We see it all too often: A major corporation moves forward in their decision to acquire a company for their intellectual property and then investigates the IP involved. Because this is simply the way acquisitions seem to occur, the process has become almost predictable. However, there are so many different potential outcomes to an acquisition decision, and all of these outcomes can be determined by patent analysis.
We’ve discussed in several articles why your IP intelligence should come at the forefront of innovation. We’ve talked about why IP intelligence is a necessary part of your corporate strategy. We looked at reasons to keep IP intelligence within the business sector of your company and not just the legal department. All of these things are crucial to growing and protecting your business.
Categories: Innovation, Patent Strategy, Patent Analysis
Very recently, Uber announced its new patent purchasing program, which seeks to expedite the process of purchasing intellectual property. The open application window begins April 24 and closes May 23 of this year. During that time, Uber will likely be inundated with patent portfolios of all types and sizes, as the current patent owners propose a simple price that Uber can then take or walk away from.
Categories: Patent Analysis
Here’s a newsflash: patents are pretty expensive. Because they are granted on a country by country basis, there are different maintenance and filing fees required by each country in which you’re attempting to obtain a patent. A 2003 study from the United States General Accounting Office reported that the lifetime cost for a small company to file and maintain a patent in the United States (and in 9 other major industrial countries) ranged from US$170,000 to US$340,000 in 2002 Dollars. That’s about $220,000 to $440,000 in 2013 Dollars. It’s also important to note that these figures apply to small companies—which usually pay about half the filing fees that large companies pay.
It was a productive meeting, really. The agenda was clear and concise. The presentations were quick and helpful. Everyone thought it went well. Until the CEO said, “What the %$!@?”
Categories: Innovation, Patent Strategy, Patent Analysis
This is the fourth in a series of articles about technology landscapes, or patent landscapes. In the first post “Why I Hate the Phrase ‘Technology Landscape’,” we explain that the phrase “technology landscape” means different things to different people in different contexts. In the second article “Technology Landscapes and Patent Monetization” we discuss how a technology landscape is only the starting point towards making business decisions regarding patent monetization (making money on your patents). The third article investigated the use of a technology landscape to support a corporate growth strategy for an emerging company.
This is the third in a series of posts about Technology Landscapes aka Patent Landscapes. In the first post "Why I Hate the Phrase ‘Technology Landscape,” I note that the phrase “technology landscape” can mean have different meanings for different people, depending on the context. In the second article, “Technology Landscapes and Patent Monetization,” I assert that a technology landscape is only the starting point towards making business decisions regarding Patent Monetization (making money on your patents).
Categories: Patent Landscape, Patent Strategy
This is the second in a series of posts about technology landscapes, also called patent landscapes. In the first post, Why I Hate the Phrase "Technology Landscape,” I point out that the phrase “technology landscape” is used to describe everything from a $1,000 offshore basic patent search to a $200k high-end consulting engagement with strategy consulting firms or a law firm billing by the hour.
A wise man once said, “Language gets in the way of communication.” In my experience, the lexicon of “technology landscape” or “patent technology landscape” gets in the way of making strategic and even tactical business decisions involving intellectual property and business strategy. That is why I hate the phrase “technology landscape” as applied to patents.
Most of the value in companies lies in intangible assets. It’s estimated that over 80% of the market value of the S&P 500 companies is represented by intangibles, or what’s left after you take the market capitalization and subtract the tangible assets like equipment and real estate.
Categories: Patent Strategy
