1 / 14

Advanced Licensing: Patent Assertion in A Licensing Context

Advanced Licensing: Patent Assertion in A Licensing Context. Howard Skaist Managing Attorney Berkeley Law & Technology Group, LLC June 17, 2005. IP Game has Changed: Patents Have “Teeth”. Design Freedom not as important

Lucy
Download Presentation

Advanced Licensing: Patent Assertion in A Licensing Context

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Advanced Licensing:Patent Assertion in A Licensing Context Howard Skaist Managing Attorney Berkeley Law & Technology Group, LLC June 17, 2005

  2. IP Game has Changed:Patents Have “Teeth” • Design Freedom not as important • Explosion of technology/capital spending (eg, the information age) • Fed Cir (1982) • Growth of “IP businesses” • Patent Reform??

  3. Need A Strategy • Goal to align business and patent strategy • Two main uses for patents: • Defend your turf • Collect a toll • In what form? • Cross-license • Cash • Equity • Joint business arrangements • Other?

  4. Need A Strategy • Only a few choices – enforcement or licensing • Strategies can vary with business or technology • Who is entering your business? Whose business are you entering? Who represents non-competitive IP threats? • Strategy should drive execution • Portfolio management • Patent filing • Claim drafting • Patent acquisitions/divestitures • Consider selling non-core IP to finance licensing program • Your Strategy will change and evolve • Keep that in mind

  5. Zero Sum Game • Leveraging Portfolio is Zero-Sum Game – whether in licensing or litigation • Non-assertion permits others to infringe without paying • End game of litigation is licensing (unless can litigate forever) • Important consideration - relative change in IP strength versus IP exposure over time

  6. Licensing Approach • Licensing today is a mixture of: • Charm based licensing • Fear based licensing • Fact based licensing • Today, most potential “licensees” will not pay without both a demonstration of infringement and an intention to enforce • This means building convincing patent case without litigation/discovery • Rest of presentation – execution

  7. Target Selection is Critical • More than simply determining who is infringing • Set of factors must be considered: • Target’s exposure; your exposure • Target’s resolve; your resolve • Target’s history of licensing and litigation • Relationship between you and target (e.g., customer/supplier/competitor) • Environmental factors can be as or more important than overall quality of patent case

  8. Building Team is also Critical • Building patent case requires experts in business, technology and law • Does this talent exist in-house? • Have any members has done previously? • Are any members familiar with portfolio? • Is decision-maker/team leader objectively able to evaluate strengths/weaknesses of case? • How does uncertainty impact?

  9. The Objective and The Dance • The objective - demonstrate patent imbalance • Your patents cover more of their revenue than their patents cover of your revenue • Avoid MAD situations • The Dance • My patents are red hot - Yours are diddly-squat • No one admits infringement or invalidity – this does not mean deal cannot be struck

  10. Step One: Mining the Portfolio • Mining Your Portfolio is important • Must have or acquire this knowledge – various ways • Triage approach – three vectors – annual evaluation • likelihood of infringement • ease of detection • ease of design around • Inherently subjective – good experts are key • Claim construction is central • PTO class codes are a place to start • Capture knowledge • Although discovery-related issues exist

  11. Step Two: Knowledge of Accused Product/Technology • Product/Technology Knowledge is also important • Party asserting has disadvantage • Target knows how their product works • Avoid taking positions that may later undermine your case (e.g., due to prior art or a mistake in how the product works) • Can be esp. tricky when responding to opponent’s positions • Distinguish between past, present and future • Current infringement gets the attention • Focus on key products • Reverse engineering is expensive, but sometimes necessary; exploit other resources first

  12. Step Three: Presenting the Case • Presenting case is critical – litigation without court rules • Credibility is a resource not to be wasted • Avoid weak assertions or ridiculous positions • Know about the decision maker • Usually not a lawyer • Presentation should be directed to this individual or set of individuals • Stay focused on big picture • Concede on minor points • Listen carefully; show respect; appear reasonable • However, good cop; bad cop can work if carefully orchestrated • Must ultimately appear reasonable for escalation path

  13. Example Assertion:US Patent 7,000,000 Claim 1: An integrated circuit comprising: side elements A; top element C; chip element D; and connection elements B.

  14. Example Assertion:US Patent 7,000,000 Elements A Element B Elements D Element C

More Related