Posts in Podcasts

Helping audiences understand what intellectual property is, why it’s valuable, and how to use it is an ongoing challenge. The perception that intellectual property is only for attorneys and big companies is widespread. Of course, while that impression is grounded in reality, it’s also inaccurate. At its best, IP helps level the playing field for smaller entities. What can be done to make IP education more relevant and interesting to more people? One solution is to have educators who are not practicing attorneys teach about intellectual property. They are generally able to speak more freely and with less concern for the technical aspects of the law.

Attorneys are, by nature, skeptical and risk averse. I was repeatedly reminded of this over the last few months listening to discussions about using AI for patent practice and Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons’ (D-DE) latest effort to fix the patent eligibility mess (via the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) of 2023). Amid the initial excitement over ChatGPT’s launch, IP attorneys rightfully turned their attention to the risks and pitfalls of using AI. However, I was surprised about the extent to which that became the focus of conversations regarding using AI for patent practice. Although I think – like in most other professional fields –patent attorneys have accepted the notion that AI will play a major role in their practice at some point in the distant future, the general consensus seems to be that the risks are too great, and the payoff is too small for that to happen anytime soon.

What are ways of making money from patents without suing for patent infringement? In the not-so-distant past, technology companies like Microsoft and IBM signed hundreds of mutually beneficial licensing agreements with a wide range of businesses without resorting to lawsuits. Today, we are more likely to read about tech companies suing one another for patent infringement than negotiating win-win deals. What happened, and how are innovators being affected?

Laurie Fitzgerald brings over a decade’s worth of experience to the table in the realm of patent licensing and intellectual property. In her current capacity at Avanci Vehicle, she plays a pivotal role in spearheading the platform’s expansion, encompassing over 80 automotive brands and licensors responsible for a significant portion of 3G/4G/5G cellular Standard Essential Patents (SEPs). On this episode of The SEP Couch, we delve into the intricate details of the recently launched 5G Vehicle SEP Program by Avanci.

How does the research that takes place at universities turn into products and services? Before the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980, recipients of federal funding for early-stage research, such as universities and federal labs, were not permitted to own the intellectual property they created. Instead, the patents filed on inventions related to federally funded research stayed with the government.

Claims are the fundamental building blocks of a patent. There simply is not a more important concept to grasp in all of patent strategy. As former Chief Justice of the Federal Circuit, Giles Rich, once famously said, “The name of the game is the claim.” And in terms of what game you’re playing, the claims are where you separate the patents playing checkers from the patents playing chess.

This episode of IP Goes Pop! ®, takes you on a journey through the iconic world of the Barbie universe and brand, exploring its deep-rooted connections with pop culture and intellectual property law. Hop in the dream car and journey with Volpe Koenig Shareholders and podcast hosts, Michael Snyder and Joseph Gushue to a land of pink corvettes, with a few pitstops at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Kicking off with a discussion of the recent cinematic triumphs of the Barbie movie released this year (2023), your hosts delve into how this classic brand has been brought to life on the big screen captivating audiences around the globe.

In a recent legal development that has captured the attention of the intellectual property world, a three-judge appellate panel has explored the intricacies of the willful blindness doctrine within the context of contributory trademark infringement. This thought-provoking case involves the legal dispute between online marketplace giant Redbubble and YYGM, trading as Brandy Melville. The legal discussion at hand offers valuable insights into the evolving landscape of online trademark infringement liability.

Non-diluting capital can be an essential source of funding when trying to get your innovation off the ground. Investor money comes with the loss of equity and/or control. Family and friends’ money may come with the risk of strained relationships. In comparison, essentially free money by way of government grants can seem like an obvious choice, right? And it is for many. The Small Business Technology Transfer (or STTR) and Small Business Innovation Research (or SBIR) grants are the largest source of early-stage capital for life science startups in the United States, combining to provide over $2 billion annually in support from federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH). But like money from investors, friends, and family, these grants do still come with some serious strings attached and potential ramifications you need to be aware of.

Copyrights and trademarks, in particular, have seen a lot of limelight this year involving some of the biggest brands and pop culture icons. At the same time, major IP rights questions are erupting around the use of generative AI systems like ChatGPT. In this month’s episode of Patently Strategic, we take a fast-paced tour through some of the highest-profile copyright and trademark disputes – both recently settled and freshly on the horizon – involving the likes of Jack Daniels, Mickey Mouse, Andy Warhol, Jason Voorhees, Winnie-the-Pooh, Lizzo, and WallStreetBets. Fortunately for us, sometimes life can be more entertaining than art. In addition to covering the IP fundamentals necessary to help get you booted up, we’re going to use big brand IP current events and Supreme Court cases as a vehicle to gain a deeper understanding of copyrights and trademarks and some of the sharpest corners you should be aware of when managing your own brand protection.

The technological improvement test is used by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to determine the issue of subject matter eligibility. Of all the tests for a showing of something more or practical application – machine transformation, machine implementation, data transformation – technological improvement is probably the most popular and oft-used by applicants because it has the clearest standards. As you probably already know, the technological improvement test used by the USPTO looks for a technological problem for which there is a technological solution and the claims recite a technological improvement therefor.

When Judge Pauline Newman helped create the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982 to have exclusive jurisdiction over patent cases, no one could have guessed the drama that would follow almost 40 years later.. The drama, in her view, is now forcing her to choose preserving the entire structure of American government over the court she loves. In April, Gene Quinn broke the news on IPWatchdog about a complaint filed by Chief Judge Kimberly Moore of the Federal Circuit against Newman for being unable to effectively discharge the duties of her office. Days later, Newman showed up and spoke at Fordham Law School’s annual IP conference in New York, speaking with an eloquence that completely undermined the foundation of that complaint.

Will Twitter’s meager patent portfolio doom Musk’s hopes of “strictly enforcing” Twitter’s IP rights? Eli is joined by return guest Kroub on this special episode to discuss how an unprecedented IP dispute between two of the world’s richest men might play out. In response to Meta successfully launching Threads, Musk’s go to lawyer Alex Spiro sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg expressing “serious concerns that Meta…has engaged in systematic, willful, and unlawful misappropriation of Twitter’s trade secrets and other intellectual property” and intention to “strictly enforce its intellectual property rights.”  Although the letter focuses on trade secrets, Spiro’s colleagues are likely busy mining Twitter’s patent portfolio.

In the latest episode of The SEP Couch, Tim Pohlmann interviews Eli Mazour, a partner with Harrity & Harrity LLP and host of the Clause 8 podcast. With experience working alongside Qualcomm and other innovation leaders, Mazour navigates the difficulties inherent in standard essential patents and explores how companies on either side strive for change. He underscores the need to comprehend technology, beyond merely perusing patents and standards.