Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Generating Cash from a Patent Portfolio: An Overview
We have all seen the statistics:
- About two-thirds of today's S&P 500 market capitalization comes from intangible assets, having doubled in proportion from 20 years ago.
- More than $100 billion is collected annually in IP licensing income.
- More than $200 billion is written off every year from IP impairments.
- More than $300 billion in infringement (mostly innocent) occurs annually.
Today most professionals realize that the increasing value of intellectual property (IP) is a trend that will not be reversed. The accounting and reporting for intangibles is already catching up with the “real world,” most notably via Sarbanes-Oxley. More pertinent to this article is the fact that the financial services community is beginning to respond broadly with new products and services designed specifically to take advantage of this newly discovered wealth.
This is the first of a series of articles that will review various methods to generate cash from a patent portfolio. Only a flavor of each method is presented for this article; future articles will delve into the newer or more unique methods. It should be noted that the actual monetization of patents is often separate and distinct from the process of value creation ' the traditional focus of many IP professionals. Value creation comes in many stages, including invention, patenting, pooling, cross-licensing, and the methods discussed below. Cash is the ultimate byproduct, and, it is hoped, the ultimate goal of any economic effort, including patenting.
Today there is a rising need to use all forms of IP, especially patents, to improve companies' bottom lines. Most other assets have already been squeezed; future expected interest rate increases, overburdened balance sheets, and a recent drive to hold management more accountable for turning these “hidden” assets into something more tangible have made patent monetization a priority in many IP departments.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?