Archive for August, 2011

The Wolves are at the Door: Why YOU Need to Hire an Intellectual Property Lawyer

Tuesday, August 30th, 2011

Innovation is the lifeblood of any organization, and value creation is measured by a company’s intellectual property portfolio. As a business leader, you are responsible for protecting your company’s IP portfolio through patents. What exactly is a patent? A patent is a legal document granted by the federal government that gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell, and importing the claimed invention. Essentially, it is the property right to the inventor. Virtually anything made by man can be patented, such as “a new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement,” according to Fleit Gibbons Gutman Bongini & Bianco PL.

Why patent, you ask? To make profit from your invention! In order to succeed in business, you must protect and manage your innovation. Remember – the wolves are always at the door, just waiting to pounce on your ideas. Patents are part of an offensive and defensive strategy. Intellectual property law keeps your competitors from copying, using, selling or importing your idea. Patents protect your trademark against counterfeiting and unauthorized use.

If your organization has a portfolio of intellectual property, it is necessary to hire an IP attorney that will protect, enforce and handle valuation of your intellectual assets. It is time and money well spent, as IP attorneys manage patents as well as a comprehensive list of intellectual property concerns including trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, unfair competition, false advertising, computer law, technology licensing and related litigation.

To choose the right IP firm for your organization, look for an attorney who has experience in your product or service arena. Find out if they have a degree in engineering or expertise working in your industry. Does the law firm specialize in any particular business segment, such as entertainment, machinery or financial products? Do they work with small, midsized or large companies? These are all questions you should address when selecting the best fit IP firm.

Tips:

-Make sure you patent and protect surrounding inventions to eliminate alternatives to copy what you try to do or deliver. When you develop a technology you normally will come across additional options and surrounding IP, protect these as a defensive strategy

-Make sure you stay current with the changing Patent laws, including the possible upcoming change to “first to file” vs invent and having a year to file.

-According to Futurist David Houle we are entering the “IP age”. Make sure you are part of it

-Make IP as much a corporate governance issue at the Board level as any other strategic elements that is covered and watched over

-Make sure you cash in on your IP Portfolio

 

Here are some resources for information on patents:

-          U.S. Patent and Trademark Office www.uspto.gov

-          Patents.com www.Patents.com

-          Google Patents www.google.com/patents

-          Patently Obvious: Chapter 6 in “Robert’s Rules of Innovation”

Remember, in high-stakes industries, your competitors are always looking for a way to get a leg-up. With increasingly advanced technology, it is easier than ever to unravel ideas and inventions through reverse engineering. The only way to truly protect your intellectual property is by patenting your IP portfolio. As they say, “the name of the game is the claim.” Without patenting, you will not share in the profits of your competitors. Be sure to educate your employees on the importance of protecting your company’s IP rights and create value for all the stakeholders.

Why America’s patent system needs to be reformed, and how to do it

Tuesday, August 23rd, 2011

From The Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/21526370

ON AUGUST 15th Google bid $12.5 billion for Motorola Mobility, a troubled American maker of mobile phones. If the purchase goes through, it will be Google’s largest ever acquisition, almost doubling the size of its workforce. The attraction for the internet giant is not the handset-maker’s 19,000 employees nor its 11% share of America’s smartphone market, but its portfolio of 17,000 patents, with another 7,500 in the pipeline. This will bolster Google’s puny arsenal of around 2,000 patents, hugely strengthening its position in current and future legal battles with its more heavily armed industry rivals. Having been defeated in a recent auction of patents belonging to Nortel, a defunct Canadian telecoms firm, Google was clearly desperate to win Motorola’s portfolio: its offer valued the company’s shares at a 63% premium over their closing price the previous Friday evening.

 

The basic idea of patents is a good one: an inventor is granted a limited monopoly (20 years, in America and elsewhere) over a technology in return for disclosing the details of its workings, so that others can build upon the invention. Advanced technologies are thus made widely available, rather than remaining trade secrets, spurring further innovation. In some industries, notably pharmaceuticals, it is doubtful that the huge investments needed to develop new products would be made without the prospect of patent protection.

In recent years, however, the patent system has been stifling innovation rather than encouraging it. A study in 2008 found that American public companies’ total profits from patents (excluding pharmaceuticals) in 1999 were about $4 billion—but that the associated litigation costs were $14 billion. Such costs are behind the Motorola bid: Google, previously sceptical about patents, is caught up in a tangle of lawsuits relating to smartphones and wants Motorola’s huge portfolio to strengthen its negotiating position (see article).

What has gone wrong? The prizing of patent quantity rather than quality—lawyers are said to compare portfolios by measuring the heights of their respective piles—is one cause for concern. A second is the rise in dubious patents, particularly in the fields of software and business methods, that should never have been awarded. This leads to the third: the growing problem of “patent trolls”, or firms that treat patents as lottery tickets and file expensive, time-consuming lawsuits against companies that have supposedly infringed them.

A blueprint to improve the machinery

A patent-reform act is about to be passed in America, but it has been so watered down that it will fail to make much difference. Three much bolder reforms are needed.

First, patents in fields where innovation moves fast and is relatively cheap—like computing—should have shorter terms than those in areas where it is slower and more expensive—like pharmaceuticals. The divergent interests of patent-holders in different industries have held up reform, but there is no reason why they should not be treated differently: such distinctions are made in other areas of intellectual-property law. Second, the bar for obtaining a patent, particularly for software or business methods, should be much higher (as it is in other countries), and the process of re-evaluating bad patents should be more open and efficient. Finally, there should be greater disclosure requirements of the ownership of patent portfolios, and patent cases should be heard by specialised courts (as happens in other areas of law), rather than non-expert juries in advantageous jurisdictions in Texas. That would make life harder for trolls. These fixes would help America’s patent system encourage innovation rather than litigation.

Intelligence Lost: Seven Innovative Steps to Ensure Boomer Retirement Doesn’t Create Knowledge Vacuum

Tuesday, August 9th, 2011

The U.S. business community is facing a war of intelligence attrition. Fortune 500s will see countless experienced knowledge workers walk out the door over the next two decades. The U.S. Armed Forces are losing millions of officers and key personnel to retirement.

For even those companies that thrive on innovation, the numbers are daunting – and demand action. Some 900,000 white collar workers from the Executive Branch of government, and another 5,400 federal executives, will be up for retirement over the next decade, according to an August 2007 study from Tandberg.

A McKinsey Quarterly survey in 2007 found that the Baby Boomer generation is “the best-educated, most highly skilled aging workforce in U.S. history.” Though they’re “only” about 40% of the workforce, they comprise more than half of all managers and almost half of all professionals, like doctors and lawyers.

Many are preparing to leave – and American leadership isn’t prepared to lose them. To paraphrase one-time presidential contender Ross Perot, that “giant sucking sound” being heard across the business landscape is the vacuum of combined knowledge locked up in the heads of millions of baby boomers heading off into retirement.

As the boomer generation (those born between 1946 and 1964) retires, executive leadership faces a daunting task: How to ensure key intelligence and know-how doesn’t walk out the door when they retire. The loss of business intelligence and corporate knowledge, especially in R&D-focused companies or organizations, could amount to billions of dollars in lost intellectual capital. Leaders must act fast.

Even those organizations with young employees must consider knowledge management. Knowledge loss also occurs as key personnel resign or are lost to illness or tragedy, taking with them a trove of irreplaceable knowledge.

The question becomes: How do leaders keep the older generation actively engaged so that process of extracting and archiving key information is interesting, challenging and rewarding?

-          Establish and share rules of and rationales for engagement. Determine how information gathering will be accomplished – for example, by questionnaire, survey, online system, etc. Will sales people drop into the contact management system such key nuggets as a client’s admin’s name, or the client’s birthday, or his preference to be called Robert, and not Bob, thus strengthening key relationships? If so, be sure to tell the entire organization to do this – and why this is should be done.

-          Scan the personnel landscape. Create a database charting individual or shared “expertise clusters” across the organization. Use relationship software or “spiders” to track knowledge by department and employee (See exhibit example). Learn, cross-reference and document where key knowledge or competencies reside. If a key term or phrase were searched by project or product, specific individuals’ names should come up.

-          Set up a database or system for collecting information. This is especially important in larger organizations. It’s not enough to do a “knowledge dump” from one person to another. Resignation or illness could strike, leaving the company in the same situation again. Create a sustainable “Knowledge Library” system to capture key data, information and processes. Databasing solutions can be as simple as a shared Excel spread sheet, or use of enterprise collaboration platforms like Confluence (http://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/), Socialtext (http://www.socialtext.com/) or TWiki (http://twiki.org/). Easy to create, update and maintain, sharing knowledge across the organization becomes a simple process.

-          Create a home for – and invite – nuanced info. At my old company, we manufactured screw-on pumps that turned liquid soap into foam. Early on, clients called about “leakers” – pumps that loosened during shipment. Our president discovered the right amount of “let off torque” to keep them in place. Because how much torque varied by bottle type, such experience-borne knowledge could not be written in customer instructions. Soon after, he took ill and left the company – but not before writing this key bit of pass-along information in a reference manual used by everyone who’s come after him.

-          Build bridges early on. Like a mentor / apprentice relationship, encourage interaction between the generations. This can foster an esprit de corps and facilitate a transfer of knowledge across ranks and age groups.

-          Host events to bring people together. Monthly breakfasts, after-work happy hour “spit & whittle” chats, and other informal exchanges can create opportunities for verbal or hands-on knowledge sharing. Hold a seminar in effective knowledge-sharing principles and practices; invite the entire organization.

-          Use social media and online tools. Create a closed group on LinkedIn, subscribe to an online whiteboard or collaborative application, create a spreadsheet or chart on Google Docs, set up a blog, forum or company intranet where retirees can return online and enter insights they recall after leaving the organization. Don’t be afraid to “crowd source” new ideas from retirees by sending eblasts or messages via group tools.

-          Make knowledge sharing a continual, perpetual habit, not a one-time act. Encourage people to document and share what they know. Invite, even incentivize retirees to return to share solutions later when they may recall something they’ve done in the past.

Remember, no tidbit is too small. It’s just not about the knowledge behind what they did. Gather details regarding the work-arounds they devised and the minutia involving their otherwise undocumented experience of things that work – and things that don’t. Even informal practices – like a workflow system that has proven effective – must be put into writing for archival and sharing purposes.

Boomers are retiring. Years of hard data and soft know-how is preparing to leave your organization. Are you prepared to avoid the vacuum?

 

By Robert Brands with Jeff Zbar [www.gotwords.biz]

 

Robert F. Brands, a veteran corporate executive who now consults with companies worldwide and author of Robert’s Rules of Innovation (www.robertsrulesofinnovation.com). Brands, a senior executive for companies like GTE, Kohler and Rexam, is president and founder of InnovationCoach.com. Having gained hands-on experience in bringing innovation to market, creating and improving the necessary product development processes and needed culture, he delivered and exceeded bringing “at least one new product per year to market” resulting in double digit profitable growth and shareholder value.