Your source for expert commentary on IP management issues.
Specifically developed for and by the ipHandbook
Level of difficulty
Videos are organized by topic. If you have or know of an additional IP educational program that you would like posted in this collection, please email us at email@example.com.
Companies today are managing their IP and Open Innovation (OI) initiatives with varying degrees of success. When these two processes are combined, the results can be anything from great to catastrophic. The workshop deals with improving the quality of both IP management and OI initiatives, with a particular focus on their overlap and synergy. These merged capabilities are becoming increasingly important to incorporate in a company's OI process because shortened product development cycles and regional IP differences offer competitors greater opportunity to take advantage of strategic mistakes. Paul draws on his Fortune 500 and Dot.com experiences, as well as his research in management consultancy to provide company examples with detailed insight on how to proceed and what pitfalls to avoid, such as:
Describe the issues surrounding IP rights in the global context and methods to maintain a strong international intellectual property system. Note: Slides are sometimes not visible.
This webcast is of a meeting in Washington DC concerning the Pharma Reimbursement Treaty proposal from Pfizer CEO Kindler and Stanford Professor Barton and includes a comprehensive panel discussion on the topic, where John Barton and Joseph Damond from Pfizer participated. It was organized by KEI and American University Washington College of Law Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property. Note: Sound and video quality are very poor.
Introduces the McKnight Foundation's collaborative crop research program, AATF, and PIPRA. Describes the objective to bring food security to developing nations by investing in scientific research and encouraging leadership within those countries. Addresses the some of the issues of IPR and how they can impede innovation. Note: Slides are sometimes blurry and cannot be read.
Provides a view from a political scientists on some broad trends in the globalization of IPR. Also discusses the IP issues in agriculture, the regulatory environment, and a constructive discussion on the path ahead.
Each speaker on this panel proposes a unique approach to the problem of making medicines universally affordable. Dr. David Meeker works in the area of rare diseases. Genzyme's hormone replacement therapy for Gaucher disease, which affects roughly 30 thousand globally, costs $150k to $200k per year. For patients in nations with poor health care systems, Genzyme discounts the medicine steeply. "Don't say free drugs," says Meeker. "We'll help individual patients as best we can but we're going to work on developing a health care system in that country that will eventually be able to take over."
In this concluding panel about international drug pricing, speakers discuss the legal pitfalls and complexities involved in global pharmaceutical trade. Gareth Williams notes that the implementation of the key TRIPS agreement (an international law that helps defend intellectual property) has been slow. The law "cannot prevent nations from taking steps to protect public health," and its implementation regarding drug patents has been delayed until 2016 for developing nations. The European Union has created a "fortress Europe," where you can't import products from outside the community. Gary Goodwin cautions conference attendees against chatting even informally about drug prices, lest they be viewed by authorities as colluding. Competition watchdogs are increasingly sensitive to the possibility that pharmaceutical industry representatives engage in price-fixing schemes whenever they meet--including public forums such as this.
In some ways, the pharmaceutical industry is unique from other industries, its upfront R&D costs, for instance are extremely high. But these panelists see some commonalities with other business sectors, and offer observations and counsel to drug manufacturers. Andrew Parece focuses on the trade of high tech goods, such as software, digital cameras and DVDs. There are difficulties controlling the free flow of these goods, and their prices, across borders--a challenge the drug industry also confronts today. Parece suggests that pharma companies "leverage their competitive advantage...to differentiate products, and turn offerings into products and services such as patient assistance and education, and disease management." Tamsin Randlett of Gap, Inc. deals more with issues on the manufacturing end.
The very first tablet or drop of a new medicine comes at a dear price--$800 million--according to recent studies of R&D in pharmaceutical industries. But manufacturing subsequent pills costs literally pennies. What's a fair way to price life-improving, or life-saving medicine? The two speakers in this part of the forum vigorously defend charging different prices for medicines in different parts of the world. Judy Lewent argues that differential pricing ensures global access.
Ruikka reviews FRAND (Fair, Reasonable, Non-Discriminatory Terms) licensing aspects from a business perspective. He describes the problems in detail, provides the contract context for requiring and giving FRAND undertakings, and provides one perspective for evaluating investment compatibility (the 25 per cent "rule"). He concludes with a thoughtful discussion on FRAND implementation, stipulating that essential patent royalty sought should be expressed in relation to a stated aggregate patent cost, the acid test (viz. 25 per cent rule), and that the proportion sought should be justified from that aggregate, quantitative and qualitative argument.
Hess reviews the issues related to FRAND royalties in the absence of an agreement by detailing a recent case of the Appeals Court of Karlsruhe which was appealed and adjudicated by the Federal Supreme Court of Germany in May 2009. The conclusions are that in case of a conflict, it is better for a user to pay higher royalties rather than lower ones, then file a declaratory judgment action to have the right (ie. FRAND) royalties determined by the court. Alternatively, the user may wait until the patentee files the infringement action but this poses the risk that if the preliminarily paid royalties were not sufficient, the court will issue an injunction. Hess ends with an appeal to for comparative royalties in the various industry sectors to be determined and published; perhaps a role for LES.
Huber reviews the raison d'etre, origins and functions of the MPEG patent pool.
Judge Rader discussed patent valuation issues in relation to standard setting, or, more specifically, asked the question what is a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory royalty? He asserts that the problem is not the royalty rate, but the royalty base. Judge Rader illustrates this in detail through a recent CAFC case (now in appeal with the Supreme Court) on Cornell University vs Hewlett-Packard Company and concludes that much of the issues are related to economics. He concludes by asserting that there is no tension between patents and standards but they cloud the economic sky and we don't properly use our legal and economic tools to reach the basis for valuation.
Co-founder of LES Philippines in 1983, Associate Justice Carpio reviews the importance of licensing in a nation's technology development and overall economic development.
The various IP rights covered are defined and the Uruguay Round process which led to the TRIPS Agreement is explained. The architecture of the Agreement is presented in detail, in particular its basic principles, how protection is provided and enforced, the settlement of disputes, transition periods for developing and least-developed countries, and notification obligations. Note: Video and sound quality are poor.
This Q&A includes clarifications on compulsory licensing, copyright and patent protection for pharmaceuticals (effects on prices), LDCs difficulties to implement the TRIPS Agreement, transfer of technology, foreign direct investment, traditional knowledge, counterfeiting and piracy of indigenous music, protection of new plant varieties and genetically modified organisms. Note: Video and sound quality is fair.
Provides a description of the current state of the IP landscape, worldwide. Pinpoints the distribution of agricultural R&D funding. Discussion of the abilities of developing nations to reap the benefits of genetic transformation. Note: Slides are sometimes blurry.
Donald Kennedy, the editor-in-chief of Science, the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, explores the Bayh-Dole Amendment of 1980 which resulted in a dramatic growth in academic centers devoted to patenting and licensing faculty inventions. Does this change the character not only of science but of academic life?
Daniel Gervais reviews TRIPS, the link between trade and intellectual property, and foreign direct investment. He then goes on to discuss some of the fine tuning and changes happening in the TRIPS talks, most notably Ip and traditional knowledge. He argues that countries, especially knowledge-rich countries such as India must be flexible in the implementation ot TRIPS to strengthen their innovation strategies. Many factors are reviewed, including the decoupling of multinations from the US economy, their increasingly global sources of innivation, (now false) assumptions that innovation thrives in capitalistic societies (read democratic), and new thinking about the role of the state. He concludes with a discussion on options for WIPO's future role in strengthening innovation.
Hornick reviews the basics of trademarks from a practical perspective, outlining what makes a trademark strong, famous and valuable. He concludes with 10 practical recommendations: be creative, be introspective, what to strive for, what to avoid, look at the entire brand identity, protect and defend the brand, consistency in quality, matching quality with the market, advertising and marketing, and doing everything right.
What are PVP regimes? How did they originate and work in practice? What has been their effect on private sector investment in various crop breeding programs, on seed prices, and on productivity increases? How do PVP regimes relate to the Convention on Biological Diversity and to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture? What are the diplomatic and other roots of Farmer's Rights (not to be confused with Breeder's Rights or Breeder's Exemption). These and many more subjects are covered in this lecture an illustrated through many case studies from the US, India and elsewhere.
Provides a general introduction to Intellectual property and various IP rights.
Jay P. Kesan, Professor & Director, Program in Intellectual Property & Technology Law at the University of Illinois talks about basics of IP including Patents, their importance and the requierments for patentability.
Michael Cohen answers questions about Intellectual Property, Trademarks, Copyrights, and the Patenting Process.
Comprehensive 4-lecture course on all aspects of Copyright Law.
The Science Commons Open Access Data Protocol proposes requirements for interoperability of scientific data.Technical Open Access allows scientists to download data easily and use them in any way, including ways that initial curators had not considered. Note: Video quality is fair; slides are very poor.
Joseph Stiglets introduces some of the basic issues of biopiracy and provides classic examples of biopiracy in modern society.
Focuses on the obligations and future actions of U.S. universities with regard to the moral and ethical implications of IP.
"Is the Light Bulb Broken? - Issues in Patent Failure" Samson Vermont Assistant Professor George Mason School of Law The development of new ideas and technologies are of fundamental importance to a nation's economy. Accordingly, the ability to protect these creations of the mind through an intellectual property system is just as vital. If functioning properly, intellectual property spurs innovation and product development by allowing inventors to reap the benefits of their efforts. Note: Video quality is fair; slides are not visible.
The conference focuses attention on the need for assistance in developing countries, and the opportunities for law firms, law school clinics, and other legal service providers to engage in pro bono work in the intellectual property law and policy space. The Conference assessed the future of public interest intellectual property law and how pro bono effort can be matched to demand in difficult economic times. Conference speakers also discussed the broader mission and history that led to the formation of PIIPA and other public interest intellectual property providers, and summarized some of the many matters and projects that the PIIPA network has handled during its six years of existence. A podcast is also available at http://www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/podcast.cfm.
Karen Hersey, Professor of Law at Pierce Law and a past President of the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) talks about the University- Industry relations in the Bayh Dole era. The talk looks into the problems faced during the licensing negotiations and solutions available for the same.
The use of employee non-compete agreements by Massachusetts companies is routine, with employers mandating that employees steer clear of any business of a competitive nature once they leave their present jobs. Many believe these agreements are critical to guarding a company's hard-earned intellectual property. Others, however, believe that non-competes are handcuffs on innovation. Note: Video quality is fair; Slides are often too blurry to read.
Malackowski begins by ask how we can provide greater IP transaction speed and efficiency, facilitating market moving, better primary markets and secondary trading, leading to greater perception of fairness and market liquidity. He outlines recent developments in market moving (eg. Ocean Tomo Auctions and various on-line platforms) and explains Unit License Rights, derivative markets, IP equity indexes, patent indexes and Tradable Technology Baskets, including the novel www.PatentBidAsk.com mechanism. His presentation includes thoughtful comments on LES role in these areas.
The speaker provides a thoughtful overview of the importance of an open IP marketplace for economic and social development. He briefly touches on TAEUS' broad array of services. A highlight of this is The Global Patent Syndicate (GPS) which is an initiative central to the future of IP rights monetization and the commercialization of new innovation. The GPS makes IP transactions easier, faster, and more lucrative for patent rights holders worldwide.
Alexander Manu is involved in the development of strategic intellectual property and business concepts in the areas of conceptual design, intellectual property, user interaction, ideal experience mapping, and industrial design. In this presentation to the Technology Management Program he explores and defines new competitive spaces through strategic foresight for pre-competitive innovation. Note: Video quality is fair; Slides are often too blurry to read.
Very brief, but well-done summary of Plant Variety Rights.
Patent Attorney Katherine White of Enterprise Partners Venture Capital kicks off this new speaker series with advice for inventors on securing successful patents in a talk sponsored by the Von Liebig Center for Entrepreneurism and Technology Advancement at UCSD's Jacobs School of Engineering.
Describes the basics of the Patent system, both in the U.S. and internationally. Analysis of the aspects of patent failture and reform options.
Gives advice to inventors on making successful patent applications, protecting inventions while applying, and provides steps for reviewing an application.
Mark Shuttleworth discusses the original purpose of patents and how this has changed through time. Mark goes on to pinpoint weaknesses in the system and suggests changes that would nurture innovation.
Defines the IP interface "problem" of cumulative IP protection of a single product and the strategies that may be used to regulate IP interfaces. Provides a framework for the patent/PVP interface.
Moderator William Uricchio sets the scene for panelists' discussion of current copyright wars with a brief historical overview of copyright protection. In 1790, when news traveled by horse and carriage, copyright protection was good for 14 years. Today, when a digital, networked society enables instant transmission of data, protection lasts 70-plus years. Uricchio notes, "Bizarrely, the faster information circulates, the longer we're extending copyright protection. It seems totally at odds with where our constitution framers and case law emerged from."
Jonathan Zittrain, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, and Co-Founder of the Berkman Center, leads a dynamic, though-provoking, and frequently humorous talk reflecting on the legacy of the US v. Microsoft case and its implications for openness and open platforms in the future.
This is a talk given by Jack Russo for the class, "Designing a Free Society." The talk is titled, "Intellectual Property and Creative Freedom." Jack Russo is Managing Partner, Russo and Hale LLP. Brought to you by the Stanford Decisions and Ethics Center.
Maura Marx, Executive Director of the Open Knowledge Commons, introduces the OKC, a new organization born out of the Open Content Alliance and dedicated to advocacy for and development of an open digital library of human knowledge. Note: Video quality is fair; Slides are often too blurry to read.
Scientists and educational institutions in a digital age must push back forcefully against the old paradigms for scholarly communications, or risk imperiling the course of scientific research. These speakers describe how traditional modes of publication have constricted public sharing of ideas on which scientific progress is based, and propose approaches more appropriate for a web-based world.
Claude Canizares sets the stage, describing the transformative changes in academic publishing: the disappearance of a paper-driven industry (with limited and controlled copies of authors' works) and the emergence of internet publishing, "where anything goes." The inexorable consolidation of academic publishers has allowed "relatively small numbers to exert significant control." This leads to conflict with institutions like MIT, whose mission is research and the untrammeled dissemination of knowledge.
Lewis Hyde, Berkman Fellow, speaks on "The Pros and Cons of an 'Educational Fair Use' Project"
The recent Supreme Court's decision MedImmune v. Genentech is discussed in relation to negotiating and drafting patent licenses. MedImmune accepted a license obliging payment of royalties for any drug covered by pending applications. The license provided that MedImmune was obliged to pay royalties until patent was held invalid but did not bar MedImmune from challenging patent's validity. When the patent was issued, Genentech sent a letter demanding royalty payments but MedImmune replied stating patent was believed to be invalid and unenforceable though MedImmune paid royalties "under protest". MedImmune filed for a declaratory judgment action "on contractual rights and obligations," alleging that its drug "did not infringe" and "did not infringe any valid claim".
The second case, Quanta v. LG, deals with patent exhaustion of a method claim in a license. This case has significant ramifications for generic drug manufacturers. In other words, the doctrine of patent exhaustion applies to method patents or "[t]he authorized sale of an article that substantially embodies a patent exhausts the patent holder's rights and prevents the patent holder from invoking patent law to control post sale use of the article."
McInnes covers the uniqueness to Australian patent and contract law pertaining to license agreements. He covers ownership, joint IP, "no challenge" clauses, negative covenants, improvements, post-patent issues, patent misuse, insolvency, naked patent vs. know-how license, dispute resolution and enforcement aspects, statutory implied warranties, funding conditions and government policies, and permissions for biological materials. He illustrates the areas where licensees and licensors have to be very careful with colorful examples.
How do you protect and enhance your professional reputation in a license negotiation? What are the established ethics codes and model rules of professional conduct (such as those from the American Bar Association or the Licensing Executives Society) when it comes to intellectual property licensing negotiations? How do you know what is "legal" and what is "right" under different circumstances? What is the difference between lying and puffing? These and many other questions are reviewed and illustrated through a dozen case studies. The conclusions: Be knowledgeable, be ethical, be professional, and remember that no client or employer is worth sacrificing your professionalism.
Greg Kisor explores issues involving intellectual property both within the United States and on a global level. He is VP and Portfolio Architect at Intellectual Ventures where he focuses on a variety of projects relating to intellectual property and invention. Presented by the Technology Management Program at UC Santa Barbara.
Luz describes the activities of AyalaTBI which is a facility network and a service portfolio manager that helps create the ecosystem where technology startups and existing enterprises improve their chances of growing into medium to large-scale businesses. AyalaTBI provides an ecosystem that enables entrepreneurs to build successful science and technology businesses with global potential and facilitates the development of public and private partnerships in the areas of finance, education and culture, R&D and technology commercialization, and incubation.
Dr. Ulrich Mueller, Director of Licensing at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, Texas University presented a seminar about "Maximizing Commercialization Strategies for University-based Technologies" on February 23, 2006. The seminar was sponsored by the Vice Presidency for Research and Technology in an effort to disseminate information about technology transfer and the commercialization of intellectual property. Note: Video quality is fair.
Freedom to Operate (FTO) is the ability to proceed with the research, development and/or commercial production of a new product or process with a minimal risk of infringing the unlicensed intellectual property (IP) rights or tangible property (TP) rights of third parties. The procedure for assessing whether the product or process possesses FTO is called the FTO analysis, performed by meticulously dissecting the product or process into its fundamental components and then scrutinizing each for any attached IP or TP rights. The early preparations for an FTO analysis are crucial, because they will influence all that follows and hence determine the quality of the work product. Thorough preparation will lay a solid foundation, supporting a credible and reliable FTO analysis; this includes searching both the scientific and patent literature, and careful organization and analysis of results. This talk is presented in framework of FTO as a series of strategic steps in innovation management and risk assessment: from FTO analysis to FTO status to FTO opinion and then to FTO strategy, all within the context of accelerating global access to critical innovations in health and agriculture.
Explains how IPR is a tool that serves the business enterprise. Defines Freedom to Operate and its relation to risk-benefit decisions. Goes on to explain how FTO is obtained.
Recognizing that disputes can arise and interfere with the successful use of IP and even put a company's success at risk, there is a growing trend to submit disputes to such alternative disputes resolution (ADR) procedures. Wilbers defines arbitration, mediation and expert determination approaches, reviews these specific approaches and their pros and cons, details WIPO's role in ADR and provides a number of case examples.
Lazatin reviews Philippine laws and procedures on mediation, arbitration and litigation and concludes, through a number of case studies, that it better to go into mediation than arbitration, and that arbitration is superior to litigation in the Philippines.
Chang defines and reviews the arbitration, mediation, litigation and administrative proceedings in China. He provides information on recent CIETAC cases and details the enforcement procedures prevalent under different circumstances in China (Trademark: State or local administrative Authorities of Industry and Commerce; Patents: Local Patent Administrative Offices; Trademark and Copyright General Administration of Customs or State or Local Copyright Administration; and unfair competition/trade secret: Unfair Trade Bureau).
Biopiracy is a much (over)used term when the real challenges are how to develop and implement transparent and effective access and benefit sharing (ABS) practices that encourage sound dealmaking in bioprospecting. The lecture examines the history of genetic resources exchange which form the backdrop to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. ABS practices are detailed and a number of seminal bioprospecting deals (including INBio, Yellowstone, and Diversa Inc.) are reviewed. The lecture concludes with a discussion on a) policy implications, b) institutional strategies, c) negotiating practices, d) the importance of finding pragmatic solutions to the interface between the Western model of intellectual property and indigenous communities/traditional knowledge, and e) a call for the continued open exchange of crop genetic resources which is vital for future food, feed and fiber productivity, particularly for developing countries
Prof. Lessig talks about the prolific and controversial web culture of piracy, particularly file sharing, has taken the world by storm, and for more than a decade, we've been waging a war... Some of the elements of the discussion also relate, in a broad sense and indirect manner, to biopiracy.
This webinar offers an overview of the new China patent law, current thinking on how to respond, and the latest intelligence on the contents of draft Implementing Regulations to the law and judicial interpretations. Note: Sound quality is poor at times.
Discusses some of the issues related to germplasm and IPR in IRRI and developing countries. Reviews the purpose, rather than incentives, of patent laws. Explains IRRI's role as a producer of global public goods.
Ghanaian internet entrepreneur and researcher Eric Osiakwan and the Berkman Center's Ethan Zuckerman will discuss the climate for innovation around information technology in Sub-Saharan Africa. Note: Video quality is fair; Slides are often too blurry to read.
Discusses the role of agriculture in contributing to food security in developing countries (particularly Africa) and how the governing policies may conflict with interest of the United States and the international environment.
At a time when the French legislative authorities are about to vote on a new copyright regulation under which the internet access of copyright infringers can be shut down while other regulators in Europe (at the EU or at the national level) are debating about the constitutionality and the fairness of such sanction, it appears interesting to present and to discuss the pros and cons of this controversial approach as well as the challenges that it raises. Note: Video and sound quality are poor.
Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia University who focusses on telecommunications law, talks with Jeffrey Toobin about the tension between control and exposure in intellectual-property law today, the East Coast-West Coast divide on copyright law, and why your television may stop working on February 17, 2009. From "2012: Stories from the Near Future," the 2007 New Yorker Conference.
The Berkman Center presented a debate between Valenti and Lessig on the future of intellectual property online. Note: Video quality is poor.
Pamela Samuelson walks her audience through dense and murky regulations and case law surrounding digital rights management, glimpsing a somewhat brighter way ahead for advocates of fair use. As Samuelson recounts, representatives of the music, film, and publishing industries successfully pressed politicians in the mid-1990s for legislation to outlaw new technologies that could circumvent technical protection measures (TPMs) that these industries sought to safeguard their copyrighted material.