IP News & Transactions

Idaho – The New Silicon Valley?

According to an article in the online edition of The Idaho Statesman, the Idaho Department of Commerce is backing the formation of a new company named “I-Cubed” (which stands for “Invest Idaho Innovations LLC”), that will actively seek foreign investment into Idaho to foster development of technologies there for subsequent monetization through licensing.  The article describes in depth the planed structure of I-Cubed, as well as the fact that the majority of technologies developed within Idaho’s universities and companies “sit on the shelf” – that is, are developed with little thought towards a tail-end monetization strategy.

The State of Idaho’s backing of I-Cubed is a great example of how state governments in the U.S. can help their local economies via encouragement of IP monetization.  It is interesting that in the midst of all the discussion regarding the planned bailouts of GM and Chrysler, there is scant discussion on the subject of IP monetization within those states most impacted by the problems of GM and Chrysler – even though both organizations have enormous resources in terms of “on the shelf” IP…

The Idaho Statesman article may be found at http://www.idahostatesman.com/business/story/669530.html.

A Great Blog – The New ITC Law Blog

Your author just came across an excellent new blog by the law firm Oblon, Spivak – it is a website dedicated to issues relating to U.S. patent litigation pursued via Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).  It is noteworthy that while much online comment may be found regarding the subject of the Federal Court system in the context of patent litigation, very little attention is given to the ITC and Section 337 investigations – even though they are increasingly becoming a key part of ALL U.S. patent litigation.

Readers may find the website at www.itcblog.com.

Changes to China’s Basic Patent Law

An excellent opinion piece by Ronald A. Cass in the online edition of The Wall Street Journal Asia discusses the “Third Amendment,” a series of changes to China’s patent laws which were adopted in late 2008.  Among other detail in the article, Mr. Cass points out what may be referred to as “the good” and “the bad” in these changes to China’s patent laws:

The Good: A new standard of “absolute utility” will be used, requiring that proposed inventions must not only be novel within China, but novel when viewed against all prior inventions on a worldwide basis.

The Bad: Expansion of existing “compulsory licensing” provisions, which allow the government to force patent holders to issue low-royalty (or royalty-free) licenses to use of their patents. (Readers will note that your author has written in previous posts on the subject of compulsory licensing.)

It is too early to know what the ultimate implications of these changes to China’s patent law will mean to holders of both China and non-China IP rights, as the Third Amendment will be subject to administrative and judicial interpretation by the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) and the People’s Court, respectively.  However, your author believes that the Chinese government will probably lean more towards an interpretation that will provide more (and not less) protection for foreign holders of China and non-China IP rights, as the Chinese government will be keen over coming years to ensure global enforceability of its own homegrown patents.

The article may be found at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123419814824764201.html?mod=googlenews_wsj.

Here Comes Huawei

A recent article in the online version of China’s People’s Daily reports that telecom equipment giant Huawei is now the leading source of new patent applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).  Huawei had the highest number of new patent filings, with a total of 1737 applications in 2008.  After Huawei, the next most prolific patent filers were Panasonic (Japan), Philips Electronics NV (Netherlands), Toyota (Japan) and Robert Bosch GMBH (Germany).

Interestingly, while no U.S. company was in the top 5 of patent application filers, the U.S. still ranked first in the world with over 53,000 new fillings.  This would seem to suggest that much of the innovation occurring within the U.S. is presently coming from small and medium size company filers, as opposed to larger enterprises.  It may well be that in light of the current economic situation, larger technology companies in the U.S. are cutting back on patent filing programs to conserve cash.  A good decision in the short run perhaps; but not necessarily the best decision for the long run…

The People’s Daily article may be found at http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-02/03/content_10757403.htm.