Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Strategy Toolbox
Researchers and technology managers may not deal with IP every day like IP professionals do, but they are still exposed to all sorts of patent strategy tools, especially when they are attempting to develop a patent strategy for a business. The advertisements for these tools typically imply that life would be so much simpler if only they used the vendor's latest and greatest tool. Many of these tools are very useful; however, most tools also have limitations. Having a framework from which to evaluate these tools is therefore helpful to researchers and managers.
To help develop strategies, there are tools such as books on patent strategy, Web sites and computer software, and obviously, newsletters such as this one. The usefulness of these tools varies widely, based on the experience of the person using the tool and what “job” the person is trying to accomplish. For example, many books are written for the novice independent inventor and are therefore written on a very basic level, the concept of strategy being primarily how to obtain an enforceable patent. On the other hand, many newsletter articles are written for IP professionals and contain much more advanced advice. This advice may be excellent, but also may be too narrowly focused, such as covering some legal exception or nuance, to be incorporated into a broad patent strategy for a particular business.
The question then is how can these tools, supposedly all devoted to patent strategy, be organized so that researchers or managers can decide if the tools will be useful in developing an overall patent strategy for their business? Obviously, to construct the correct strategy, appropriate tools are needed. It is useful, therefore, to think about putting the tools that are the most needed into a “Strategy Toolbox.” Just like an amateur woodworker and a master carpenter may have some of the same tools, two different businesses may use some of the same strategy tools when obtaining their IP. However, just like the master carpenter has additional tools for use in specialized situations, one business may find the need for more complicated or sophisticated strategy tools in its toolbox.
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.
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.
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.