9:00 AM
to 10:30 AM
New Models of Monetizing IP in the University and Corporate Environments
7 Attendees
Location
Mason I
Type Intellectual Property, Panels
Panelists will discuss innovative approaches to monetizing intellectual property. Examples to be presented include the approach of Intellectual Ventures, which creates new inventions, invests in existing inventions, and partners with individuals, universities, and research labs to develop inventions; emerging models in the university landscape such as the iBridge Network, an online platform that aggregates university-based research, investigators and technology acquirers, resulting in 850 transactions over three years; the Pediatric Medical Device Idea Campaign, which seeks to engage a broad community in the innovation process; and the evolution of IBM's approach to IP, and its Smarter Planet initiative, which aims to make many aspects of our world 'smarter' by optimizing knowledge sharing and network utilization for a better way of living.
Tags Thurs 1E
11:00 AM
to 12:30 PM
Assessing the Patent Landscape: A method for the entrepreneur
4 Attendees
Location
Mason II
Type Intellectual Property, Papers
Beginning with the earliest stages of developing an invention and continuing through to commercialization, it is prudent to assess the competitive patent landscape. Knowing the competitions' proprietary advantage is important in defining a new product's features and specifications to avoid a potential lawsuit for patent infringement. Too often this is ignored and the new product has to be redesigned in response to a cease and desist letter. While it is preferable that a patent attorney be engaged to evaluate this threat during the design process, financial limitations of the inventor may make this unfeasible. Accordingly, the authors' simplified method of classifying patents may be the most practical alternative and the resulting data can be incorporated in table form into a business plan. The authors explain the rationale for the seven basic classifications and provide a real-world application of the method.
Tags Sat 2D3
11:00 AM
to 12:30 PM
Developing, Protecting, and Transferring Intellectual Property in Undergraduate Capstone Courses
4 Attendees
Location
Mason II
Type Intellectual Property, Papers
To successfully complete the Engineering Technology Capstone Design Sequence at Texas A&M, student teams must function as small startup ventures to transition an idea, opportunity or problem statement to a fully functional product prototype ready for operational testing and validation. With the programs' new-found success, both public and private sector organizations are becoming actively involved in the sponsorship of capstone projects. Issues such as intellectual property rights and licensing are now being addressed so that guidelines and procedures are in place to insure a true winning experience for students, faculty and the external sponsor. Working with the Office of Technology Commercialization, our programs have established a formal process for protecting and transferring intellectual property know-how to the sponsoring organization or managing the IP for licensing and commercialization. This session describes the process, provides examples of success, and presents the lessons learned.
Tags Sat 2D1
11:00 AM
to 12:30 PM
Reforming the USPTO to Give a Fair Shake to Independent Pro Se Inventor-applicants
2 Attendees
Location
Mason II
Type Intellectual Property, Papers
The US Patent and Trademarks Office (USPTO) does not collect data on pro se (without legal representation) patent applications. Therefore, the challenges faced by the pro se inventor-applicants are hidden. The author subjected himself to the PTO's patent examination process as a pro se applicant for a first-hand experience of the process, which resulted in an issued patent in December 2009. The author's experience is included as an illustrative case with a contributed third-party evaluation by a registered patent attorney. A tool proposed in this presentation assesses the quality of the patent examination process at the USPTO. The author demonstrates how, at various stages in the examination process, the pro se applicant is pushed to the point of abandoning his/her application prematurely. Detailed recommendations for reforming the USPTO are offered; the USPTO is making an effort to make the changes recommended.
Tags Sat 2D2
