Search
advanced search
search help
ipHandbook Blog
Your source for expert commentary on IP management issues.
Go to the blog
In ipHandbook Forums
See recent topics
About
Editor-in-Chief, Anatole Krattiger
Editorial Board
Concept Foundation
PIPRA
Fiocruz, Brazil
bioDevelopments- Institute
|
Why This Topic Is Important
Freedom to operate (FTO) is the absence of any third party IP claims against ones commercial
operations. The more that public institutions use IP protection to transfer and develop new technology,
the more likely it is that third parties will have competing IP. However, this section explains that the efforts
to analyze and deal with competing IP should be commensurate with the amount of value put at risk.
Therefore, the burden to analyze and manage FTO is usually on the licensee. However, there can be
times when a technology transfer office needs to be aware of a technology’s FTO in order to transfer it
effectively.
Key Implications and Best Practices: Section 14
Given that IP management is heavily context specific, these Key Implications and Best Practices are intended as starting points to be adapted to specific needs and circumstances.
- The management of patent infringement risks requires a good knowledge of the strategic options available. These options include legal/licensing, business strategies, and R&D strategies.
- Unlike at a private company, where business/legal/financial conditions often determine R&D strategies, licensing officers in public sector institutions rarely influence research projects and institutional policy. The role of the technology transfer officer as communicator in the public sector is therefore much more important for bringing about an IP management “culture” throughout the organization.
- A freedom to operate (FTO) analysis is an interdisciplinary endeavor best executed through FTO teams. These teams, made up of legal, business, and scientific professionals, are in themselves useful for strengthening intra-institutional dialogue and communications.
- The role of the technology transfer officer, and that of attorneys who may produce legal FTO opinions, is generally to advise senior management. It is a manager’s purview, based on your input, to decide how to deal with the risks identified in your FTO analysis.
- Much work leading to a legal FTO opinion can be done in-house, working with scientists, technology transfer professionals, business people, and others. The role of patent counsel is important for formal legal FTO opinions, but this expense may not often be required or justified in public research settings.
- Evaluate the pros and cons of free versus subscription-based patent search sites. Quite often, free services are limited in content and scope and do not allow for myriad search capabilities of paid services. But many free sites, such as WIPO’s PatentScope, are increasingly adding extremely valuable features.
- For an academic or public institution, legal FTO opinions are unlikely to be needed for the majority of technology transfer functions. They might be applicable if the institution is engaged in downstream product development and commercialization.
- One way to cut costs is to conduct the background research for an FTO analysis in-house. The compiled file of relevant art can then be provided to patent counsel, who can then further analyze, conduct additional searching to fill in suspected gaps, and render an FTO opinion. Universities with law schools might be able to give law students valuable internships in this manner.
- Through good licensing practices (including appropriate indemnification provisions and warranty disclaimers), much of the risk associated with IP infringement can be transferred to licensees who take over products from the public sector.
Abstract
Freedom to Operate, Public Sector Research, and Product-Development Partnerships: Strategies and Risk-Management Options
by Anatole Krattiger
Abstract:
Freedom to operate (FTO) is—first and foremost—a strategic management tool. It is the synthesis of scientific, legal, and business expertise coupled with strategic planning. Strictly speaking, however, FTO is a legal concept. It is a legal opinion by patent counsel on whether the making, using, selling, or importing of a specified product, in a given geographic market, at a given time, is free from the potential infringement of third-party intellectual property (IP) or tangible property rights. As such, it is one type of input among many that managers use to make strategic risk-management decisions in relation to R&D and product launch. For academic and public research institutions, bringing products to market is often not a main goal. However, as a portion of their research moves downstream into product development, FTO becomes—or should become—an integral component of their endeavors. This is particularly relevant for product-development partnerships (PDPs) in health and for various public–private partnerships (PPPs) in agriculture, as well as for the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and national agricultural research systems (NARS), all of which are concerned about global access.
Research exemptions exist in many jurisdictions, so most university research does not generally need to be concerned with FTO unless product development takes place. But PDPs, such as the Malaria Vaccine Initiative or the TB Alliance, are in a different category since their purpose is directly related to the distribution of products in the developing world. This chapter discusses three main categories of options that are available to reduce risk and obtain a manageable level of FTO. In practice, a combination of two or more options will often be pursued concurrently. These are:
- Legal/IP management strategies: license-in, cross-license, oppose third-party patents, seek nonassert covenant, seek compulsory license
- R&D strategies: modify product, or invent around
- Business strategies: merge and/or acquire, wait and see, abandon project
Each option presents its own risks and opportunities. Any action—including the decision not to take action—carries risk. Delaying the licensing of third-party intellectual property, for example, could lead eventually to expensive licensing terms, the inability to obtain a license, or the possibility of being sued for patent infringement. But for some organizations, such as those developing genetically modified crops, the reverse may be the case. For the public sector, the challenge will be to balance the various types of risks that each option presents.
The chapter concludes by urging the public sector to judiciously evaluate whether and when FTO concerns should be considered, and to build in-house capacity to conduct patent searches and cursory FTO analysis (as opposed to legal opinions). This will lead to benefits like better competitive intelligence and culture change in public sector organizations engaged in product development. An FTO strategy, therefore, is a plan that begins with research and evolves into an attitude throughout a product’s R&D and commercialization/distribution cycle.
Abstract
Freedom to Operate: The Law Firm’s Approach and Role
by Gillian M. Fenton, Cecilia Chi-Ham, Sara Boettiger
Abstract:
In the fields of health and agriculture, it has become increasingly important to understand the role of patent infringement in research, development, and commercial production. If a patented technology is used without permission, the patent holder may have the right to sue the researcher for patent infringement. Many companies routinely analyze the freedom to operate (FTO) of a research project or product, assessing whether it is likely to infringe existing patents or other types of IP rights. Private companies more routinely engage in FTO analysis than public sector research institutions because the infringement risks they face must be directly considered in the calculus of profitability. Public and not-for-profit private institutions also are becoming increasingly aware of the need for better FTO information, but FTO analysis is expensive, and its benefits must be weighed against its costs. This chapter provides an overview of the process, including considerations of when to invest in FTO analysis, and particularly focuses on the law firm’s role and perspective.
Abstract
Freedom to Operate: The Preparations
by Stanley P. Kowalski
Abstract:
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 chapter explains these preparations through an example.
Abstract
How and Where to Search for IP Information on the World Wide Web: The “Tricks of the Trade” and an Annotated Listing of Web Resources
by Harry Thangaraj, Robert H. Potter, Anatole Krattiger
Abstract:
Emphasizing patents and patent searching, this chapter will put readers on the initial path to understanding and protecting intellectual property (IP). By exploring patent information on the Web site of the European Patent Office and other Web sites listed in this chapter, the reader can begin to learn by doing and quickly gain experience that should improve his or her searching skills. Other resources dealing with IP in general are described. This collection is by no means exhaustive, given the vast amount of information on IP that is present on the Web, but the sites listed here should be valuable in accessing unbiased, useful information about the IP landscape, especially for key areas of technological interest. The value of IP searches for a typical technology transfer office is also discussed.
Abstract
Managing Liability Associated with Genetically Modified Crops
by Richard Y. Boadi
Abstract:
Recent years have seen intense global debate about whether or not agricultural biotechnology—particularly genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically modified crops (GM crops)—should be covered by a specially designed liability regime. This chapter examines common and statutory law theories of liability, various attempts at the national and international levels to design liability regimes for GMOs, and liability risk-mitigation measures.
|
|