it helps create a sustainable and defensible differentiator for the company.
By owning IP, a high entry barrier is created, thereby helping you to grow your venture faster with respect to your competitors’ offerings. Note - IP is always given high weightage by the investors and creates good value for your venture.
IP has, in fact, been identified as the key ingredient for startups across the world to get a competitive advantage in the market, according to the Startup Genome Project that aims to map, model and analyse what it takes to make startups tick.
IP assumes even greater significance for technology startups, where new innovations are being made every day. There is a huge brand value attached to IP, in both the manufacturing and technology sector. It gives investors, clients, and other stakeholders a tremendous sense of confidence in your commitment and passion to not just succeed, but also become a market leader in your area of operation.
There are essentially three ways in which a startup (or any other organisation) can protect its intellectual property (i.e., the idea or concept/ product/ process/ associated symbols, logos etc. that define the brand), namely, through:
1) Patents
2) Trademarks
3) Copyrights
Intellectual property is, in fact, an asset for its owner and has a commercial value attached to it.
Payal Chawla, Founder, Juscontractus says, “Protecting IP requires thought and strategy. A novel technological innovation, like Tetrapak, would be worth protecting through a patent, which can be very expensive. In certain situations, it may be possible to seek a trademark protection or simply protect through a trade secret. This can be done through investing in marketing, and creating a recall between the owner and the product. The point is - there are different strategies available for different goals. Intellectual property can be very valuable. It is not unknown for a brand to be three times the turnover of a company. IP, if correctly and strategically protected, can take the valuation of a company to a completely different level.”
Also remember, if someone else happens to do so before you, then you are likely to be pushed out of the game (even if you had started working on the idea first), lest you are found guilty of patent infringement or copyright violation.
Companies can even leverage these patents as a means to further boost their revenues through licensing. For instance, Ford and Toyota have both bought licenses from Paice LLC to use its patent covering hybrid cars.
In summary
While startups are constrained by a paucity of funds when it comes to protecting intellectual property, what is important is that they should still continuously work on identifying IP and at the same time consciously work on setting aside funds to protect IP.
Since international patents may prove to be expensive at this stage, a good start would be to apply for a domestic patent/trademark/copyright. As the company scales up, it can set aside a budget for patent/trademark/copyright in the international market. Failure to do so can affect the company’s prospects to scale up.
It’s not just at the startup stage that IP is important. Businesses are constantly reinventing and redefining themselves in today’s day and age, where change is the only constant. This means greater focus on innovations, which in turn, means a greater need to protect IP.
The importance of IP cannot, (and should not) be undermined by startups, and established companies alike, because of the long-term sustainable advantages it offers.
Source >> https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/254442
When entrepreneurs embark on that unique business idea that they have no doubt would be a commercial success in the market, their prime focus initially is how to actually start giving shape to the venture.
In the midst of numerous things that go into building a startup from scratch, the word ‘Intellectual Property’ (IP) is often not their priority. And even if they consider IP protection, it seems too expensive a proposition for a startup to act on.
But what entrepreneurs should remember is that assessing IP implications is not just about protecting the work you are doing. It is also to check if someone else has an IP for similar work. Often, there could be others in different parts of the globe working on a similar idea, which you may not be even aware of.
What will happen if you find out one day that someone else has already patented that idea or product or solution that you have painstakingly developed?
Importance of IP protection
In today’s competitive and dynamic environment, IP can be a unique selling proposition (USP) of the product or service, and it helps create a sustainable and defensible differentiator for the company.
By owning IP, a high entry barrier is created, thereby helping you to grow your venture faster with respect to your competitors’ offerings. Note - IP is always given high weightage by the investors and creates good value for your venture.
IP has, in fact, been identified as the key ingredient for startups across the world to get a competitive advantage in the market, according to the Startup Genome Project that aims to map, model and analyse what it takes to make startups tick.
IP assumes even greater significance for technology startups, where new innovations are being made every day. There is a huge brand value attached to IP, in both the manufacturing and technology sector. It gives investors, clients, and other stakeholders a tremendous sense of confidence in your commitment and passion to not just succeed, but also become a market leader in your area of operation.
There are essentially three ways in which a startup (or any other organisation) can protect its intellectual property (i.e., the idea or concept/ product/ process/ associated symbols, logos etc. that define the brand), namely, through:
1) Patents
2) Trademarks
3) Copyrights
Intellectual property is, in fact, an asset for its owner and has a commercial value attached to it.
Payal Chawla, Founder, Juscontractus says, “Protecting IP requires thought and strategy. A novel technological innovation, like Tetrapak, would be worth protecting through a patent, which can be very expensive. In certain situations, it may be possible to seek a trademark protection or simply protect through a trade secret. This can be done through investing in marketing, and creating a recall between the owner and the product. The point is - there are different strategies available for different goals. Intellectual property can be very valuable. It is not unknown for a brand to be three times the turnover of a company. IP, if correctly and strategically protected, can take the valuation of a company to a completely different level.”
Also remember, if someone else happens to do so before you, then you are likely to be pushed out of the game (even if you had started working on the idea first), lest you are found guilty of patent infringement or copyright violation.
Companies can even leverage these patents as a means to further boost their revenues through licensing. For instance, Ford and Toyota have both bought licenses from Paice LLC to use its patent covering hybrid cars.
In summary
While startups are constrained by a paucity of funds when it comes to protecting intellectual property, what is important is that they should still continuously work on identifying IP and at the same time consciously work on setting aside funds to protect IP.
Since international patents may prove to be expensive at this stage, a good start would be to apply for a domestic patent/trademark/copyright. As the company scales up, it can set aside a budget for patent/trademark/copyright in the international market. Failure to do so can affect the company’s prospects to scale up.
It’s not just at the startup stage that IP is important. Businesses are constantly reinventing and redefining themselves in today’s day and age, where change is the only constant. This means greater focus on innovations, which in turn, means a greater need to protect IP.
The importance of IP cannot, (and should not) be undermined by startups, and established companies alike, because of the long-term sustainable advantages it offers.
Source >> https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/254442
Startups May Be the Biggest Losers in Qualcomm-Apple ITC Fight
By: Rachel Wolbers
With growing anxiety about trade, the International Trade Commission should be a force for stability and predictability in trade disputes, protecting American companies from unfair competition by foreign entities.
Unfortunately, the ITC is too often a place for American companies to harm fellow American competitors. Qualcomm’s patent dispute against Apple, and by extension, Intel, is an egregious example of this. Unfortunately, if the ITC sides with Qualcomm, the ruling would most severely affect American startups and consumers, proving again the proverb “when elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers most.”
The ITC was set up as a quasi-judicial federal commission to investigate unfair trade practices. Unlike federal District Courts, the ITC’s only available remedy to companies is a so-called exclusion order, which prevents the importation of goods that infringe valid U.S. patents. This is a mighty power, because no matter how trivial a patent might be to a product, the ITC can bar it from being sold in the United States.
The threat of an exclusion order is particularly concerning for startup component makers. If you run a small company that manufactures a unique type of glass used on iPhones, the dispute between Qualcomm and Apple has nothing to do with your product, but your business could be crippled if the ITC excludes some iPhones because of a separate patent issue. Since the typical smartphone uses technology based on more than 250,000 patents, there are a lot of potential small component makers that could be hurt by the exclusion of an iPhone.
Aside from the threat of an exclusion order, a decision in favor of Qualcomm could hurt startups and competition in the tech industry more generally. Apple and Qualcomm may be locked in heated legal battles in courtrooms worldwide, but the recent ITC case is particularly anticompetitive. Qualcomm isn’t looking for an exclusion order on all iPhones, only the iPhones that contain modems produced by Intel — its only competitor in the market. If Qualcomm is successful in blocking Intel modems, it will regain monopoly power in the modem market, driving up prices for consumers and creating increased barriers to entry that can stifle future innovation.
Startups affected by this decision will not just be those trying to make components for smartphones. These types of modems are used in a variety of devices that rely on cellular communications. As 5G is rolled out, Qualcomm modems will have a huge potential market in burgeoning industries like autonomous vehicles, smart cities and the Internet of Things. As startups innovate in these spaces, Qualcomm should not be allowed to use its market dominance to bully companies into unfair licensing agreements.
It is clear that if the ITC issues an exclusion order on iPhones containing Intel chips, it won’t be in the public interest. Stifling competition and disproportionately harming startups and consumers never is.
Source >> https://www.insidesources.com/startups-may-be-the-biggest-losers-in-qualcomm-apple-itc-fight/
With growing anxiety about trade, the International Trade Commission should be a force for stability and predictability in trade disputes, protecting American companies from unfair competition by foreign entities.
Unfortunately, the ITC is too often a place for American companies to harm fellow American competitors. Qualcomm’s patent dispute against Apple, and by extension, Intel, is an egregious example of this. Unfortunately, if the ITC sides with Qualcomm, the ruling would most severely affect American startups and consumers, proving again the proverb “when elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers most.”
The ITC was set up as a quasi-judicial federal commission to investigate unfair trade practices. Unlike federal District Courts, the ITC’s only available remedy to companies is a so-called exclusion order, which prevents the importation of goods that infringe valid U.S. patents. This is a mighty power, because no matter how trivial a patent might be to a product, the ITC can bar it from being sold in the United States.
The threat of an exclusion order is particularly concerning for startup component makers. If you run a small company that manufactures a unique type of glass used on iPhones, the dispute between Qualcomm and Apple has nothing to do with your product, but your business could be crippled if the ITC excludes some iPhones because of a separate patent issue. Since the typical smartphone uses technology based on more than 250,000 patents, there are a lot of potential small component makers that could be hurt by the exclusion of an iPhone.
Aside from the threat of an exclusion order, a decision in favor of Qualcomm could hurt startups and competition in the tech industry more generally. Apple and Qualcomm may be locked in heated legal battles in courtrooms worldwide, but the recent ITC case is particularly anticompetitive. Qualcomm isn’t looking for an exclusion order on all iPhones, only the iPhones that contain modems produced by Intel — its only competitor in the market. If Qualcomm is successful in blocking Intel modems, it will regain monopoly power in the modem market, driving up prices for consumers and creating increased barriers to entry that can stifle future innovation.
Startups affected by this decision will not just be those trying to make components for smartphones. These types of modems are used in a variety of devices that rely on cellular communications. As 5G is rolled out, Qualcomm modems will have a huge potential market in burgeoning industries like autonomous vehicles, smart cities and the Internet of Things. As startups innovate in these spaces, Qualcomm should not be allowed to use its market dominance to bully companies into unfair licensing agreements.
It is clear that if the ITC issues an exclusion order on iPhones containing Intel chips, it won’t be in the public interest. Stifling competition and disproportionately harming startups and consumers never is.
Source >> https://www.insidesources.com/startups-may-be-the-biggest-losers-in-qualcomm-apple-itc-fight/
Start-ups and Intellectual Property
By:GREENAWAY SCOTT
When it comes to establishing a new brand or business, intellectual property protection could prove to be invaluable.
All businesses have intellectual property, whether it’s their logo, original designs, or even a trade secret. This can act as a valuable asset giving start-ups a competitive edge, as such, it needs protecting.
What is intellectual property?
The term ‘intellectual property rights’ describes a range of legal rights that can attach to certain information, ideas and creations such as inventions, names and images.
They generally fall into two categories. Unregistered rights for which protection arises automatically, this includes copyright, unregistered design rights and rights in unregistered trademarks.
There are also registered rights which include patents, trademarks and registered designs. An application must be made to an official body to protect these rights, for example the Intellectual Property Office in the UK.
The owners of such rights are entitled to prevent their unauthorised use and can also exploit them to generate an income.
Type of intellectual property protection
Copyright – copyright automatically arises when an original work in a relevant category is created. Due to its automatic protection it is one of the most simple intellectual property protectors and it provides the owner with a number of rights and legal benefits to prevent unauthorised use and exploitation of the protected work.
Trademark – this is a registered right in which is applied for at the Intellectual Property Office. There are specific requirements such as it being a distinctive sign which is used to identify particular goods and services provided by that business. The trademarked sign must be distinctive and not misleading. It cannot be identical to an already registered trademark.
Patents – patents are one of the most effective ways of encouraging innovation and improvisation by ensuring inventor’s works are protected and that they are being rewarded. Patents last for 20 years in which the owner can exploit their right as they wish. Patent applications are lengthy and complicated, however the grant of a patent will greatly benefit the business.
Industrial design protection – this protection allows you to protect the aesthetic aspects of a product such as surface decoration. Industrial design protection only takes into account the aesthetic aspects and does not consider the functionality of the product.
The importance of intellectual property protection
Intellectual property can be used a unique investment opportunity and allows your business to be differentiated from others. Intellectual property creates good value for your business and a high entry barrier is created allowing you to develop your business without the threat of competitors using your ideas or branding. Intellectual property creates a competitive advantage for start-ups.
The benefits of protecting your intellectual property
Intellectual property can differentiate your business from others, from a customer and investor perspective. It allows customers to distinguish and easily identify your brand. Investors may be more attracted to your business if they can see that you have protected your intellectual property.
As mentioned above, when intellectual property rights are registered you are entitled to exploit those rights. This is an advantage as it allows additional revenue by selling or licensing your intellectual property.
Source >> https://businessnewswales.com/start-ups-and-intellectual-property/
When it comes to establishing a new brand or business, intellectual property protection could prove to be invaluable.
All businesses have intellectual property, whether it’s their logo, original designs, or even a trade secret. This can act as a valuable asset giving start-ups a competitive edge, as such, it needs protecting.
What is intellectual property?
The term ‘intellectual property rights’ describes a range of legal rights that can attach to certain information, ideas and creations such as inventions, names and images.
They generally fall into two categories. Unregistered rights for which protection arises automatically, this includes copyright, unregistered design rights and rights in unregistered trademarks.
There are also registered rights which include patents, trademarks and registered designs. An application must be made to an official body to protect these rights, for example the Intellectual Property Office in the UK.
The owners of such rights are entitled to prevent their unauthorised use and can also exploit them to generate an income.
Type of intellectual property protection
Copyright – copyright automatically arises when an original work in a relevant category is created. Due to its automatic protection it is one of the most simple intellectual property protectors and it provides the owner with a number of rights and legal benefits to prevent unauthorised use and exploitation of the protected work.
Trademark – this is a registered right in which is applied for at the Intellectual Property Office. There are specific requirements such as it being a distinctive sign which is used to identify particular goods and services provided by that business. The trademarked sign must be distinctive and not misleading. It cannot be identical to an already registered trademark.
Patents – patents are one of the most effective ways of encouraging innovation and improvisation by ensuring inventor’s works are protected and that they are being rewarded. Patents last for 20 years in which the owner can exploit their right as they wish. Patent applications are lengthy and complicated, however the grant of a patent will greatly benefit the business.
Industrial design protection – this protection allows you to protect the aesthetic aspects of a product such as surface decoration. Industrial design protection only takes into account the aesthetic aspects and does not consider the functionality of the product.
The importance of intellectual property protection
Intellectual property can be used a unique investment opportunity and allows your business to be differentiated from others. Intellectual property creates good value for your business and a high entry barrier is created allowing you to develop your business without the threat of competitors using your ideas or branding. Intellectual property creates a competitive advantage for start-ups.
The benefits of protecting your intellectual property
Intellectual property can differentiate your business from others, from a customer and investor perspective. It allows customers to distinguish and easily identify your brand. Investors may be more attracted to your business if they can see that you have protected your intellectual property.
As mentioned above, when intellectual property rights are registered you are entitled to exploit those rights. This is an advantage as it allows additional revenue by selling or licensing your intellectual property.
Source >> https://businessnewswales.com/start-ups-and-intellectual-property/
Opinion: Insurtech Start-Ups Can Do More to Win Government Cash
By: InsuranceEdgeEditor
Insurtech is the buzzword in the insurance industry right now, with dozens of UK start-ups all trying out new ideas and often hungry for investment cash. But what can they do to increase their chances of getting off the launch pad? Is there anything companies can do to get more government help?
Definitely, says Luke Hamm, CEO of GovGrant
It’s taken a while but it seems that the UK insurance industry has well and truly caught the Insurtech bug. For years, analysts, the media and consultants have been championing the benefits of innovation to drive the change necessary to deliver the products and services that the modern consumer demands.
And it appears that those messages have been taken on board with the money following quickly behind. According to Accenture, the first half of 2017 saw £218m invested in UK Insurtech which was a huge leap on the measly £7.3m the year before with deal making increasing by 75% in the same period.
Companies such as Brolly, Cuvva and Nimbla are good examples of successful UK startups, embracing the Insurtech spirit. But as investment continues to pour in, so the number of startups focused on the disruption of the UK market will increase.
To date, it is this external investment that has grabbed the headlines and understandably so, for the best ideas in the world will get nowhere without the necessary capital to make it a reality. But what many existing and nascent organisations may not be aware of is that there are Government incentives to get businesses like theirs off the ground and growing.
Back in 2000, the Government introduced Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credits to encourage greater R&D spending, in turn leading to greater investment in innovation. They work by either reducing a company’s liability to corporation tax or by making a payment to the company if it is loss-making.
According to Government statistics from 2015-16, nearly £3bn has been claimed back by UK companies and while it appears knowledge of the scheme is growing (a 20% increase on the previous year), the scale of adoption is till not what the Government would like.
Indeed, in his 2017 Spring Budget speech, Chancellor Philip Hammond bemoaned the lack of take-up of the scheme and my experience of working in this space, backs that sentiment up. At GovGrant, we assist businesses, including InsurTech, to maximise the funding opportunities through innovation tax incentives when they are investing in R&D and Intellectual Property. We come across too many companies that are completely unaware of what is available and even when they are aware, they may think it doesn’t apply to them or that it’s just too difficult to secure.
Read More >> https://insurance-edge.net/2018/07/15/opinion-insurtech-start-ups-can-do-more-to-win-government-cash/
Insurtech is the buzzword in the insurance industry right now, with dozens of UK start-ups all trying out new ideas and often hungry for investment cash. But what can they do to increase their chances of getting off the launch pad? Is there anything companies can do to get more government help?
Definitely, says Luke Hamm, CEO of GovGrant
It’s taken a while but it seems that the UK insurance industry has well and truly caught the Insurtech bug. For years, analysts, the media and consultants have been championing the benefits of innovation to drive the change necessary to deliver the products and services that the modern consumer demands.
And it appears that those messages have been taken on board with the money following quickly behind. According to Accenture, the first half of 2017 saw £218m invested in UK Insurtech which was a huge leap on the measly £7.3m the year before with deal making increasing by 75% in the same period.
Companies such as Brolly, Cuvva and Nimbla are good examples of successful UK startups, embracing the Insurtech spirit. But as investment continues to pour in, so the number of startups focused on the disruption of the UK market will increase.
To date, it is this external investment that has grabbed the headlines and understandably so, for the best ideas in the world will get nowhere without the necessary capital to make it a reality. But what many existing and nascent organisations may not be aware of is that there are Government incentives to get businesses like theirs off the ground and growing.
Back in 2000, the Government introduced Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credits to encourage greater R&D spending, in turn leading to greater investment in innovation. They work by either reducing a company’s liability to corporation tax or by making a payment to the company if it is loss-making.
According to Government statistics from 2015-16, nearly £3bn has been claimed back by UK companies and while it appears knowledge of the scheme is growing (a 20% increase on the previous year), the scale of adoption is till not what the Government would like.
Indeed, in his 2017 Spring Budget speech, Chancellor Philip Hammond bemoaned the lack of take-up of the scheme and my experience of working in this space, backs that sentiment up. At GovGrant, we assist businesses, including InsurTech, to maximise the funding opportunities through innovation tax incentives when they are investing in R&D and Intellectual Property. We come across too many companies that are completely unaware of what is available and even when they are aware, they may think it doesn’t apply to them or that it’s just too difficult to secure.
Read More >> https://insurance-edge.net/2018/07/15/opinion-insurtech-start-ups-can-do-more-to-win-government-cash/
Intellectual property strategies for startups
By: Benjamin Lehberger
Intellectual property protection is an important consideration for most startups. Obtaining intellectual property protection, such as patents, can minimize competition and act as a defensive mechanism against infringement claims from others. Intellectual property also can attract or solidify funding and partnerships. In formulating an intellectual property strategy for your startup, consider the following.
File early, and keep quiet
Your time to file for patent protection is limited and patents should be contemplated early on in development. In the United States, an inventor has a one-year “grace period” from first publicizing an invention to filing for patent protection, after which it is too late. However, you should not wait even that long. In 2013, the U.S. patent system switched from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system. This subtle difference in terminology could mean dire consequences for those who delay seeking patent protection.
Under the old first-to-invent system, you could be the first to conceive of an invention and still obtain patent rights over an earlier filer by showing that you conceived first and continued to diligently work on your invention. Today, it is a race to the patent office. Regardless of who conceived of the invention first, the first one to file their patent application “wins.”
Also, it is important to note that the one-year “grace period” to file a patent application is not available in most countries outside of the United States. If you plan to seek patent protection abroad, publicizing your invention at any time before filing a patent application could put your foreign intellectual property rights in jeopardy. Therefore, file early and keep quiet until you do.
File again as the invention evolves
As your startup continues to develop its product or products, consider each new feature as a possibility for patent protection. Startups that file one early patent application and stop may find that, once the patent issues, the product has moved far beyond what was in the original patent application. The product may end up being under-protected or not even covered by the patent at all.
It is important to reevaluate patent protection on a regular basis and consider filing on new features of the invention when applicable. If the product is evolving quickly, consider filing a provisional patent application or a series of provisional patent applications within a year before filing a utility patent application.
Read More >> https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/31/intellectual-property-strategies-for-startups/
Intellectual property protection is an important consideration for most startups. Obtaining intellectual property protection, such as patents, can minimize competition and act as a defensive mechanism against infringement claims from others. Intellectual property also can attract or solidify funding and partnerships. In formulating an intellectual property strategy for your startup, consider the following.
File early, and keep quiet
Your time to file for patent protection is limited and patents should be contemplated early on in development. In the United States, an inventor has a one-year “grace period” from first publicizing an invention to filing for patent protection, after which it is too late. However, you should not wait even that long. In 2013, the U.S. patent system switched from a first-to-invent to a first-inventor-to-file system. This subtle difference in terminology could mean dire consequences for those who delay seeking patent protection.
Under the old first-to-invent system, you could be the first to conceive of an invention and still obtain patent rights over an earlier filer by showing that you conceived first and continued to diligently work on your invention. Today, it is a race to the patent office. Regardless of who conceived of the invention first, the first one to file their patent application “wins.”
Also, it is important to note that the one-year “grace period” to file a patent application is not available in most countries outside of the United States. If you plan to seek patent protection abroad, publicizing your invention at any time before filing a patent application could put your foreign intellectual property rights in jeopardy. Therefore, file early and keep quiet until you do.
File again as the invention evolves
As your startup continues to develop its product or products, consider each new feature as a possibility for patent protection. Startups that file one early patent application and stop may find that, once the patent issues, the product has moved far beyond what was in the original patent application. The product may end up being under-protected or not even covered by the patent at all.
It is important to reevaluate patent protection on a regular basis and consider filing on new features of the invention when applicable. If the product is evolving quickly, consider filing a provisional patent application or a series of provisional patent applications within a year before filing a utility patent application.
Read More >> https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/31/intellectual-property-strategies-for-startups/
Intellectual property basics for startups: patents
By: Victoria Lee
The crown jewel of a typical technology company is its intellectual property portfolio. Having a good basic understanding of intellectual property protection is essential for entrepreneurs to extract value out of their company's key assets and manage opportunities and risk arising from them. One important type of intellectual property that may be part of an intellectual property portfolio is a patent.
What is a patent?
Utility patents are the types of patents that are typically filed by technology-oriented startups.1 They protect inventions which are new, useful and non-obvious. Such inventions can be electrical, biological, mechanical, chemical or even a business process. In order to obtain any patent rights, the startup must apply to the government in each jurisdiction in which protection is sought and comply with such jurisdiction's legal criteria. Currently, a patent in the United States has a term of 20 years from the filing date but the term may be extended under certain conditions.
When do you need a patent?
Most products and services can be protected by a combination of intellectual property rights. For example, computer software can be protected by patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets. Microsoft protects certain functions of its Windows software with patents; it uses copyright to protect the actual code of the Windows software from copying; it uses trademark law to protect the ''Microsoft'' and ''Windows'' trademarks which identify the product; and it uses trade secret law to protect the structure and methodology of its source code. However, once a patent is issued, trade secrets in the part of the computer software protected by the patent will be disclosed and will no longer be protected by trade secret law.
Patents permit the owner to ''exclude'' others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, and importing a product or service embodying the invention. The fact that a patent is a ''negative'' right is very important because it means that obtaining a patent does not give a startup the right to sell a product or provide a service: many products and services are covered by the claims of multiple patents owned by different parties. Patents are generally viewed as the strongest form of intellectual property because they can prevent a competitor most effectively from making its product.
Many startups miss the opportunity to protect the most important elements of their products by not understanding the deadlines in patent law or not implementing a strategy for patent protection of products and services. Briefly, most countries will not permit patent protection for an invention unless the application is filed prior to public disclosure of the invention, such as by demonstrating a product at a trade show, publishing technical papers or offering it openly for sale to third parties. The United States, like the rest of the world, now follows the ''first to file'' rule with certain modifications rather than the previous ''first to invent'' rule. Startups need to be aware of this framework and ensure that they make appropriate decisions regarding protection before demonstrating their products at a tradeshow, publishing technical papers about it or offering it for sale to third parties.
Patents are sufficiently important that we have included a separate overview specifically discussing patent strategies for startups, including a discussion about the deadlines for patent prosecution. You can access our patent strategy overview.
Read More >> https://www.dlapiperaccelerate.com/knowledge/2017/intellectual-property-basics-for-startups-patents.html?platform=hootsuite
The crown jewel of a typical technology company is its intellectual property portfolio. Having a good basic understanding of intellectual property protection is essential for entrepreneurs to extract value out of their company's key assets and manage opportunities and risk arising from them. One important type of intellectual property that may be part of an intellectual property portfolio is a patent.
What is a patent?
Utility patents are the types of patents that are typically filed by technology-oriented startups.1 They protect inventions which are new, useful and non-obvious. Such inventions can be electrical, biological, mechanical, chemical or even a business process. In order to obtain any patent rights, the startup must apply to the government in each jurisdiction in which protection is sought and comply with such jurisdiction's legal criteria. Currently, a patent in the United States has a term of 20 years from the filing date but the term may be extended under certain conditions.
When do you need a patent?
Most products and services can be protected by a combination of intellectual property rights. For example, computer software can be protected by patents, copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets. Microsoft protects certain functions of its Windows software with patents; it uses copyright to protect the actual code of the Windows software from copying; it uses trademark law to protect the ''Microsoft'' and ''Windows'' trademarks which identify the product; and it uses trade secret law to protect the structure and methodology of its source code. However, once a patent is issued, trade secrets in the part of the computer software protected by the patent will be disclosed and will no longer be protected by trade secret law.
Patents permit the owner to ''exclude'' others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, and importing a product or service embodying the invention. The fact that a patent is a ''negative'' right is very important because it means that obtaining a patent does not give a startup the right to sell a product or provide a service: many products and services are covered by the claims of multiple patents owned by different parties. Patents are generally viewed as the strongest form of intellectual property because they can prevent a competitor most effectively from making its product.
Many startups miss the opportunity to protect the most important elements of their products by not understanding the deadlines in patent law or not implementing a strategy for patent protection of products and services. Briefly, most countries will not permit patent protection for an invention unless the application is filed prior to public disclosure of the invention, such as by demonstrating a product at a trade show, publishing technical papers or offering it openly for sale to third parties. The United States, like the rest of the world, now follows the ''first to file'' rule with certain modifications rather than the previous ''first to invent'' rule. Startups need to be aware of this framework and ensure that they make appropriate decisions regarding protection before demonstrating their products at a tradeshow, publishing technical papers about it or offering it for sale to third parties.
Patents are sufficiently important that we have included a separate overview specifically discussing patent strategies for startups, including a discussion about the deadlines for patent prosecution. You can access our patent strategy overview.
Read More >> https://www.dlapiperaccelerate.com/knowledge/2017/intellectual-property-basics-for-startups-patents.html?platform=hootsuite
Startups want a strong patent system—they just don’t know it yet.
By: Zachary Silbersher
JUNE 4, 2018
This week’s edition of The Economist addresses an interesting spin on the prospects of budding Silicon Valley startups living under the shadow of Big Tech. The fantasy of getting bought is being supplanted by the reality of getting taken out. The Economist argues that startups now live within a kill zone maintained by Big Tech—either sell out on our terms, or we’ll coopt your technology and launch our own product. While antitrust may be one solution to give more leverage to innovators, what about patents?
For a long while after Microsoft’s 1990’s strategy to “extinguish,” startups enjoyed free reign. The idea of cobbling together a few techies with some business sense and a half-cracked idea of how to do something new with your phone could feasibly translate into VC funding. Now, however, the tides have changed. Startups coming anywhere near internet technology are more likely to find themselves in the “kill zone.” Big tech, including all the regular names (Alphabet ($GOOG); Facebook ($FB); Apple ($APPL); Amazon ($AMZN); Microsoft ($MSFT)), is now more mindful of identifying encroaching startups and taking them out. Snap is the most notorious example. After spurning Facebook’s offer to purchase the company, Facebook essentially cloned Snap’s essential features and dampened the company’s growth.
The Economist identifies three reasons why startups are more vulnerable now to the kill zone, and why Big Tech is now more adept at spotting them. First, Big Tech is armed with better data to identify encroaching startups. Google and Facebook have their hands on unique data regarding how users spend their time on the internet and what they do. Further, Big Tech has a track record of investing in startups only to turn around and launch its own competing product soon after. Second, Big Tech is awash with compensation incentives to lure top talent away from rolling the dice on a startup. And third, there are few disruptive technologies on the rise that could provide a platform for startups to break through. The Economist concludes this is why VC funding is more interested these days in technologies currently distanced from Big Tech, such as cryptocurrencies or synthetic biology. (Although the rumors are that Facebook is dabbling in cryptocurrencies.)
Big Tech’s kill zone may already be self-reinforcing. Compared to even 10 years ago, Big Tech has become so entrenched and institutionalized that most startups today are “built for sale, not for scale,” quotes the The Economist of an investor in tech. Yet, if the kill zone discourages early stage funding, and if Big Tech turns more frequently to knocking out startups rather than buying them up, then the startup fantasy may soon wither. Assuming that startups are a boon for innovation, The Economist rightly observes that one obstacle to perpetuating the kill zone may lie within antitrust enforcement. If regulators decide to crack down on Big Tech’s appetite to swallow up nascent competitors, that may help the pendulum swing back in favor of startups.
Yet, what is notable in The Economist’s article is that there is no discussion about how intellectual property either can or should be a consideration. The Economist portrays numerous examples of Big Tech just co-opting a startup’s tech and launching its own version. Yet, there is no corollary discussion of the consequences for Big Tech of violating the startup’s IP. This is not a criticism of The Economist. Instead, it is an accurate reflection of the force and esteem that intellectual property has these days, or rather the lack thereof. Big Tech is obviously not worried about patents owned by startups because Big Tech rightly believes those patents have no bite.
That, in itself, is due in part to the lobbying of Big Tech to diminish the value and corresponding threat of patents. Over the past half-decade alone, the value of software-based U.S. patents has diminished due to a series of Supreme Court cases (including Alice and Octane Fitness) and the implementation of the IPR process, among other reasons. Companies like Cloudflare have made waves and attracted accolades by publicly attempting to shame companies that enforce patents without simultaneously practicing them. But while those publicity campaigns make lots of techies feel great, they are also probably shooting themselves in the foot. Companies like Cloudflare—indeed, most tech companies except for a select few—are not immune to the kill zone.
Read More >> https://www.markmanadvisors.com/blog/2018/6/4/startups-want-a-strong-patent-systemthey-just-dont-know-it-yet
JUNE 4, 2018
This week’s edition of The Economist addresses an interesting spin on the prospects of budding Silicon Valley startups living under the shadow of Big Tech. The fantasy of getting bought is being supplanted by the reality of getting taken out. The Economist argues that startups now live within a kill zone maintained by Big Tech—either sell out on our terms, or we’ll coopt your technology and launch our own product. While antitrust may be one solution to give more leverage to innovators, what about patents?
For a long while after Microsoft’s 1990’s strategy to “extinguish,” startups enjoyed free reign. The idea of cobbling together a few techies with some business sense and a half-cracked idea of how to do something new with your phone could feasibly translate into VC funding. Now, however, the tides have changed. Startups coming anywhere near internet technology are more likely to find themselves in the “kill zone.” Big tech, including all the regular names (Alphabet ($GOOG); Facebook ($FB); Apple ($APPL); Amazon ($AMZN); Microsoft ($MSFT)), is now more mindful of identifying encroaching startups and taking them out. Snap is the most notorious example. After spurning Facebook’s offer to purchase the company, Facebook essentially cloned Snap’s essential features and dampened the company’s growth.
The Economist identifies three reasons why startups are more vulnerable now to the kill zone, and why Big Tech is now more adept at spotting them. First, Big Tech is armed with better data to identify encroaching startups. Google and Facebook have their hands on unique data regarding how users spend their time on the internet and what they do. Further, Big Tech has a track record of investing in startups only to turn around and launch its own competing product soon after. Second, Big Tech is awash with compensation incentives to lure top talent away from rolling the dice on a startup. And third, there are few disruptive technologies on the rise that could provide a platform for startups to break through. The Economist concludes this is why VC funding is more interested these days in technologies currently distanced from Big Tech, such as cryptocurrencies or synthetic biology. (Although the rumors are that Facebook is dabbling in cryptocurrencies.)
Big Tech’s kill zone may already be self-reinforcing. Compared to even 10 years ago, Big Tech has become so entrenched and institutionalized that most startups today are “built for sale, not for scale,” quotes the The Economist of an investor in tech. Yet, if the kill zone discourages early stage funding, and if Big Tech turns more frequently to knocking out startups rather than buying them up, then the startup fantasy may soon wither. Assuming that startups are a boon for innovation, The Economist rightly observes that one obstacle to perpetuating the kill zone may lie within antitrust enforcement. If regulators decide to crack down on Big Tech’s appetite to swallow up nascent competitors, that may help the pendulum swing back in favor of startups.
Yet, what is notable in The Economist’s article is that there is no discussion about how intellectual property either can or should be a consideration. The Economist portrays numerous examples of Big Tech just co-opting a startup’s tech and launching its own version. Yet, there is no corollary discussion of the consequences for Big Tech of violating the startup’s IP. This is not a criticism of The Economist. Instead, it is an accurate reflection of the force and esteem that intellectual property has these days, or rather the lack thereof. Big Tech is obviously not worried about patents owned by startups because Big Tech rightly believes those patents have no bite.
That, in itself, is due in part to the lobbying of Big Tech to diminish the value and corresponding threat of patents. Over the past half-decade alone, the value of software-based U.S. patents has diminished due to a series of Supreme Court cases (including Alice and Octane Fitness) and the implementation of the IPR process, among other reasons. Companies like Cloudflare have made waves and attracted accolades by publicly attempting to shame companies that enforce patents without simultaneously practicing them. But while those publicity campaigns make lots of techies feel great, they are also probably shooting themselves in the foot. Companies like Cloudflare—indeed, most tech companies except for a select few—are not immune to the kill zone.
Read More >> https://www.markmanadvisors.com/blog/2018/6/4/startups-want-a-strong-patent-systemthey-just-dont-know-it-yet
Tech giants offer startups free patents in bid to foil lawsuits
By: Susan Decker
Red Hat Inc. and Lenovo Group Ltd. are giving away free patents to any startup that joins a group of more than 200 companies devoted to keeping its members and their patents out of court.
It’s a carrot to entice startup companies to join the LOT Network, a non-profit created by Google and Canon four years ago to combat litigation by patent assertion companies, known derisively as “trolls,” that don’t make any products but seek royalties by challenging patents. By joining LOT, a company agrees that if they sell patents to such firms, all group members will have a free license to them.
“You’re binding yourself to the mast and saying ‘I’m not going to give in to the siren song of trolls,"‘ said Ira Blumberg, vice president of intellectual property and litigation for Lenovo.
The goal is to avoid or at least limit a repeat of what happened when the dot.com bubble burst nearly two decades ago. That left firms in bankruptcy court with little of value other than their patents, which were sucked up by speculators in hopes they would be tickets to big bucks. It contributed to a 47 percent increase in the number of patent complaints filed in the U.S. from 2000 to 2010.
While the number of suits is declining, it remains an issue for companies of all sizes, said Patrick McBride, senior director of patents for the Raleigh, North Carolina-based software company Red Hat.
“It is difficult to get a sufficient number of companies to coalesce around a single solution that will address the problem,” McBride said. “There is a mesh of overlapping efforts and LOT is a significant player.”
It’s easy to attract larger companies, said Ken Seddon, chief executive officer of LOT, which stands for license on transfer. The group’s members collectively own some 1.1 million patents and patent applications worldwide. That provides immunity from a fraction of the patents in force worldwide -- more than 347,000 were issued last year in the U.S. alone.
It’s still a big enough number that “I’m basically a patent litigation flu shot,” Seddon said.
Automakers including Ford and General Motors that are using more electronics in their vehicles joined as part of an overall strategy to eliminate the type of patent wars that engulfed the smartphone industry. Retailers like Bed Bath & Beyond and J.C. Penney get sued a lot over products they sell so it’s cost-effective to eliminate at least some potential threats.
Of the 224 members, about 75 count as startups and Seddon said he’s trying to increase that number. Investors in smaller companies may be wary of locking up patents in the future, fearing it will reduce their value, and may question the benefit of a group founded by large patent owners like Google and Canon.
Seddon’s pitch includes the free patents, no cost membership for companies with less than $25 million in annual revenue or financing, and an opportunity to network.
Limiting litigation is a concern of small companies focused on building their brand, said Alexandra Sepulveda, vice president of legal at Udemy Inc., a seven-year-old company that sells education videos taught by people with work-life experience.
“For any startup that gets to the success we have -- everybody comes out of the woodwork,” she said of the company’s decision to join LOT a year ago. “The last place you want to be is in front of your board answering questions about why you didn’t put preventative measures in place.”
Read More >> http://www.standard.net/Business/2018/05/13/Tech-giants-offer-startups-free-patents-in-bid-to-foil-lawsuits
Red Hat Inc. and Lenovo Group Ltd. are giving away free patents to any startup that joins a group of more than 200 companies devoted to keeping its members and their patents out of court.
It’s a carrot to entice startup companies to join the LOT Network, a non-profit created by Google and Canon four years ago to combat litigation by patent assertion companies, known derisively as “trolls,” that don’t make any products but seek royalties by challenging patents. By joining LOT, a company agrees that if they sell patents to such firms, all group members will have a free license to them.
“You’re binding yourself to the mast and saying ‘I’m not going to give in to the siren song of trolls,"‘ said Ira Blumberg, vice president of intellectual property and litigation for Lenovo.
The goal is to avoid or at least limit a repeat of what happened when the dot.com bubble burst nearly two decades ago. That left firms in bankruptcy court with little of value other than their patents, which were sucked up by speculators in hopes they would be tickets to big bucks. It contributed to a 47 percent increase in the number of patent complaints filed in the U.S. from 2000 to 2010.
While the number of suits is declining, it remains an issue for companies of all sizes, said Patrick McBride, senior director of patents for the Raleigh, North Carolina-based software company Red Hat.
“It is difficult to get a sufficient number of companies to coalesce around a single solution that will address the problem,” McBride said. “There is a mesh of overlapping efforts and LOT is a significant player.”
It’s easy to attract larger companies, said Ken Seddon, chief executive officer of LOT, which stands for license on transfer. The group’s members collectively own some 1.1 million patents and patent applications worldwide. That provides immunity from a fraction of the patents in force worldwide -- more than 347,000 were issued last year in the U.S. alone.
It’s still a big enough number that “I’m basically a patent litigation flu shot,” Seddon said.
Automakers including Ford and General Motors that are using more electronics in their vehicles joined as part of an overall strategy to eliminate the type of patent wars that engulfed the smartphone industry. Retailers like Bed Bath & Beyond and J.C. Penney get sued a lot over products they sell so it’s cost-effective to eliminate at least some potential threats.
Of the 224 members, about 75 count as startups and Seddon said he’s trying to increase that number. Investors in smaller companies may be wary of locking up patents in the future, fearing it will reduce their value, and may question the benefit of a group founded by large patent owners like Google and Canon.
Seddon’s pitch includes the free patents, no cost membership for companies with less than $25 million in annual revenue or financing, and an opportunity to network.
Limiting litigation is a concern of small companies focused on building their brand, said Alexandra Sepulveda, vice president of legal at Udemy Inc., a seven-year-old company that sells education videos taught by people with work-life experience.
“For any startup that gets to the success we have -- everybody comes out of the woodwork,” she said of the company’s decision to join LOT a year ago. “The last place you want to be is in front of your board answering questions about why you didn’t put preventative measures in place.”
Read More >> http://www.standard.net/Business/2018/05/13/Tech-giants-offer-startups-free-patents-in-bid-to-foil-lawsuits
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)