Foresight President Efrat Kasznik gave a presentation titled “Are Patents Promoting Product Innovation? The Role of IP Strategy in the Global Marketplace” at the Product Management Event 2013 in San Francisco on March 4th, 2013.
Many of the attendees at the session asked for a copy of our slide deck, so we have attached the embedded presentation.
Are Patents Promoting Product Innovation? The Role of IP Strategy in the Global Marketplace from Foresight Valuation Group
Incorporate a successful IP strategy to enhance your product management process
· Align your IP portfolio with your product strategy and corporate vision
· Maximize the offensive and defensive value of your IP as it relates to your products and industry
· Accelerate product development through ‘open innovation’ by optimizing the inflow and outflow of knowledge
· Implement tools and best practices for managing product innovation activities from R&D to market across your organization
Are Patents Promoting Product Innovation? The Role of IP Strategy in the Global Marketplace
1. ARE PATENTS PROMOTING
PRODUCT INNOVATION?
THE ROLE OF IP STRATEGY
IN THE GLOBAL MARKETPLACE
‘
The Product Management Event
2013
March 4-5, 2013, San Francisco
Efrat Kasznik, Founder & President
Foresight Valuation Group, LLC
250,000 Active Patents That Impact SmartphonesThere are roughly 40,000 new software patents issued each year — and the rate of issuance is growing over time.http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/27/151357127/another-ridiculous-number-from-the-patent-wars
250,000 Active Patents That Impact SmartphonesThere are roughly 40,000 new software patents issued each year — and the rate of issuance is growing over time.http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/27/151357127/another-ridiculous-number-from-the-patent-warshttp://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/m/pdfs/iphone-report.pdf
Update/change
Update/change
Xerox PARC: Kodak: Point of R&D, patenting: which to patent, what others have already patented
1979 – xerox PARC decided not to patent its invention of the GUI (graphical user interface) that later formed basis of Apple’s mac and Microsoft’s windows personal computer OS. Xerox had gone so far to write patent applications for some of its GUI technologies but decided not to proceed with its filings.Management (copier guys) didn’t see much of a business in what was then a small market for PCsXerox still should have viewed GUI research as corporate assets of potentially great value – if not to itself then to othersHad Xerox patented the GUI, even at 1% royalty rate on sales, license fees Xerox could have eared from 84-98 from mac and windows sales would have topped half a billion dollars.Xerox was a sleeping giant in terms of exploiting its IP – 8k patents in 97 but no one in company knew precisely how many of the patents had significant commercial or strategic value.Xerox also didn’t take advantage of its IP, even in 97 they only earned 8.5M in patent license royalties (1k per patent vs IBM’s 75k per patent of their 15k patents) .Recruited new CEO hired speficially to restructure program at xerox to help push earnings growth back into double digits. Formed Xerox IP operations – hired company’s first VP of IP – developed active patent licensing program, a more IP savvy R&D effort, and active anti infringement campaign“systematic mining of patent portfolio for opportunities” – Xerox’s strategy for proactive and aggressive effort to generate revenue from patentsIf you only use your patents to protect your products, you’re missing all manngers of revenue generating and other opportunities”
1960s-Kodak engaged in small scale R&D to develop cameras and film for instant photography market (dominated by Polaroid, a company with 1/10 of Kodak’s $10B in sales) Research failed to yield profitable products to compete with Polaroid, Kodak abandoned projectLate 1960s- Polaroid instant camera sales exploded – represented 15% of all US camera purchases – Kodak’s president became obsessed with getting market share1969- Kodak launched renewed R&D program “project 130” to develop instant cameras and films- its managers knew of potential infringement dangers – hired law firm to advise R&D – told technical staff they “should not be constrained by what an individual feels is potential patent infringement” – this statement came back to haunt Kodak in court1976- Kodak launched its new line of instant cameras and films – largest advertising campaign in history of consumer photo business – 7 days later Polaroid responded with lawsuit1990 – lawsuit resolved and Kodak ordered to pay damagesFlaw in strategy – didn’t focus on designing around Polaroid patent and developing more advanced inventions – focused on whether or not if pursued in court that the Polaroid patents would be ruled invalid or not.
Old ugly honeywell touCh pad old vs new – highlight disruptive nature