Patents increasing by the day: A quick stat

A very large percentage of technical information that is generated across the globe reside in the patent databases.

Below chart depicts breakup according to country and application type for major filing countries. Data Source – patentanalysis.com

Patent Count

Data collected through a survey say that there are:

  • 72 million patent documents worldwide
  • appx. 15 million inventions
  • 1,000,000 patent in last 10 years
  • Weekly – More than 10,000 new patents
  • Every 30 seconds a new patent document is added to the vast technical library of patent documents

The statistics clearly indicates:

  • Increase in R & D efforts
  • Increase in patent filing efforts
  • Increase in market coverage through family patent filing

Potential Risks

  • Patent grant rate is bound to go down. According to a study, already the Belgium PTO has a 30% grant rate
  • Risk of reinventing the wheel, if patentability / prior art search not performed thoroughly
  • Large number of patents may get invalidated by other relevant patents thus causing many infringement law suits to become void
  • Need of clearance would increase

Is Microsoft Aging?

Recently, U.S. state of Mississippi settled an antitrust suit with Microsoft Corp for $100 million on Thursday and said businesses, individuals, schools and local government were eligible for a share of the money. Apart from antitrust suit Microsoft was also ordered to pay $521 million to Eolas Technologies, $200 million to a Canadian software firm i4i Ltd and much more to many more companies for patent infringment and offcourse these are all lost battles by Microsoft. Here is the current list of all patent under litigation.

  • US5369702 – TECSEC Incorporated – Distributed cryptographic object method
  • US6374289 – Backweb Technologies, Ltd. – Distributed client-based data caching system
  • US6542814 – Horizon Navigation, Inc. – Methods and apparatus for dynamic point of interest display
  • US6195662 – Juxtacomm Technologies Inc. – System for transforming and exchanging data between distributed heterogeneous computer systems
  • US6405368 – Method for separate compilation of templates
  • US7496854 – Arendi Holding Limited – Method, system and computer readable medium for addressing handling from a computer program
  • US6405368 – Method for separate compilation of templates
  • US7363592 – Tool group manipulations

Patent Lawsuit a Safe Route to Revenue Generation During Recession

The objective and target of any organization is growth at 45 degree on x & Y axis through best products, best services etc… with latest innovations. Ever since recession has hit the western market the economy and jobs are melting like never before, chapter 11 filing cases are increasing. After all to run an organization revenue has to be generated. As newspapers across North America and the globe continue to flood with stories of economic downturn and businesses fighting to survive, organizations this month are placing a renewed focus on innovation and revenue generation.

Revenue generation through patent lawsuits is the new trend. 35 patent lawsuits have been filed just in 5 plus month time during 2009, wonder how many more are there. Surely first half of 2009 is not good for Google in terms of lawsuits, total 14 lawsuit are been battled.

Lawsuit filing cases of 2009:

  1. Aloft Media, LLC v. Yahoo! Inc. et al
  2. Performance Pricing, Inc. v. Google Inc. et al
  3. Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc.
  4. Actus, LLC v. Bank of America Corp. et al
  5. Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al
  6. ESN LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al
  7. Heartland Recreational Vehicles LLC v. Forest River Inc
  8. Software Rights Archive, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
  9. Northeastern University et al v. Google, Inc.,
  10. Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
  11. Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al
  12. Aloft Media, LLC v. Google, Inc.
  13. GraphOn Corporation v. Google Inc.
  14. Google, Inc. v. EMSAT Advanced Geo-Location Technology, LLC et al
  15. Picsel (Research) Ltd. et al v. Apple Inc.
  16. Web Tracking Solutions, Inc. et al v. Google, Inc.
  17. Association For Molecular Pathology et al v. United States Patent and Trademark Office et al
  18. Cygnus Systems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al
  19. Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al
  20. Certicom Corporation et al v. Sony Corporation et al
  21. Klausner Technologies Inc v. Verizon Wireless et al
  22. Clark v. The Walt Disney Company et al
  23. HYPERPHRASE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. GOOGLE INC.
  24. BabyAge..com, Inc. v. Leachco, Inc.
  25. IP Innovation LLC et al v. Google, Inc.
  26. Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.
  27. Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al
  28. Soilworks LLC v Midwest Industrial Supply Inc
  29. Priest et al v Google Inc.
  30. 21 srl v. Apple Inc. et al
  31. PACid Group, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al
  32. Accolade Systems LLC v. Micron Technology Inc et al
  33. Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
  34. Clear With Computers, LLC v. Bassett Furniture Industries, Inc. et al
  35. Motorola Inc v. Research In Motion Limited et al

Bilski Effect on various Technology Patents

Finally the Bilski case has gone to US Supreme Court. “Not since 1981 has the Supreme Court undertaken to spell out the kinds of inventions that are eligible for patent rights — that is, the right to produce or use an invented device or process, or to license it to others for royalties. Much has changed since the Court’s decision in Diamond v. Diehr in 1981, not least the digital revolution.”

A study was conducted on the effect of Biliski in various technology patents by an IP, technology and market research company called Dolcera.
Detailed report and statistics have been published at Dolcera Public Reports

The below chart depicts the effect of Biliski on various technology domains.

Bilski

Free Microsoft Antivirus “Morro” And Immediate Impact

Today’s headline on yahoo news:Microsoft will soon unveil free anti-virus software“.

Immediate Market Impact: Symantetc shares fell 0.5 percent on Nasdaq and McAfee fell 1.3 percent on the New York Stock Exchange, while Microsoft was up 2.1 percent. The Nasdaq composite index was down 0.47 percent.

Investors Reaction: Investors are closely monitoring the free service, code-named Morro after Brazil’s Morro de Sao Paolo beach, amid concern it could hurt sales of products from Symantec and McAfee, which generate billions of dollars of revenue a year protecting Windows PCs from attacks by hackers.

Competitors Reaction: Officials with Symantec and McAfee have said they do not see Morro as a threat.

Analyst Reaction: “It’s a long-term competitive threat,” said Daniel Ives, an analyst with FBR Capital Markets, though he added that the near-term impact was minimal.

Is Microsoft attempting to challenge commercial antivirus makers just like  OpenOffice.org challenged Microsoft?

Maybe microsoft is planning to make morro an integral part of its OS for future sales strategy. The reason behind comment is below:

The reason that today’s computers and today’s computer networks are so easily infected stems back to a decision made at Microsoft, for marketing reasons.

In other words, we’re all being screwed by Microsoft Marketing. Let me explain. Read full story….

Source: Yahoo news and bnet.com

First Indian Sound Mark Granted

Wonder how many of us have missed this peace of delightful information like me, though the news is not new but worth knowing about…

Yahoo! Inc. has been  granted the Indian Trademark Office’s first ever sound mark registration.

INTA’s Indian representative, Simran Daryanani, has supported the move, saying: “We are extremely excited to learn that the Indian Trademark Office has recognized an audible iteration of intellectual property and granted it protected status as a sound mark.” He went on to comment:: “India has a thriving economy, and its resourceful and hardworking people are developing new products and services everyday, and we hope that this is only the first in a long list of new protections for Indian brand owners.”

In a statement, INTA acknowledged the commitment and leadership in intellectual property protection of the Indian Trademark Office, and said that the decision indicated that sound marks are now being considered as meaningful as word marks.

Source: WIPR

U.S. District Court Grants AeroMechanical Services’ Motion to Dismiss In Patent Infringement Complaint

AeroMechanical Services Ltd. (AMA), is pleased to announce that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has granted its motion to dismiss and has dismissed Star Navigation Systems Group’s patent infringement complaint against AMA for a second time. The Court agreed with AMA that Star failed to properly join the two co-owners of the patent – Viraf Kapadia and Hilary Vieira — in the lawsuit.

On April 25, 2008, after having its original complaint dismissed, Star filed an amended complaint against AMA for infringement of US7113852. In the amended complaint, Star added its CEO Mr. Kapadia as a co-plaintiff, and unilaterally named Mr. Vieira an “involuntary plaintiff.” Messrs. Kapadia and Vieira are the co-owners of the ‘852 Patent. AMA moved to dismiss this amended complaint because Mr. Vieira did not qualify as an “involuntary plaintiff.”

The U.S. District Court has given Star until September 5, 2008 to amend its complaint to name Mr. Vieira as a defendant. If Star elects to amend its complaint, Mr. Vieira will have the opportunity to fully participate in the suit. But, Star and Mr. Vieira are currently embroiled in a dispute in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice involving, among other things, the ownership of US7113852.

AMA is the technology leader in aircraft health performance monitoring systems, and holds patents recognizing its innovation in this industry. AMA takes intellectual property matters very seriously.

Patent #US7113852

Title – System and method for transportation vehicle monitoring, feedback and control

Filed – July 20, 2001

Abstract – A system provides monitoring/feedback to a transportation vehicle regarding the state of that vehicle based on, at least, information provided by sensors located on or in the transportation vehicle. Monitoring the transportation vehicle provides information about the status of the transportation vehicle and equipment on or in the vehicle. Feedback information is provided to the transportation vehicle based on the information received during monitoring. Additionally, feedback information may be formulated based on additional criteria received from equipment other than the sensors located on or in the vehicle, for example, meteorological systems, geographic location systems, e.g., a radar system, a global positioning system, etc. The information provided by the sensors and the formulated feedback information may be stored in memory on the transportation vehicle as well as at a stable location for archiving and subsequent analysis.

Honeywell asks panel to take up patent suit

Honeywell International has accused four Japanese firms and their U.S. subsidiaries of infringing its patents.
Honeywell accused the Japanese companies for infringing patents on automotive display and navigation systems.

  • Alpine Electronics
  • Denso Corporation
  • Pioneer Corporation
  • Kenwood Corporation

The four companies all have U.S. subsidiaries that are also named in Honeywell’s request for an investigation.

The commission has been a popular venue for patent infringement suits because, unlike other courts, it can bar products made with infringed technology from importation.

According to Honeywell Aerospace spokeswoman Cathy Gedvilas, “Honeywell continues to invest substantial resources in the design, development and manufacture of navigation systems and equipment . This action will protect against the unauthorized use of our patented technologies”.

Apple Settles iPod Patent with Burst

Apple agreed to settle a patent dispute with Burst.com, ending two years of litigation. Burst agreed not to sue Apple over current or pending DVR patents.

Under the agreement, Apple will pay Burst.com $10 million and get access to Burst.com’s patent portfolio, with some exceptions. Apple won’t have access to four of Burst.com’s current and pending patents, including three pending patents relating to digital video recorder (DVR) technology. Court costs, expenses and attorney’s fees will reduce the proceeds to Burst.com to $4.6 million.

Burst alleges that Apple infringed four patents for transmission of compressed audio and video files in iTunes, iLife, QuickTime and the iPod.

Apple was asked by Burst in 2004 to license some of its patents, saying they were at the pioneering heart of the iPod. In January 2006, Apple sued Burst.com in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, seeking a judgment that the Burst.com patents were invalid and not infringed upon. Burst.com countersued in April 2006, alleging that Apple infringed four of its patents.

Bust also won a $60 million financial settlement from Microsoft in 2005 after a patent dispute over the transmission of music and video with its Windows Media Player.

CSIR’s polymer gets US patent; USV to license know-how

Mumbai, May 18 The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) has received a United States patent on an innovative process to make sevelamer, a generic polymer that treats toxic excess of phosphate in the body caused by chronic renal failure.

The patent is a culmination of work done by CSIR’s constituent lab in Pune, the National Chemical Laboratory, on a mandate initially given by Mumbai-based drug company USV Ltd.

USV had acquired the patent rights from CSIR last year, following which it further undertook the prosecution of the application.

Dr Kulkarni’s team developed the alternative process that received the patent.

As per the agreement, USV had the first right to license the know-how and acquire the patent rights, and USV exercised this option.

USV had approached NCL in mid-2003 to develop an innovative process to manufacture the polymer. NCL developed the process and CSIR filed the patent application in India, and the US.

NCL’s scientists developed a cost-effective process to manufacture sevelamer, the phosphate-absorbing polymer. The process NCL reduces the manufacturing time and the process chemicals requirements and is easy to scale up. USV has made a one time payment, and no further milestone payments are involved, he said, citing confidentiality for not giving details.

This development is significant as a technologically novel process received a US patent and has been found commercially attractive by a pharma company.

The recent patent success comes against the backdrop of the Centre’s efforts to get more public-funded institutions to file patents and work with the industry to commercialise research efforts.

With 128 patents in 2006-2007, the CSIR accounts for about 47 per cent of the total US patents granted to Indians, excluding non-resident Indians and foreign assignees, said Mr R.K. Gupta, Head of CSIR’s IP Management Division.

Final patent

The final patent on the CSIR-developed innovative polymer will be issued by the US Patent Office in approximately four months, said Pharmaceutical Patent Attorneys, LLC, the New Jersey-based firm who prosecuted the patent for its Indian client.