Mauricio Uribe is a Partner with Knobbe Martens. He has extensive experience in comprehensive client counseling in all aspects of intellectual property law. He has counseled various clients on patent and technology licensing matters, including standards essential patent licensing. He has also been very active in the prosecution of patent applications in both the electrical engineering and computer software fields.
For more than 15 years, Mauricio has engaged in numerous licensing strategy and license negotiations for various clients. He has extensive experience representing clients with regard to standard essential patent licensing matters and is well versed in case law and licensing models throughout the world. Mauricio has helped clients set up licensing programs, identify and cultivate essential patent assets, develop responses to licensing offers and develop holistic licensing programs.
Mauricio has traveled extensively throughout the world assisting clients with key license negotiations. He also has wide-ranging experience in developing patent portfolios and intellectual property assets. He also provides counsel on patentability, due diligence and infringement mitigation matters and comprehensive intellectual property programs including litigation and complex, global patent and technology licensing.
He joined the firm as a partner in the Seattle office in 2008.
Challenging established processes is a commonly recognized leadership principle. In recent weeks, the emphasis by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on reconsidering and reforming patent bar eligibility, especially with regard to a potential design patent bar, represents a significant challenge to well-established Patent Office procedures. If the health and viability of an organization can be defined in terms of its ability to revisit, revamp and evolve existing rules and procedures, then this initiative, led by Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Kathi Vidal, represents a healthy and viable intellectual property community.
Can something called a “Bored Ape” be embodied in a non-fungible token (NFT) and be associated with smart contracts? How could this present unique and challenging issues regarding copyright law? Over the course of the last two months, the general public has tracked what started out as a phishing scam involving actor Seth Green’s NFT from the Board Ape Yacht Club. It then evolved into a public quest to regain the NFT and the rights to develop a broadcast program based on the character depicted in the digital image. The trials and tribulations related to Seth Green’s efforts to ultimately regain his “lost” NFT made for interesting media clicks. It also raised awareness to copyright issues that are yet to be fully resolved. Seth Green may rest easy knowing he is again the rightful owner of his Bored Ape NFT, but the legal community should not be as quick to move on.