IP SOLUTIONS BLOG

The recent Supreme Court ruling on Bilski v. Kappos left the door open for companies to continue to file for business method patents providing their claims are not too abstract. Some have interpreted this to mean that computer-oriented processes will likely remain patentable subject matter, whereas computer-implemented innovations will require additional evidence of the fact that the concept is nonobvious and patentable.

All this talk about the ruling got me wondering just how prevalent business method patenting is. So we did some research on the history of such patents. Here’s what the data showed:

• Global business method patenting has been on the rise for more than a decade, dipped slightly from 2003-2006, then rebounding with an increase of 637% from 1998 – 2009
• Over 43,000 business method patents filed and granted in 2009
• The United States and Japan are, by far, the most prevalent business-method-patenting countries. Their leading positions can likely be attributed to the technologically-saavy mentality of these nations and their awareness of the opportunity such patents present. The US and Japan are also world financial leaders, and business method patenting has strong origins in that industry.

To learn more, download our special report, The Evolution of Business Method Patenting.

Laura Gaze, Senior Marketing Manager, IP Solutions Bilski, Business Method Patents, Patents Bilski, Business Method Patents, Patents

Are you preserving a wrinkle-free face with nanotechnology?

You may be, without even knowing it. Nanotechnology, the use of microscopic devices, materials or compounds that are 100 nanometers or smaller, isn’t just for your favorite electronic gadget anymore.

A new report, “Can Nanotech Unlock the Fountain of Youth?” from Thomson Reuters IP Solutions, finds that the beauty industry has started taking an aggressive approach to using nanotechnology to improve the performance of creams, sunscreens, shampoos and other personal-care products.

And surprises abound: while L’Oreal and Amorepacific are, as expected, early innovators in the development of nanotech-based beauty products, a great deal of new innovation in the field comes from companies that one would not traditionally associate with the cosmetics industry, including Fujifilm and BASF.

Of 367 unique inventions filed in 2009, 10 were by Fujifilm; nine were by BASF and seven were by Amorepacific.

To hear more about innovation in the nanotechnology arena for personal care items, listen to Michael Thompson from IP Solutions in this podcast.

Read the full report.

Data for the report is compiled from the Thomson Reuters Derwent World Patents Index® database, for patent research, and SERION®, for trademarks, to identify global innovation and brand activity in nanotechnology for personal care products.

admin Nanotechnology, Patents, Trademarks Nanotechnology, Patents, Trademarks

Today is World Intellectual Property Day and Thomson Reuters is proud to partner with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to launch a program giving industrial property offices (responsible for intellectual property and copyright) and government and academic researchers in developing countries free access to global patent information.

The goals of World IP Day are to raise awareness for how patents, copyrights, trademarks and designs impact daily life; increase understanding of how protecting IP rights helps promote creativity and innovation; celebrate creativity and the contribution made by creators and innovators to the development of societies; and, encourage respect for the IP rights of others.

Our hope is that free access to scientific and technical knowledge, in particular knowledge in patents, fosters global innovation by enabling the development of solutions to the world’s technical challenges.

“The theme of this year’s World IP Day, “Innovation – Linking the World,” reflects the goal of this new program which aims to provide access for developing and least-developed countries to technical information found in patent databases”, said Yo Takagi, assistant director general, Global Infrastructure Sector, World Intellectual Property Organization “These databases offer sophisticated search and analysis tools as well as a wide range of other value-added features. Allowing developing and least-developed countries to more fully exploit their creative potential through the effective use of technical information found in these specialized patent databases will further link these countries into the global knowledge economy and foster the development of new solutions to technical challenges faced on a local and global level.”

Read the news release for more information on the program that WIPO and Thomson Reuters will be working together on.

Laura Gaze, Senior Marketing Manager, IP Solutions Global IP, Patents, Thomson Reuters Global IP, IP Solutions, patent, Thomson Reuters, WIPO

Hear David Brown, President of the IP Solutions business of Thomson Reuters, talk about patent analysis of wind, solar and marine alternative energy technologies in a recent interview with Fox Business co-host Dagen McDowell. David highlights findings from the just-published Thomson Reuters World IP Today Report, “Alternative Energy Powers Up,” written by Sue Cullen, Ph.D., IP Consulting Services director, IP Solutions, Thomson Reuters.

Read the full World IP Today Report on Alternative Energy.

Laura Gaze, Senior Marketing Manager, IP Solutions Alternative Energy, Patents Alternative Energy, Patents, Thomson Reuters

A recent Chronicle of Higher Education posting describes an amusing deception carried out by a researcher in response to receiving numerous “aggressive” unsolicited e-mail messages from an open access publisher which finances its scientific journals by charging authors a publication fee.

Philip M. Davis, a doctoral student in communication at Cornell University, submitted a fake computer-generated research paper from a fake institution. The paper – “a nonsensical five-page report with footnotes and graphical charts” – was accepted after the publisher said it had been peer-reviewed (along with an invoice for $800.)

This made me wonder what happened to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) conducted “Peer-to-Patent” experiment. The answer is that, as of June 15, 2009, the pilot is now closed to new applications, but the pipeline of existing applications will continue to be processed until they have all completed the normal peer review cycle (estimated to be mid-October).

The pilot was set-up to determine if peer review can support, in a cost effective manner, timely, accurate decisions about what inventions merit a U.S. patent.  Certainly in terms of participation the pilot can be judged a success.  A recent update recorded that since Peer-to-Patent launched, there have been 370,011 page views from 67,188 absolute unique visitors in 152 countries/territories with 2,501 registered users of the site and nearly 350 prior art uploads by volunteer experts since the project’s launch.  121 applications have completed or are currently participating in the program.  There are currently 27 patent applications available for review.

The decision to discontinue the program was made by the USPTO on the heels of the recent recognition of Peer-to-Patent by the White House Open Government Initiative.  The USPTO has requested a period of time in which to evaluate the program before making a decision on whether and how to proceed further.

We’d be interested here in your views of the program.

Bob Stembridge, Customer Relations Manager, Thomson Reuters Patent Law, Patent Reform, Patents Patents, Peer-to-Patent, USPTO

In a recent article published in BusinessWeek, Thomson Reuters CEO Tom Glocer provides insight into the factors driving the professionalization in the developing world. Among those factors is the patent boom in China. He explains that as the nation’s economy shifts to one focused on innovation, China is creating a legal system with a greater focus on protecting property rights. Read the full article.

Kevin Bonsor, Marketing Manager, IP Solutions Economy, Global IP, Patents Economy, Global IP, Patents, property rights

David Brown, president of Thomson Reuters IP Solutions, took a few moments out on his recent trip to Beijing to share his thoughts on global growth in the patent and trademark industry. In this podcast, he discusses how law firms are capitalizing on these growth opportunities, especially in China and Korea, to develop new clients and retain market share, and how Thomson Reuters is supporting the patents and trademark business through the new combined offering of Westlaw Patents + Thomson Innovation.

Kevin Bonsor, Marketing Manager, IP Solutions Global IP, Patents, Thomson Reuters, Trademarks Global IP, patent, Thomson Reuters, Trademarks

Visualization and patent mapping are important tools that companies are using to evaluate the strategic strength of their patent portfolios and identify areas for growth and innovation.

Bill Chambers, vice president of North American Sales for Thomson Reuters IP Solutions, spoke about patent visualization – among several IP-related topics – at a AALL vendor panel on Sunday, July 26. He recaps some of the key points here:

Kevin Bonsor, Marketing Manager, IP Solutions Innovation, Patent Mapping, Patents Patent Mapping

Joff Wild of IAM Magazine reports in his blog that during IP Business Congress 2009, Ian Harvey, UK Intellectual Property Institute chairman, observed that a recent Chinese government delegation to the UK came in the hope of getting comments from British businesses about proposed amendments to the Chinese Patent Act (due to come into force October 1 2009). The delegation received no feedback, which indicates either a complete lack of awareness or complete disinterest in changes due to hit 3 months from today.

It struck me that despite the availability of much comment about the proposed amendments, I hadn’t seen the actual text of the amendments anywhere. No wonder – it appears to be copyright-protected material and available only on payment of a subscription at the Lawinfochina.com website .

While limiting availability of the text through a single channel may be sufficient to deter casual enquirers, those companies that have business in China and are subject to IP considerations should really act now (if it’s not already too late) to obtain the original text of the proposed amendments and begin to assess and plan for the potential impact on their future business in that country.

Anyone disagree?

Bob Stembridge, Customer Relations Manager, Thomson Reuters Patent Law, Patent Reform, Patents Asia-Pacific, Chinese Patent Law, patent, Patent Reform

This may be a great time for companies that are relatively stable to put thought into refilling their pipelines for the future. One of the things they can do is keep tabs on the appearance of distressed intellectual property in areas of interest to them.

What is distressed IP? Companies who may have great product ideas and talented staff may be having difficulty raising capital, and may use their IP as collateral to secure funding. In some cases such companies actually may be in bankruptcy with their IP in receivership. Distressed IP has been with us a long time, but will surely be on the increase in the current economy.

The value in these financially challenged companies will be squandered if their IP and their inventor know-how is not rescued. The worst kind of patent is a lapsed patent on a great idea, because it serves as a prior art hurdle to the development of that idea down the road. Entities that aggregate such patents are already operating, (variously named as trolls, anti-trolls, NPEs and so on), but there is no reason that manufacturing companies cannot rescue IP and talent in their own special interest areas.

The logical drivers of this opportunity for companies might be new business development or M&A departments. They could use an alerting service or a consulting service to help them identify technology in this category, and then vet the candidates internally for fit with their business development plans. I think it is important to emphasize that not only might they find valuable intellectual property at bargain prices, but they might find talent looking for a home as well. It’s like going to a restaurant and getting a great meal, and then taking the chef home with you too.

I can’t find anything wrong with this idea for a manufacturing entity, and in fact it may mitigate future risk. Is there anyone out there who can see a downside?

Sue Cullen, Ph.D., IP Consulting Director, IP Solutions Economy, Patents Economy, patent