"As a patent trial lawyer and IP attorney, one question clients frequently ask is, "Why should we build a patent portfolio?" This question is often followed by concerns regarding the costs associated with obtaining patents, the lengthy process involved and news stories about how changes in the patent litigation standpoint have greatly reduced the value of patents or have limited the value of patent portfolios to large companies."
"Widespread use of patent office procedures such as Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs) and ex parte reexaminations to attack the value of patents; Ability of defendants (especially in software cases) to attack the eligibility of patent protection by filing Alice or Section 101 patent eligibility motions (to dismiss or for summary judgment); Low-to-modest damages "reasonable royalty" damages recoveries in patent cases due to use of "apportionment" and smallest-saleable unit calculations;"
Clients often ask whether building a patent portfolio is worthwhile given concerns about cost, time, and news of reduced patent value. Common litigation pressures include Inter Partes Reviews and ex parte reexaminations, Section 101/Alice eligibility challenges, apportionment and smallest-saleable unit limits on reasonable royalty damages, and the eBay v. MercExchange restriction on injunctive relief. Those factors have substantially impacted patent litigation outcomes. None of those factors alone or together negates the value of building and maintaining a strong patent portfolio. Patents still provide business benefits and can enhance overall business value.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]