Posts in Podcasts

If you look closely enough, you’ll find patent numbers on most of the physical products around you. Much like their copyright and trademark cousins, these designations are far from cosmetic. Instead, they serve a statutory requirement to provide public notice about your protected intellectual property. In the case of patent marking, not only does it reduce the risk of infringement because you are informing potential infringers of the patent’s existence, but the notice also marks the point in time to which you can go back for collecting on awarded damages.

In a spirited discussion at our annual Women’s IP Forum, attendees were treated to an insightful fireside-style chat conversation with the Honorable Judge Pauline Newman, a trailblazer for women in law and a luminary in the field of intellectual property. Judge Newman spoke with Renee C. Quinn, Chief Operating Officer of IPWatchdog, Inc. Her career has been marked by a commitment to innovation and the advancement of strong intellectual property rights, shaping the very foundation of modern patent law. But did you know that Judge Newman was until a few years ago an active and licensed pilot? Did you know that she tutored singer/ songwriter legend Joan Baez in chemistry when Baez was in high school? While so much of Judge Newman’s life has been well documented, there are so many layers to her extraordinary life.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I had the pleasure of speaking with Daren Tang, Director General of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Our conversation spanned a range of topics, from the future of intellectual property (IP), to how intellectual property has been a force for helping humanity, to WIPO’s strategic initiatives and the burgeoning impact of artificial intelligence (AI). A central theme of our conversation was Tang’s fervent advocacy for intellectual property as a catalyst for global innovation and betterment of the human condition.

In this week’s episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, we dive into the intricacies of patent enforcement with Scott McKeown, a partner with Wolf Greenfield and author of PatentsPostGrant.com. McKeown, who has a reputation as one of America’s top practitioners at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), shares insights into the continually evolving landscape of patents, patent litigation, PTAB challenges and regulatory upheaval at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). We specifically discuss the biggest issues facing the USPTO generally, and the PTAB specifically, namely, the increase in discretionary denials under the Trump Administration, the fact that across all aspects of government it seems we are governing by memorandum, how what we are seeing at the USPTO now is a snap back from the past several years but can’t be expected to last forever, the demise of the patent examiners union, and more.

Does owning a piece of property give you the absolute right to alter or remove any art that’s on it? That question was asked in the recent, high-profile dispute in Manhattan over the Elizabeth Street Garden, a public space beloved by residents that was transformed from a once-abandoned city lot into a sculpture-filled garden three decades ago. The city planned to demolish the garden to build affordable housing for seniors. In response, the garden’s advocates filed a federal lawsuit in February 2025, arguing the entire garden was a “physical and social sculpture” protected from destruction by the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA).

In this week’s edition of IPWatchdog Unleashed, I spoke with with Clint Mehall, a partner with Davidson Kappel, LLC, and John Rogitz, who is managing attorney for Rogitz & Associates. Both are prominent voices in the patent world, and they also serve on our ad hoc IPWatchdog Advisory Committee. Our conversation focuses on 35 U.S.C. 101, and in particular, what a recent memo from the Office means for patent eligibility rejections.

Patrick Kilbride argues for a system where novel work is protected by law, honoring the American founders’ vision that property rights should be tied to labor. Kilbride asserts, “Innovation is just an economic activity. What sets it apart is its complexity, requiring time, resources, and the right environment to flourish.” He stressed the global necessity for environments that support innovation, highlighting the shared human instinct to create and solve problems. He also explained that if an individual creates something demonstrably new, they deserve ownership and protection, reinforcing the essential role of strong IP laws in the economy.

In the latest episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, I had the opportunity to sit down with Ted Wood—a unique figure whose career spans military service, engineering and patent law. After spending time both in-house and at Am Law 100 firms, today Ted is Managing Partner of Wood IP. Our conversation, which took place August 8, was not only interesting and fun but a testament to the diverse pathways one can take to success, both in life and, specifically, in the engineering and patent law fields.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has embarked upon a three-year plan to focus on and discuss standard essential patents (SEPs).To forward this laudable goal, WIPO will host a free SEP symposium in Geneva on September 18-19, which will be live streamed online… WIPO bringing the SEP community together for an IP conversation was the predicate for our IPWatchdog Unleashed podcast this week. I spoke with András Jókúti, who is the Director of the Patent and Technology Law Division at WIPO. Our conversation provided insights into WIPO’s approach to SEPs, the challenges at hand, why WIPO is attempting to navigate this complex terrain, the need for increased transparency and much more.

I invited McNish to join us for a conversation about PTAB practice and how it has evolved over the last several months, and to specifically discuss one of the more intriguing criteria being used by the USPTO to discretionarily deny institution of IPR challenges—the settled expectations of the patent owner. And, according to McNish, “by all appearances, ‘settled expectations’ decisions are converging toward a bright-line rule warranting discretionary denial starting six years after issuance, which would track the Acting Director’s previous analogy to the six-year damages lookback in the Dabico decision.”

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, we have a conversation about one of the hottest topics not just in the intellectual property world, but one that people are discussing both inside and outside of government. The cost of prescription pharmaceuticals is higher in the United States than anywhere else in the world, and many in the United States—including President Trump—are fed up with this imbalance. What makes drug pricing an intellectual property issue is the fact that those who do not like patents engage in a sophisticated and coordinated campaign to mislead the public into ignoring what really drives prices and instead blame patents. In other words—they lie.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we explore the age-old question about whether it is best to keep an innovation as a trade secret or if it makes sense to seek patent protection. And while this question is not new, it is a question that has been getting more attention in recent years as patents in the United States become weaker, which makes trade secrets increasingly look like a viable alternative for a host of different innovations in a variety of technology fields. “I have a pretty easy formula that I use to balance the patent versus the trade secret [question],” Arash Behravesh said. “And that is, can it be reverse engineered? How much does it cost the competitor to reverse engineer it? And if we decide to keep it as a trade secret, how long will it be before somebody potentially discloses the information to the public?”

Think of the distinctive lightning bolt scar on Harry Potter’s forehead, or the iconic “S” on Superman’s chest – certain images are so ingrained in our consciousness, they become inseparable from the characters themselves. Tattoos, in today’s era, have achieved a similar cultural ubiquity, morphing from personal statements into globally recognized symbols on the bodies of athletes, musicians, and movie stars. From Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson’s elaborate Polynesian sleeve to Post Malone’s face covered in ink, these designs are often as famous as the individuals sporting them. But when a tattoo becomes a fixture in the pop culture landscape, who truly owns its image? The legal landscape surrounding tattoo copyright is still being shaped, with recent court decisions adding layers to the debate.

Universities have seen their role change since the Bayh-Dole Act was passed in 1980. They have been incentivized for both innovation and economic development, with patents being an important part of that landscape. With impending reductions in government funding for universities, finding new ways to support research has become an incredibly important activity. But replacing the funding is no simple matter and universities will have to find ways to do it.

I began my conversation with Wen Xie by giving her an open mic opportunity to share her thoughts on the state of the industry and she said: “You asked me just now before we started filming, should we be afraid of AI. And my answer is there’s no point in being afraid because it’s coming… AI is coming in every profession, every technology. And we shouldn’t resist it when it comes to patent drafting or patent prosecution.”