Missing the Boat on IP Protection

I run across quite a few start out-up providers that come to me at the eleventh hour searching for to acquire patent protection for their technologies. The usual scenario is that a organization produced some sort of public disclosure without having knowing that below U.S. Patent law, certain types of public disclosures, such as trade shows, public demonstrations, publication of white papers, etc., trigger a one year clock to get a patent application on file at the USPTO. Although the U.S. is fairly generous with its one year grace period, most other countries require that a patent application is on file prior to such a public disclosure.

"Specific types of public disclosures... trigger a 1 year clock to get a patent application on file"

In other words, though a organization might still be in a position to file for a patent in the United States within 1 year of the public disclosure, in most other countries such a disclosure could bar the protection of foreign patent rights. Unfortunately, in today's global economy, this could be the distinction between good results and failure for a large number of organisations.

"Such a disclosure might bar the protection of foreign patent rights"

1 cause a number of organisations miss the boat on IP protection is that in their rush to capitalize on their innovations, they fail to take into account international IP protection. To make matters a lot more difficult, IP protection can come in various forms, from trade secret protection, to copyright and trademark protection, to patent protection, to licensing, to name just a few. In addition, on best of their own IP protection, providers need to not step on the IP rights of their competitors. For any business, realizing their competitors' IP rights may well be as important as protecting their own.

"In their rush to capitalize on their innovations, they fail to contemplate... IP protection"

Therefore, it is not surprising that the international protection of IP rights is not inexpensive. So what can organisations do to defend their technologies and navigate a costly, complex, and typically unfriendly IP landscape? For starters, providers should certainly evaluate the importance of their IP, and make IP management, assessment, and protection a central part of their company plan and a important price of doing company. Right after all, their competitors surely will.

"Suppliers should evaluate the importance of their IP,... a necessary cost of performing business"

Moreover, organizations must operate with a competent patent attorney who understands their organization and technology, can support them navigate the IP landscape, and can aid them defend their IP assets nationally and globally. A factor to think of in this respect is the cost-effectiveness the patent lawyer offers. After all, it is no secret that the most high priced piece of the IP protection puzzle is frequently the patent attorney. Consequently, it is fundamental, especially for start off-up suppliers, to get a patent lawyer that takes the time to understand the company's technologies, revenue model, and function processes to make sure that an IP strategy is executed in a focused and effective manner.

"Acquire a patent lawyer that... fully grasp the company's technologies... to make confident that an IP technique is executed in a focused and efficient manner"