You Can't Patent Everything Under The Sun

Mike Dillon, General Counsel of Sun Microsystems, has written an interesting blog in which he describes a new approach for a major company that files hundreds of patent applications every year. He says:

...at some point, a company needs to ask how many patents it really needs. And, that's exactly what we did about three years ago. Up to that time Sun was filing well over 1,000 patent applications per year. But, in 2005, we made the decision to reduce our patent filings to the point that we had about 700 patents issued last year. And this number may decline in the future. While this is still a sizable number for most companies, it is a significant decline for Sun and occurs during a period in which we have more innovation than at any point in Sun's history.

Why the change? Part of the reason is financial. On average, it costs more than $20,000 to obtain a U.S. patent and this figure grows significantly when you file around the world. Also, this amount does not include annual annuities required to keep a patent in effect. Being selective in what you patent can result in significant savings. However, the bigger reason for the change is that our focus has shifted from quantity to quality. To this end, we have completely re-architected the manner in which we determine the innovations we will patent. As part of this process, inventions are reviewed by a panel of the chief technology officers from across our different lines of businesses with input from distinguished engineers and other experienced innovators. We apply a significant amount of scrutiny to determine whether something is truly innovative before we submit it to the PTO. For us, it doesn't make sense to patent everything. Rather, our focus is on patents that represent significant technological innovation.

Makes a lot of sense. Companies that file applications for several hundred patents every year have to consider carefully which of many thousands of inventions by their employees are worth making a patent application for, and which innovations should be protected with a different strategy. Managing the intellectual property review process, especially in large companies with experienced innovators in many locations around the world, is critically important and sometimes challenging to control.

In many cases, companies rely on ad hoc, human driven processes for safeguarding ideas and making decisions about them. Subsequently, a lot of innovative ideas lie fallow or are lost. Since human processes are error prone, a lot of mistakes get made. This represents a significant risk for companies today. That's why many of our larger clients are employing the newest technologies from IP.com to help them organize their processes for intellectual property review in a secure environment customized for their special needs.

InnovationQ WorkflowInnovationQ helps protect intellectual property by securing and authenticating it. Powerful tracking and reporting capabilities enable managers to see every event associated with an intellectual property asset, helping to detect synergies in their organization and guard against misuse.

The InnovationQ workflow engine also allows companies to automate intellectual property processes in an easy to use, yet deliberate fashion that helps to ensure error-free compliance.

If your company manages a lot of intellectual property, you might find interesting the white paper "Best Practices for Successful Innovation Management" that is available to download free here from our website. And if you'd like to talk confidentially about your special requirements, by all means give us a call and let's see if we can help you.

The War On Infringement

“If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” - General Patton

General Patent Corporation International (GPCI), a leading patent licensing and enforcement firm headquartered in Suffern, NY, according to its press release, reached an important milestone in its patent enforcement campaign on behalf of its subsidiary, Acticon Technologies LLC (Acticon). GPCI recently obtained the 150th settlement under Acticon's portfolio of "smart connector" patents.

"I am absolutely amazed at the success of these patents," said Steven Farago, Ph.D., the inventor of the Acticon "smart connector" technology. "Back in 1996, I wouldn't have thought it was possible to license 150 companies. But General Patent has been wonderful and exceeded all my expectations. They have left no stone unturned in enforcing the Acticon patents."

In another press release marking its 20th year in assertive licensing, General Patent claims to have netted millions of dollars for inventors, championing the causes of independent inventors in their “David vs. Goliath” battles.

Is there a right way and a wrong way for an inventor to go about licensing a patent to a major corporation? Mike Dillon, General Counsel at Sun Microsystems, who says "the best offense...is a good defense", seems to suggest as much here on his blog:

When a third party claim has been clear and the terms reasonable, we have entered into licenses. However, those situations are easily distinguished from the cases that make up almost all of our present docket of patent litigation. These lawsuits have usually been filed with no advance notice, by plaintiffs that don't commercialize their patents (i.e. create and sell products) and in venues considered favorable to them. It's also almost always the case that these plaintiffs have done little or no investigation to ascertain whether our products infringe prior to filing their lawsuit.

Comments ensue. What do you think? Is every non-practicing entity (NPE) that asserts patent rights, with a view toward settling a license, a dreaded patent troll? Or is there a legitimate role for patent management companies to provide professional assertive licensing services to patent holders? And, anyway, is patent litigation the best approach to intellectual property dispute resolution?

Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz's Blog Review

John Cass, a marketer who writes about corporate blogging, PR communications, marketing, social media, and the Internet, reports better than average ratings for blogging Fortune 500 companies.

[Cass] developed a new chart for the Fortune 500 business blogging wiki. The chart shows the average scores for reviews conducted on Fortune 500 companies that are running a corporate blog.

You can review the chart on the about this wiki section of the website.

Using the businessandblogging.com methodology for reviewing blogs, which is a system of eight review factors to give a total of 80 potential points for assessing a company's blog,

Heaven forbid anyone might apply such rigorous analysis to our corporate blog, but at least that gives us some high standards to aspire to. We've long been fans of the blogs at Sun Microsystems, led by CEO Jonathan Schwartz. When we launched this corporate blog for IP.com Inc., I wrote about why we believe in business blogs, mentioning Sun blogs as leading examples of what we hope to achieve with this new medium for corporate communications. So we were especially interested when John Cass reported on PR Communications that one of the Fortune 500 blogs reviewed was Jonathan Schwartz's Blog.

Nigel Vanderford reviews the CEO of SUN Microsystem's blog, Jonathan Schwartz. Nigel gave Jonathan's blog high marks, 68 out of 80. He liked the frequency of posting, engaging writing and interactiveness with the rest of the blogging community. Nigel discovered Schwartz comments on other blogs.

I would have given Jonathan's Blog even higher marks--because his blog makes me aware of how much I have yet to learn about blogging. Hopefully, my team and I can learn from the good example set by Jonathan Schwartz and other senior executives like Mike Dillon who blog at Sun.

The goal isn't to get everyone at Sun contributing online, it's to become part of the industry conversation. So, if you are going to write, look around and do some reading first, so you learn where the conversation is and what people are saying. Remember the Web is all about links; when you see something interesting and relevant, link to it; you'll be doing your readers a service, and you'll also generate links back to you; a win-win.

That's what we like to do in our Quick Links in the sidebar to the left, where we share interesting blogs and articles we've found. We're learning, and sharing.