Intellectual Property Workshop on Name Ambiguity in IP Analysis Identifiers
Explore the intricacies of identifying intellectual property in a workshop addressing name ambiguity in IP analysis identifiers. Learn about Prior Art Search, Risk Assessment, Portfolio Benchmarking, and Technology Landscape. Presented by Philips Intellectual Property & Standards.
Uploaded on | 0 Views
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Name Ambiguity in IP Analysis Identifiers and Intellectual Property Workshop OECD, Paris Ingrid Baele Philips Intellectual Property & Standards June 22, 2017
IP Information Solutions IP Processes Prior Art Search FTO search Portfolio Benchmarking Technology Landscape Technology Analysis Company Analysis IP Filing Strategy x x IP Portfolio building (drafting & prosecution) x IP Portfolio Maintenance x x Product Risk Assessment x x Research Risk Assessment x x IP Scouting x x Licensing-in x x x Licensing-out x x M&A x x Company Strategy x x 2 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Prior Art Search Purpose Patentability of an invention disclosure Validity of a (granted) claim Report contains patents and NPL Number of references is low (< 10) Applicant name (ownership) is not relevant It is about what is publicly available, no matter from whom 3 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Risk Assessment Search (FTO) Purpose: find 3th party blocking claims for a new product Report contains (granted) patents Number of references is moderate (< 100) Ownership is relevant because: what is my relation with the owner of the blocking patent? Do I have a (cross) license? Can they create backfire? What is the licensing/litigation behavior? 4 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Portfolio Benchmarking Purpose: benchmark (part of) patent portfolio with competitors Report is built on patent families Data size is high (> 10000 families) Ownership is paramount Because we want to know exactly what others have 5 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Technology Landscape Purpose: how does the patenting activity look like and who is active Report contains patent publications Contains high amount of patent families (> 1000) Applicant (ownership) is relevant for the who question 6 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Technology Analysis Purpose: find white spots, scouting opportunities, acquisition targets, etc. Report contains patent publications Contains high amount of patent families (> 1000) Detailed categorization on sub-topics Applicant (ownership) is relevant for the who question 7 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Company Analysis Purpose: analyze the patent portfolio of a company Report contains patent publications Amount of patent families from a few to > 1000 Detailed categorization on topics Applicant name (ownership) is relevant for completeness 8 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Use case 1 Original versus standardized 9 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Use case 2 Assignee name misspellings 10 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Use case 3 Understandardized names of different families Multiple assignee names on one patent top assignee (DWPI standardized assignee/applicant) # patent families 452 343 309 237 143 143 136 123 115 109 104 94 93 92 1KONINK PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NV 2NELLCOR PURITAN BENNETT LLC 3GEN ELECTRIC 4OMRON HEALTHCARE CO LTD 5MASIMO CORP 6COLIN CORP 7PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 8NELLCOR PURITAN BENNETT INC 9SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD 10SIEMENS AG 11NIHON KODEN CORP 12WELCH ALLYN INC 13FITBIT INC 14MEDTRONIC INC 11 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
IP Information Solutions IP Processes Prior art search FTO search Portfolio Benchmarking Technology Landscape Technology Analysis Company Analysis IP Filing Strategy x x IP Portfolio building (drafting & prosecution) x IP Portfolio Maintenance x x Product Risk Assessment x x Research Risk Assessment x x IP Scouting x x Licensing-in x x x Licensing-out x x M&A x x Company Strategy x x 12 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Current Approach Use of tools that do part of the work Further manual corrections PDG Working Group Impact has a taskforce Applicant Name Standardization IP5 pilot project on applicant name standardization 13 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
Summary Patent ownership is relevant in most use cases and comes with many challenges An ambiguous applicant name is one of these challenges Spelling errors Unstandardized names Multiple assignee names of the same assignee Inventor name as assignee name Different level of standardization Re-assignments Etc. Need for a single, standardized, correctly written applicant name Persistent identifiers will help but will solve only part of the problem? 14 Philips Intellectual Property & Standards
