Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Patentees and competitors must take proactive steps to handle design-around issues related to intellectual property matters. Using a design-around strategy, a competitor can produce an equivalent product that is legally non-infringing on a patentee's issued patent. Successful design-around strategies can present time and cost savings in terms of research and development costs, legal fees and potential litigation costs and also can minimize the delay in commercializing an equivalent product. For example, by designing around, a competitor has the incentive to potentially capture a significant market share by producing an equivalent product while undercutting the patentee's profits.
The origins of incentives for designing around patents can be found in the policy objectives of the U.S. patent system. Our patent system's underlying policy considerations, balancing the interests of the patentee and public and fairness to all parties, actually encourage design-arounds. In the current system, while the patentee's property rights are protected, the public's right to design around the patent is also encouraged. Design-around improvements based on a patent are part and parcel of the patent bargain made by the patentee. The patentee obtains a monopoly to prevent others from making, using, selling or importing an infringing product while public knowledge is broadened in that technology.
Scenario: Your company has created a new invention and secured an issued patent claiming the invention. Patenting your invention is an important step in commercializing and marketing an inventive product; you have a market-driven incentive to invest in innovation. But is your patent “design-around” proof? Increasingly, companies are imitating their competitor's products by tweaking their own products just enough to avoid a patent infringement suit by a patentee. In today's competitive marketplace, a potential competitor has an incentive to design around your patent to produce an equivalent product that does not legally infringe your patent.
Chief information officers still bear the brunt of cybersecurity worries at many companies. But a study by the Association of Corporate Counsel Foundation finds that chief legal officers are increasingly taking a leadership role in cybersecurity strategy.
General counsel are eager to tap the promise of generative AI. But without clear technology road maps, many legal departments are struggling to turn that interest into action.
Part Two of this two-part articleexamines practical steps marketers must take to succeed in this changing landscape by embracing a multichannel, AI-driven approach to their marketing and PR efforts. This means rethinking your strategy to build direct connections with your audience, using platforms that elevate your visibility and focusing on storytelling that resonates.
When the SEC issues the next annual enforcement report for fiscal year 2025, we expect securities offering actions and investment adviser actions will almost certainly be up, and the “crypto” and “cyber” cases will almost certainly be down. Public statements by the new SEC administration have said as much, but even more telling than public statements are the allocation of limited enforcement resources.
The VPPA may be nearly four-decades old and video-rental stores largely a thing of the past, but the rise of online content, streaming services and ancillary activities has brought with it frequent litigation based on the VPPA. The key challenge in these litigations is how to interpret the VPPA’s 1980s terms in light of today’s digital advances.