Issue 008
30 October 2018
No Huawei Unwired Planet v Huawei analysed Harness the power of Patent information with Minesoft ·
Comprehensive patent search & analysis Fast & reliable IP document retrieval Patent knowledge management Competitive intelligence systems
·
Minesoft solutions can transform the way you work, find out how at www.minesoft.com UK: +44 (0) 20 8404 0651 Germany: +49 (0)211 7495 0930 US: +1 866.745.3621
The new standard in global IP business intelligence
Filing Analytics – the IP business development tool you can’t afford to be without. Grow your business and increase revenue Obtain new clients and improve client retention Get the leading edge over your competitors
Download your free law firm report at
filinganalytics.io
In this issue
p10
Editor: Becky Butcher beckybutcher@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6018 Deputy Editor: Barney Dixon barneydixon@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6026
A house divided
No Huawei
Could a conservative majority US Supreme Court influence IP law?
An update on the latest ruling in the Unwired Planet v Huawei case
Email Ban
Patent Trolls
The EPO has been accused upholding a blocking system that occludes emails to staff from SUEPO
Junior Reporter: Ben Wodecki benwodecki@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6017 Designer: James Hickman jameshickman@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6021 Contributors: Jenna Lomax, Ned Holmes, and Maddie Saghir
Office Manager: Chelsea Bowles accounts@blackknightmedialtd.com Published by Black Knight Media Ltd Copyright © 2018 All rights reserved
3
IPPro
p4
Trade War
Chinese officials have called US IP criticisms “groundless and untenable”
USPTO director Andrei Iancu has called for a different approach to combatting patent trolls
A tale of two cities
Appointments at the US Court of Federal Claims and ipan
p9
Latest Events
London and Amsterdam played host to two conferences on IP
p5
Industry Appointments
p8
IP Portfolio Manager: Serena Franklin serenafranklin@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6025 Publisher: Justin Lawson justinlawson@blackknightmedialtd.com +44 (0)203 750 6028
p13
Pick up your copy of IPPro at these industry events
p16
p19
Patents · Latest News EPO accused of upholding SUEPO email ban The Staff Union European Patent Office (SUEPO) has accused the office of upholding a blocking system that occludes emails to staff from SUEPO.
“The simple fact that you receive this mail is a clear sign that the president intends to come back to a normal and healthy working relationship with the union,” the email read.
According to SUEPO, the blocking system was brought in during the reign of the EPO’s immediate past-president, Benoît Battistelli.
However, SUEPO contends that its request “probably never reached Mr Campinos’s EPO inbox since neither of the SUEPO Committee members, who were in copy with their EPO email address, received it”.
During his tenure, Battistelli implemented a number of controversial policies that were vehemently opposed by the staff union. A recent meeting between SUEPO and the EPO’s new president, António Campinos, on 7 September was seen by the staff union in a positive light, as was a recent meeting between Campinos and the office’s Central Staff Committee (CSC). The meeting had focused on “normalising the relations between SUEPO and the EPO administration”, according to SUEPO. SUEPO said that the meeting was “undoubtedly a first step in the right direction” and hoped to see more steps to achieve “concrete results for EPO staff”. Following the meeting, SUEPO sent an email to Campinos, requesting his consent for SUEPO to send an email to all SUEPO members and staff in the EPO’s office in The Hague, updating them on the outcome of the meeting. The email included a draft message to staff, which said that Campinos had engaged in “very open and direct” discussions with the staff union, which it said was a “positive and most welcome change after five years of social monologue and antiSUEPO policies”.
4
IPPro
“We concluded that the blocking/filtering system put in place in 2014 for ‘SUEPO’ tagged emails was still active.” SUEPO explained that it then sent Campinos an email via the president’s private email address on 25 September. This was allegedly met with silence. The staff union then proceeded to send a PDF file with the contents of the two previous emails to Campinos’s EPO email address from an EPO email address, indicating that the request was still pending. SUEPO said that to date, this email has also not been answered. A similar request from the CSC following its own meeting from Campinos has been “equally unsuccessful” according to SUEPO. “We can only conclude that Mr Campinos’s administration is not in favour of lifting the ban on emails to staff from Staff Committee and SUEPO, as imposed by Mr Battistelli and his associates,” SUEPO added, “this should not come as a surprise”. “Whilst presidents have changed, the administration hasn’t. And bad old ways die slowly.” The EPO declined to comment on the matter.
Patents · Latest News USPTO director calls for different approaches to defeat patent trolls US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) director Andrei Iancu, has called for a different approach to combatting patent trolls in a speech at the Eastern District of Texas Bar Association inaugural Texas dinner. In his speech, Iancu said that in the US’s “zeal” to eliminate patent trolls and bad patents, it has “overcorrected” and risks “throwing out the baby with the bathwater”. “This must now end, and we must restore balance to our system,” he said. Iancu suggested that instead of focusing on policies that highlight dangers in the system, the US should focus on “policies that encourage inventors and entrepreneurs”.
scaring our government officials drives towards over-broad policies that, on balance, inhibit innovation.” He referred to the American patent system as “a crown jewel” and “a gold standard” and begged bad actors to stop attacking it. “Let’s work together towards policies that help our inventors and entrepreneurs navigate our system to maximise their potential—to invest, to invent, to start new companies, to grow old ones, to create jobs, and to change the world.” Iancu said that focusing exclusively on selected problems, can have damaging consequences.
He added: “When we do encounter abuses, we should address them promptly and with narrowly tailored solutions. Scaring our inventors and our entrepreneurs is harmful. And
He remarked: “Focusing exclusively on killing the wolf, for example, can also kill Little Red Riding Hood! If all we care about is getting rid of the wolf, we can drop a bomb on the whole forest, and the wolf is gone. But so, unfortunately, is Little Red Riding Hood. And Grandma too!”
+33 (0) 1 84 17 45 32 contact@ipzen.com www.ipzen.com
Case Management Manage files online Track activities Attach documents Share Information
Trademark Management
Domain Name Management Manage your domain names online Track deadlines Sort domain names by category Check availability online
Watch Services
Access your portfolios online
Trademarks
Automatically calculate deadlines
Domain names
Integrate trademark data easily
Social media
Deadline Tracking View all deadlines in a snap Select people and delegate task
Integrated Invoicing Generate invoices directly from your files Consolidate files into a invoice Track payments
YOUR IP SOFTWARE SOLUTION IN THE CLOUD
5
IPPro
Copyright · Latest News Illegal streaming ‘damages creative industries’ warns UK IP minister Sam Gyimah, UK minister of state for universities, science, research and innovation, has highlighted the continued government clampdown on illicit streaming and announced new measures to tackle infringement. Gyimah’s comments follow the publication of the UK Intellectual Property Office response to its call for views regarding illicit IPTV streaming devices. Over half of respondents were in support of changing current legislative frameworks to better enforcement abilities against sellers of illicit streaming devices and apps. Despite some respondents arguing that current frameworks deal with the threat accordingly, the UK Government announced that it will consider introducing measures like administrative site blocking. It also announced that it will undertake further research into consumer attitudes towards the use of illicit IPTV streaming devices to develop more effective strategies for reducing levels of use and will conduct better training to Trading Standards officers. The government has already introduced a public education campaign alongside industry stakeholders and crimestoppers to highlight risks that come from watching content via illicit IPTV streaming devices. According to the UK government, illicit streaming boxes causes £92 billion in damages to creative industries.
Media streaming boxes such as Kodi boxes are legal, until they are altered with apps or add-ons that allow users to access paid for material for free. A statement from the government highlighted that high profile prosecutions “shows existing laws are working”. A notable example was a man found illegally streaming English Premier League football, who was jailed for five years and three months after also creating and selling access to an illegal streaming service, infusum.tv, to thousands of customers back in July. The UK was identified as one of the most prolific live streaming piracy hotspots based on average monthly unique visits, according to an Irdeto report back in August. Gyimah commented: “Illegal streaming damages our creative industries.” “We have always been clear that media streaming devices used to access ‘paid for’ material for free are illegal. Recent prosecutions have shown that if caught, sellers of boxes adapted in this way face fines and a prison sentence.” “Through our modern Industrial Strategy, we are backing our booming creative industries, which is why we are taking further steps to tackle this threat and in our recent creative industries sector deal outlined support to create the right conditions for them to continue to thrive.”
Nigerian Copyright Commission files criminal charges against Copyright Society of Nigeria The Nigerian Copyright Commission has announced criminal charges against members of the Copyright Society of Nigeria. Copyright commission director general, Afam Ezekude, announced that Copyright Society of Nigeria chief Tony Okoroji, Chinedu Chukwuji, Bernice Eremieghe, and Anne Okomi are on the receiving end of criminal charges for “carrying out the duties of a collecting society without the approval of the Nigerian Copyright Commission”. The charges were filed on 8 October at the Lagos Division of the Federal High Court. Okoroji, Chukwuji, Eremieghe and Okomi are accused of demanding royalties from media company, Noah’s Ark, based in Lagos. In doing so, the accused would have committed an offence punishable
6
IPPro
under sections 39 (4), (5) and (6) of the Copyright Act Cap C 28 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004. Ezekude added that Nigerian Copyright Commission had suspended the Copyright Society of Nigeria’s licence to operate as a collecting society following refusals to comply with directives from the Commission. He claims that the Copyright Society of Nigeria has “continued to disregard the directive of the commission, and also acted in violation of the order of suspension of its operating licence as a collective management organisation”. Ezekude concluded by reassuring copyright owners of the commitment of the commission to “entrench a transparent and accountable system of collective management”.
Trademarks · Latest News Rush to register moving trademarks in the UK coming, warns Withers & Rogers attorney There will be a rush to register trademark for moving images in the UK, following the implementation of a new trademark law, according to Withers & Rogers trademark attorney Mark Caddle. Caddle warned that there could be a “rush to register moving images and sounds, as many brands have been preparing applications ahead of time”. Early examples of moving images and holograms granted by the EU Intellectual Property Office are, according to Caddle, “an exciting opportunity for brand owners, who will soon be able to register similar marks in the UK”. The new trademark laws come into force in January 2019 as part of an EU directive and will allow brand owners to obtain trademark registrations for moving images in a much simpler manner. Ahead of the law change, the UK IP Office has urged that any applications related to moving images and sounds should ideally be made in MP3 or MP4 formats.
7
IPPro
The laws have already been in place in the EU since October 2017. Early examples include Vodafone’s moving logo and more. It is currently possible to register trademarks for moving images in the UK, but the process is incredibly labourious. Currently, applicants must create a 2D flicker book of multiple still images and an accompanying detailed description of the mark’s movement. Caddle added: “The rise of e-commerce means online visibility is becoming more important to all brand owners.” “The ability to own dynamic brand assets, such as moving logos, sounds, holograms and filmic sequences, will not only help brands to stand out online, it will give them a new weapon in their armoury to fight copycats. These changes are long overdue and brand owners should review their IP strategies ahead of their introduction in January.”
Trade War · Latest News
China calls US IP criticisms ‘groundless and untenable’ The US government’s criticism of China’s intellectual property protection was “groundless and untenable”, according to He Hua, deputy commissioner of the China National Intellectual Property Administration. During a press conference, Hua and Fu Ziying, China’s International Trade Representative and deputy minister of commerce, outlined a white paper on the facts and China’s position on China-US trade friction. In response to a question from the China News Agency at the conference, Hua said that the US had chosen to “ignore a multitude of solid facts that China has made progress in the construction of [an] IP protection system for a long time”. Hua said China had become “an IP power”, and that its inherent demand for IP protection is “right there”. He added that China’s achievements in IP protection are “palpable and widely discerned by [the] international community”. Hua added: “At present, China is in the stage of accelerating innovation capability and rapid development of innovation subjects.” “According to the Global Innovation Index 2018 released by the World Intellectual Property Organization, Cornell University and INSEAD in July 2018, China ranks 17th, joining the rank of the top 20 most innovative economies for the first time. China’s development has an inherent demand for IP protection.” “China’s achievements in IP protection are palpable and widely discerned by the international community.” The white paper outlined China’s consideration of IP protection as “clear and firm”. It showed China’s newly built “fully-fledged and highstandard IP legal framework”, which was built in a “relatively short period compared to the decades or more than developed countries have spent setting up similar legal systems”. The white paper also showed a “complete regime of IP protection, utilisation and administration, spanning laws, planning, policies and enforcement agencies”.
8
IPPro
Industry Appointments · Latest News Ipan hires new DACH regional director Intellectual property management software provider ipan group has appointed Fernando Strubing Gomes as its DACH regional director. Based in Munich, Gomes will be responsible for ipan group’s strategy, client management and sales activities in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Gomes joins ipan from a Portugese IP law firm, where he was managing director.
US Court of Federal Claims adds new IP committee member The chief judge of the US Court of Federal Claims Margaret Sweeney has appointed Tonya Evans to the court’s advisory council committee as an intellectual property member. Evans is a professor of law at the University of New Hampshire School of Law and chairs the IP and technology online programmes for the Franklin Pierce Center for IP.
Gomes commented on his new role: “I am a big fan of innovation and best practices. So, when offered the possibility to start at ipan group, taking over the coordination of the DACH region, I could not resist the challenge.” “The strong connection with German culture and IP motivates me to try to consolidate ipan’s presence in the region and to further allow our clients and partners to profit from our extensive range of integrated products and services.” Jens Lütcke, CEO of ipan, added: “We are proud to welcome Gomes to ipan.”
She has expertise in IP, new technologies, including blockchain and entertainment law. Evans also writes, speaks, and teaches about the intersections of copyright.
“His strong IP experience and knowledge of the German market will help to successfully push the growth and strategic development of our group.”
She is a member of the International Telecommunications Union Focus Group on Digital Currency and was previously a managing attorney at TME Law. Evans, who tweeted that she was “honoured” by her appointment, will serve a three-year term. RWS IP PRO AD 0418 HERO.pdf
1
14/05/2018
09:42
www.rws.com C
M
Y
Protect Your Intellectual Property Worldwide
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K
9
IPPro
Patent PCT National Translations Phase Entry
Direct Filing
European Validation
Patent Searches
Supreme Court · Analysis
A house divided The appointment of US Supreme Court justice, Brett Kavanaugh, caused enormous controversy for an already embattled US administration. But how can Kavanaugh’s vote influence the court?
Ben Wodecki reports Despite accusations and protests, justice Brett Kavanaugh, US president Donald Trump’s second nominee for the US Supreme Court, is now an associate justice of the court following a Senate vote on his appointment. Kavanagh replaces associate justice Anthony Kennedy, who was described as a moderate ‘swing’ vote on the court. The new appointment will shift that median swing vote to chief justice John Roberts. Having previously served as associate counsel, senior associate counsel, and assistant to the president and staff secretary during George W. Bush’s administration, Kavanaugh now finds himself at the big table, and his voting intentions remain to be seen, especially when it comes to intellectual property. So what can we learn from the record of Trump’s nominees?
Gorsuch and such Before tackling Kavanaugh, one needs to look at Trump’s first pick, associate justice Neil Gorsuch. Nominated in February 2017, Gorsuch’s appointment was confirmed in a 54-45 Senate vote only two months later. So far, Gorsuch’s main footprint in the world of IP is a questioning of the authority of Congress to delegate its power to agencies, such as the US Patent and Trademark Office, according to Fowler White Burnett shareholder Joe Englander.
10 IPPro
Gaston Kroub, partner at Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov, describes Gorsuch as simply stepping into justice Antonin Scalia’s “old tee”, becoming “a reliable conservative voice questioning against administrative agency overreach”. Kroub says that opinion on the Supreme Court hasn’t altered much since Gorsuch’s appointment, and questions whether Kavanaugh’s appointment will see a lean towards one way or another in relation to administrative agency overreach questions. Fowler White Burnett shareholder, Joe Englander, notes Gorsuch wrote a dissent in which he specifically disagreed with the principle of having a patent right being taken away from a patent holder by an agency official who was not a federal judge. For Gorsuch, patents are something worth protecting and rights given to the patent holder should be assessed by courts, not governments. Kroub says that this view also relates to Kavanaugh, he references an off-the-cuff comment made by Kavanaugh in a pharma dispute where he opted to use the term “monopoly” in connection with the patents. Kroub explains that this comment shouldn’t be read into too much, but says that the association of the word monopoly with patents “may indicate that [Kavanaugh] sees the value in patents”.
Supreme Court · Analysis
For Gorsuch, patents are something worth protecting and rights given to the patent holder should be assessed by courts, not governments.
Back to Brett Kavanaugh joins Gorsuch as a conservative vote, giving the court a conservative majority. With median swing Kennedy gone and Roberts, whose instincts rest with the right wing, taking the new swing spot, to what extent could the Supreme Court be swayed on law? Englander believes that, away from IP, the shift “will result in more cases relating to traditional conservative issues being brought before the Supreme Court”. Kavanaugh joins the Supreme Court from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, a court that Kroub calls “the second most prestigious court in the country under the Supreme Court”.
He remarks: “Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) members and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) members also are not nominated by the president nor confirmed by the Senate.” “However, the analysis was not made part of the final decision because no party raised a constitutional objection in the appeal.” Englander warns that with Kavanaugh on the bench, “constitutional challenges to both the TTAB and PTAB are now more likely”. Going forward, if the USPTO acts as an adjudicatory agency, then a conservative majority that leans towards reigning in the powers of administrative agencies could have an impact on the IP according to Kroub, who highlights that this would occur “particularly in the area of patents”. One thing that Kroub also warns to keep in mind, is that “the Supreme Court is very comfortable issuing a broad dictate over IP questions, and then allowing the lower courts, including the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the district courts, to sort things out.” He adds that “they don’t tend to revisit decisions in a particular area very quickly”. Robert Duminiak, partner at Howson & Howson describes Kavanaugh’s previous IP decisions as “treading the periphery of the field” and said that his “limited jurisprudence on trademark law and IP law as a whole leaves little to go on”. IPPro
There, Kavanaugh has been involved in answering administrative questions, such as the proper roles of agencies in the government and what the limits of their powers can and should be. Kavanaugh has wrote an opinion in SoundExchange v Librarian of Congress, a case revolving around the constitutionality of the Copyright Royalty Board. Englander explains: “Justice Kavanaugh opined that if members of the board are in fact principal officers of the US, then the present means of appointing board members is unconstitutional.” “The unconstitutionality arises because the board members were neither nominated by the president nor confirmed by the Senate,” he says.
11 IPPro
Kavanaugh joins Gorsuch as a conservative vote, giving the court a conservative majority.
The world’s premier IP directory
www.ipproconnects.com www.ipproconnects.com
15
Huawei · Feature
Huawei Research Centre, Shanghai
No Huawei An update on the latest ruling in the Unwired Planet v Huawei case Ben Wodecki reports The UK Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Unwired Planet v Huawei could have ripples on the licensing of standardessential patents (SEPs) for a long time to come. This month’s decision upheld a previous ruling from UK High Court judge, Colin Birss, who had ruled that Unwired Planet was in a dominant position in the market, but had not abused its dominant position by pursuing proceedings in the way that it did. He found that willing and reasonable parties would agree on a global licence, and such a licence was the fair, reasonable and
13 IPPro
non-discriminatory (FRAND) licence for a portfolio such as the one held by Unwired Planet and for an implementer like Huawei. Unwired Planet was therefore entitled to insist on it and if Huawei did agree to enter into the licensing agreement, it could be enjoined from selling its mobile phones in the UK. In its ruling, the Court of Appeal stated that a global SEP owner can meet its FRAND obligations by offering a worldwide licence. It went on to add that if the offer is refused, then the implementer may be subject to an injunction preventing further infringements in the UK.
Huawei · Feature The court also held that Unwired Planet had not discriminated against Huawei, and that the FRAND obligation did not amount to a “most favoured licensee” clause. Huawei said that it intends to appeal the ruling and “acknowledges that [the Court of Appeals] judgement raises a number of important points of principle”. In a statement, Huawei said it has “a strong record of respecting the IP rights of others, in addition to doing whatever is required to protect our own such IP rights assets. Huawei remains committed to provide its cutting-edge products and services to our customers without interruption. Irrespective of the ultimate outcome of the case, Huawei does not believe that the court’s decision will adversely affect its business operations either in the UK or in other countries.” Huawei also contends the judge’s ruling on the global rate of a licence. It argued that the set global rate and terms of a licence in circumstances where 64 percent of the money to be paid relates to Chinese patents owned by Unwired Planet, rather than to any patent owned by Unwired Planet. Huawei argued that there is currently ongoing patent litigation in both Germany and China and there are some countries that Unwired Planet holds “no relevant” patents at all. Gary Moss, head of litigation and law firm EIP, was part of the team representing Unwired Planet. He said he was “pleased” by the outcome of the latest ruling. Moss said: “The court’s judgment confirms several important points of principle as to the appropriate scope and value of SEP licences.
Liyanage called the latest ruling “significant” given the size of Unwired Planet’s portfolio of patents being relatively small. He also said that the UK Court of Appeal’s ruling “goes far beyond the dispute”. Liyanage said: “All players in the telecoms sector licence patents that are required to operate according to telecoms standards (such as 2G, 3G and 4G), and the judgment impacts not only the terms of future licences but also the way that parties negotiate licences and make offers to each other.” “This decision will also impact 5G, the next generation in telecoms technology, the standards for which are being developed. 5G patents will be subject to the same principles applied in today’s judgment to 2G, 3G and 4G patents, though not the specific royalty rates.” “With the current development of the ‘internet of things’, businesses in industries other than telecoms also need to take licences of SEPs. This includes ‘smart home’ appliance makers and manufacturers of connected cars. Today’s judgment will, therefore, have a broad cross-industry impact,” he added. HGF partner Rachel Fetches and solicitor Mahrunesa Khandaker called justice Birss’ findings “correct” and said that despite being an important judgement for SEP holders, just to get to this stage “has taken a significant amount of time and cost millions”. Both Fetches and Khandaker wrote about the importance of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) decision in Huawei v ZTE.
This provides global patent holders and licensees with a more efficient framework to help resolve SEP licensing issues.”
There, the judge was correct that the CJEU had not laid down a set of mandatory conditions for a SEP holder, which if not complied with would be a breach of competition law.
Arty Rajendra, who is a partner at Osborne Clarke and also counsel to Unwire Planet, added: “The Court of Appeal judgment sets out a blueprint for how SEPs should be licensed to implementers and confirms that a global licence is FRAND.”
Bird and Bird partners Jane Mutimear and Richard Vary said that the precedent set by this case will now put English Courts in a position to push cases forward in a streamlined manner so that trials can take place within a year, with reasonable costs levels.
“This judgment takes a pragmatic approach. It will help to enable efficient licensing discussions for both licensees and global patent holders.” Yohan Liyanage, a partner at Linklaters, said that Huawei would “likely be required to pay annual licence fees to Unwired Plant in the tens of millions of pounds in order to avoid a UK sales injunction”.
14 IPPro
Mutimear and Vary both highlighted that English courts have previously demonstrated that they can move quickly in the Copyright Tribunal, and when determining rents in business tenancies, both of which can include equally complex issues and large numbers of comparables. They argue that this case should mean that it is now possible to achieve this in relation to patent licensing. IPPro
London and Amsterdam · Conference Report
A tale of two cities London and Amsterdam played host to two conferences on IP that offered insight into AI, the internet of things, Brexit, and more Ben Wodecki reports What do London and Amsterdam have in common? In the past month, both have played host to intellectual property conferences: the World IP Summit in Amsterdam and the London IP Summit in, you guessed it, London.
The World IP Summit The World IP Summit featured some timely talks, with Microsoft senior patent attorney Sonia Cooper referencing the LOT Network and how the use of its patent portfolio is often to cross licence with operating companies that are looking to enter a market. She highlighted an agreement with Chinese phone company Xiaomi, which she said was looking to enter into the US market. She explained: “We sold them some US patents, and there was some cross licencing, we also had some business
16 IPPro
arrangements where we put some Microsoft assets on their phones.” “In the context of that deal, our membership of the [LOT Network] wouldn’t have any bearing on that and it doesn’t change the way we are using our portfolio at all.” Cooper concluded: “It is really to give our customers and the community an assurance that we’re not in the business of selling our portfolio to trolls that are essentially stifling innovation.” Speaking of protecting patents and innovation, Fraunhofer Gesellschaft’s head of legal corporate governance, Stefanie Mielert, said that new companies should patent their inventions to “stake their claim”. Speaking during a session on challenges, opportunities and initiatives for intellectual property in a digital economy, Mielert explained that “patenting inventions is a good starting point for new companies to stake their claim for their inventions”.
London and Amsterdam · Conference Report She said that the “hottest time” for patents has been “the last few years”. She highlighted that “regulatory bodies have started to realise that diversity is important” and that diversity should encompass all aspects of a business “including stakeholders”. Mediation in the internet of things will be the future, according to Ericsson’s director of intellectual property rights policy, Claudia Tapia. According to Tapia, the market value of the internet of things in the EU will exceed $1 trillion after 2020. She also said that cellular standard technologies are going to be a part of the internet of things. She highlighted the inception of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute’s terms of licensing agreements, which “brings transparency”. Another panellist, Huawei UK’s principal legal counsel, Balbinder Bisram, said that open innovation is at the epicentre of disruptive technology. Bisram said that fully utilising open innovation can, amongst other things, help build absorptive capacity, improve access to knowledge, and can stimulate broader disclosures and uses of information. She warned that sharing knowledge can sometimes lead to “leakages of assets” but that by using open innovation it “makes you look at what you have internally, that is the great attribute of it”.
London IP Summit Brexit has dominated discussions at every European conference since the referendum, and the London IP Summit was no different. The former director of IP at Bracco Imaging, Francesco Macchetta, said that the UK does not need to sign a new treaty to remain part of the Unified Patent Court (UPC). In his opinion, no new treaty would be necessary for the UK to remain in the UPC as “the UK ratified when it was an EU member as required by the legislation”. Pierre Véron, honorary president of the European Patent Lawyers Association, agreed and showed the audience the Lamping-Ullrich paper, which suggests that the UK should not be allowed to be part of the UPC post-Brexit. The paper outlines three points: the UPC would no longer be a court common to several member states and would
17 IPPro
be unable to refer cases to the European Court of Justice; a non-EU country could prevent the UPC implementing EU law and policies; and uniformity of law would be endangered because the UPC would be obliged to have two different interpretations of the UPC Agreement. UK IP Office divisional director, Liz Coleman, added that although the UPC had not yet started, if there were any unitary patents granted before the UK left, then “we would provide comparable rights and protection to those”. Unitary patents may be protected in the UK, but 4iP council’s managing director, Axel Ferrazzini, said that emerging technology companies could cause the next patent war due to a lack of understanding of how the industry works. Ferrazzini said that some new actors working in areas such as artificial intelligence (AI), the internet of things, and blockchain could cause litigation issues by selling their IP assets to companies with “more aggressive business models”. He observed that this risk would develop with the markets, as innovative companies find themselves unsuccessful in competitive spaces. Ferrazzini also questioned whether these new technologies could require a “different approach to IP protection and understanding of the role IP protection plays in business”. Businesses and industry need to focus on the technical implications and applications of artificial intelligence, according to AA Thornton partner Mike Jennings. Jennings reminded the audience that as an industry, “we are frequently reminded of the proliferation of AI and that it will drive innovation like never before”, and currently, “AI is finding itself in every industry across the world”. Jennings believes that AI “augments humans”. He said he was “very happy to see that the European Patent Office (EPO) stresses AI as augmented intelligence”. He added: “Europe is quite well prepared for AI at this time. We have had a lot of success at the UK IP Office and at the EPO.” IBM’s chief patent counsel Manny Schecter had different advice for industry, and more specifically outside counsels, saying that they need to be less conservative. Schecter said that outside counsels “tend to take very strong conservative positions” and that “they need to think about what the risk tolerance of their client is”. He said that the level of understanding between a company and its outside counsels is critical because outside counsels “don’t have the same outlook on the company as those on the inside do”. IPPro
Hotel Windsor OcĂŞanico R. Martinho de Mesquita, 129 - Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brasil
Industry Events IP Service World Munich, Germany
www.ipserviceworld.com
26-27 November 2018 Life Sciences IP Summit London
www.lifescienceip.iqpc.co.uk
27-28 November 2018 London IP Week London
www.londonipweek.com
10-13 December 2018
The primary source of global intellectual property internet news and analysis
www.ipprotheinternet.com 19 IPPro
5TH ANNUAL
IP DEALMAKERS FORUM
NOV 6-8 in NYC
IPDealmakersForum.com
CONNECTING INVESTORS & IP
“A CUT ABOVE OTHER IP EVENTS” “HIGH CALIBER SPEAKERS AND CONTENT” “ABOUT REAL MONEY AND REAL ISSUES” “TOP PLAYERS IN THE MARKETPLACE”