<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>IAM magazine - Blog</title>
    <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/</link>
    <description>The latest blog entries from IAM magazine.</description>
    <copyright>Globe White Page Ltd 2003 - 2013</copyright>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <managingEditor>jwild@globewhitepage.com (Joff Wild)</managingEditor>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 17:45:00 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <ttl>60</ttl>
    

    
    <item>
      <title>London’s tech hub still has plenty to learn about the full power of IP</title>
      <description><![CDATA[Digital Shoreditch, a festival for start-ups, has been taking place in East London&rsquo;s 'Tech City' this week. Sessions yesterday were dedicated to the topics of capital and growth, and intellectual property was among the key issues up for debate. It was encouraging to see IP as a key topic of discussion at the event &ndash; but it was also clear that IP was viewed by the SMEs present as an operational and cost burden, rather than as a potential source of added value.
Crowdfunding was certainly one of the buzzwords at the event, and delegates were keen to discuss the financing opportunities...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 17:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=cdaa57f9-1f06-460c-9f2d-add501b8c43d</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=cdaa57f9-1f06-460c-9f2d-add501b8c43d</guid>
      <author>jellis@theipmediagroup.com (Jack Ellis, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=cdaa57f9-1f06-460c-9f2d-add501b8c43d#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>Brands</category>
        <category>IA management</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        <category>IP finance</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>US patent stats that shed sharp light on the current debate about trolls</title>
      <description><![CDATA[In the next issue of IAM we have articles which feature observations that should be seared into the consciousness of all those US lawmakers currently vying with each other to introduce laws designed to curb so-called patent abuse and to tackle the &ldquo;scourge&rdquo; of patent trolls. 
An article on patent privateers written by Tom Ewing, the man who first came up with the term back in 2010, tells us: 
The USPTO issued its first patent in 1790. Patents issue sequentially. On 26th March 2013 it issued Patent 8,407,811. On that date, the midpoint for US patents was 4,203,905, and the patent...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=c3812cb8-f7e5-4aad-9668-c30ed3cd91aa</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=c3812cb8-f7e5-4aad-9668-c30ed3cd91aa</guid>
      <author>jwild@iam-magazine.com (Joff Wild, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=c3812cb8-f7e5-4aad-9668-c30ed3cd91aa#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>IP politics</category>
        <category>IP litigation</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Singapore’s IP hub plans depend on R&amp;D investment </title>
      <description><![CDATA[Nestl&eacute;&rsquo;s announcement of a $4.3 million dollar investment in a Singapore-based research facility this week is just one example of a recent trend that has seen global companies shift their R&amp;D centres to the city-state. Although companies may be moving these businesses to Singapore because of its attractive tax breaks, strong legal system, well-educated work force and proximity to other Asian markets, these shifts may well have a knock-on effect and further the government&rsquo;s IP hub plans. 
The Nestl&eacute; move was the latest in a wave of similar announcements this week: United Microelectronics invested $110 million to transform a plant into...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 11:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=8f9b0b40-5f1e-433d-85f0-9e2a74b8d388</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=8f9b0b40-5f1e-433d-85f0-9e2a74b8d388</guid>
      <author>shussain@gbp.co.uk (Seher Hussain, Globe Business Publishing Ltd)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=8f9b0b40-5f1e-433d-85f0-9e2a74b8d388#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>Brands</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Wide-ranging draft patent abuse legislation could have decent chance of becoming US law</title>
      <description><![CDATA[Another day, another draft bill presented to the US Congress designed to, in the words of its author, &ldquo;modernize our patent litigation system and protect innovators unfairly targeted by trolls&rdquo;. The Patent Abuse Reduction Act, introduced onto the floor of the Senate yesterday by Senator John Cornyn of Texas will, says the press release accompanying it, &ldquo;require plaintiffs to disclose the substance of their claim and reveal their identities when they file their lawsuit; allow defendants to hale into court interested parties; bring fairness to the discovery process; and shift responsibility for the cost of litigation to the losing party&rdquo;. 
Although...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 16:46:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=874f3004-2000-4254-b389-435b649efcf5</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=874f3004-2000-4254-b389-435b649efcf5</guid>
      <author>jwild@iam-magazine.com (Joff Wild, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=874f3004-2000-4254-b389-435b649efcf5#comments</comments>
      <category>IP politics</category>
        <category>IP litigation</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Nanotech patent sell-off may generate interest from big-name buyers</title>
      <description><![CDATA[Nanotechnology industry news site AZoNano.com reports that a portfolio of potentially more than 400 patents and applications is being put up for sale by the bankruptcy administrators of NanoInk, a company specialising in nano-scale encryption and authentication solutions. NanoInk ceased operations in February this year after its shareholders withdrew investment.
The patents &ndash; which provide coverage in a number of key jurisdictions including the United States, Japan, China and European countries &ndash; are being offered for sale along with other assets including related knowhow, equipment, inventory and licences to third party technology. Details of some of the IP that may be on...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 14:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=1f2944e8-16a8-4b03-a8dd-bdda290ffcd4</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=1f2944e8-16a8-4b03-a8dd-bdda290ffcd4</guid>
      <author>jellis@theipmediagroup.com (Jack Ellis, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=1f2944e8-16a8-4b03-a8dd-bdda290ffcd4#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>Licensing</category>
        <category>IA management</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Chinese pharma must use collaborative deals to leverage IP expertise</title>
      <description><![CDATA[The recent spate of partnerships agreed between Western and Chinese pharmaceutical businesses underscores the continued need for collaboration to fully leverage the Chinese market. But while foreign life sciences companies pursue joint ventures with an eye to increasing profits, their Chinese partners would be well-advised to use these opportunities to develop their own IP capabilities, if their aim is to become international players. 
In the last two weeks Amgen has signed a joint venture with Zhejiang Beta Pharma, SciClone Pharmaceuticals has entered into a licensing agreement with Zensun Science &amp; Technology and the Vectura Group established the Tianjin Kinnovata Pharmaceutical Company...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 11:48:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=a850fca7-c189-40f1-be56-87bce78763d2</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=a850fca7-c189-40f1-be56-87bce78763d2</guid>
      <author>shussain@gbp.co.uk (Seher Hussain, Globe Business Publishing Ltd)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=a850fca7-c189-40f1-be56-87bce78763d2#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>If Korea is serious about its royalty deficit, it must think technology first, IP second</title>
      <description><![CDATA[Recently, a delegation from the Korean Intellectual Property Office visited Cambridge University to learn more about how it spins off so many successful licences despite filing relatively few patents. Korea averages 100 licences for every 600 patents filed, while Cambridge is converting one out of every two patents into licences. 
Although Korean companies file tens of thousands of patent applications each year, the country is battling a low rate of patent to licence conversions &ndash; an issue that has been around for some time now. In 2012, the country&rsquo;s so-called licensing deficit was close to $5 billion, according to data compiled...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 08:18:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=5192a9fe-ba89-4571-8a91-8d67892f22c9</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=5192a9fe-ba89-4571-8a91-8d67892f22c9</guid>
      <author>shussain@gbp.co.uk (Seher Hussain, Globe Business Publishing Ltd)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=5192a9fe-ba89-4571-8a91-8d67892f22c9#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>Licensing</category>
        <category>IP politics</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Despite potential flaws proposed US patent transparency legislation is worth supporting</title>
      <description><![CDATA[Legislation introduced in the US House of Representatives yesterday by Democrat Congressman Ted Deutch aims to greatly increase transparency of patent ownership. The End Anonymous Patents Act would, explained a press release, &ldquo;require any sales or transfers of patents to be disclosed to the Patent and Trade Office [sic], along with a notice of the real party in interest filing by the purchasing entity. The same disclosure requirements would apply to new patents at the time they are awarded, and for currently held patents at the next scheduled maintenance fee payment&rdquo;. 
Explaining his decision to put the act forward Deutch stated:...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 12:51:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=9039c260-2653-4ca0-bff5-c5a6347432f3</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=9039c260-2653-4ca0-bff5-c5a6347432f3</guid>
      <author>jwild@iam-magazine.com (Joff Wild, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=9039c260-2653-4ca0-bff5-c5a6347432f3#comments</comments>
      <category>IP management</category>
        <category>Licensing</category>
        <category>IP politics</category>
        <category>IP litigation</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Security concerns about Huawei could adversely affect many more than just one company</title>
      <description><![CDATA[Huawei, Ericsson and Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) agreed this week to cross-license operations support systems (OSS) technology. The proposed deal signifies a major commitment to cooperation between the companies &ndash; but it could yet be derailed by concerns in the US and Europe over national security and anti-competitive practices.
The three signed a memorandum of understanding earlier this week with a view to jointly utilising the systems they have to manage multi-vendor networks. According to a press release from NSN, the parties expect the arrangement to simplify operations and reduce costs for themselves and the network operators they work with.
However, Huawei has...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 16:03:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=59b281ec-ae28-4706-b816-d5be6f5bd538</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=59b281ec-ae28-4706-b816-d5be6f5bd538</guid>
      <author>jellis@theipmediagroup.com (Jack Ellis, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=59b281ec-ae28-4706-b816-d5be6f5bd538#comments</comments>
      <category>Competition/antitrust</category>
        <category>Licensing</category>
        <category>IP politics</category>
        <category>IP business</category>
        
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Do not expect Europe's Unified Patent Court to be up and running until 2016 at the earliest</title>
      <description><![CDATA[The UK&rsquo;s ratification of the agreement to create a unified patent court (UPC) for Europe may not be subject to a referendum, but those expecting a quick sign-off from the British government look as if they are going to be disappointed. In fact, it looks as if the UK will not be in a position to ratify the treaty until the second half of 2015, meaning that it is quite possible that the UPC will not actually get underway until 2016. 
Yesterday, law firm Bristows &ndash; which has already written for IAM on the potential drawbacks of the new system in...]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 07:51:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <link>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=41bb7357-5ff4-44c3-aa65-ba86d4fe1d84</link>
      <guid>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=41bb7357-5ff4-44c3-aa65-ba86d4fe1d84</guid>
      <author>jwild@iam-magazine.com (Joff Wild, IAM Magazine)</author>
      <comments>http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/detail.aspx?g=41bb7357-5ff4-44c3-aa65-ba86d4fe1d84#comments</comments>
      <category>IP politics</category>
        <category>IP litigation</category>
        <category>Patents</category>
        
    </item>
    
    
</channel>
</rss>
