Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Standards Setting Organizations and Patents: Patent Policies Matter
For several reasons, the continuing advance of technology involves the use of standards setting organizations (“SSOs”). First, SSOs ensure that there are accepted technical standards in an industry, for example, to ensure interoperability of hardware and/or software products. Second, SSOs encourage the participation and collaboration of multiple members of the industry, thereby obtaining valuable contributions from parties who are normally highly competitive and otherwise might not work together. In addition, such standards provide a benefit to the end users (namely, the consumers of the goods or services governed by the standard) by allowing for economies of scale due to large-scale deployment of the technology covered by the standard, and thereby also helping to lower costs for new technologies.
In between the industry participants in the SSOs and the consumers, however, are the technology developers and owners. Many such developers and owners are armed with patent rights and thus have their own set of interests in the adoption of a particular technology standard, including receiving payment for licensing the patented technology covered by the standard. Even more interesting is the technology developer of an industry standard who also participates in the SSO. Recent developments in the decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) governing the relationship between patent owners and SSOs provide guidance to all parties involved in the SSO process. These decisions suggest that the standards-setting process should have clear rules regarding disclosure of patents or patent applications that may cover the standard. Failure of 1) the SSO to promulgate clear rules, 2) a SSO participant to follow the SSO rules, or 3) a SSO participant to properly understand the acts of other SSO participants during the standard development and adoption process, can result in highly undesired results, such as expensive litigation or a need to license technology covering a widely deployed standard. On the other hand, a clear understanding of the SSO rules and process should prevent standards-based surprises for all involved parties.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.