1. Two Patent Paths for Tech Giants – WSJ compares the patent strategies of IBM and HP
HP is focused on quality, breadth of coverage, and alignment with business goals. IBM continues to focus on quantity:
“H-P has been focusing on “the quality of the patents that we seek, as opposed to the quantity,” Mr. Light said. As a result, he added, H-P is seeking broad patents that relate directly to its main businesses, avoiding the costs of filing patents that may relate to more specific processes.”
I see this as part of a bigger trend. As it becomes more difficult to get patents allowed, companies will likely begin sharpening the focus of their patenting efforts on higher quality inventions and disclosures.
(Frustrated with WSJ subscription policies for online content? Read this CNet article on the HP/IBM contrast instead.)
2. Quality v. Quantity in the Tech Daily Dose article on patent rankings
Another indication of a developing trend favoring quality over quantity?
“American companies garnered a minority share of the total number of corporate U.S. patents last year, it’s important not to confuse quantity with quality,” IFI’s Darlene Slaughter said in a press release.
3. Pfizer sheds 800 scientists in preparation for expiration of patent covering Lipitor
Is the BigPharma patent cliff starting to reveal itself (remember last week’s ‘Most Interesting’ – Big Pharma apparently stands to lose patent protection on drugs with annual sales of $140 Billion by 2016)? Is the cliff being used as a scapegoat for other things?
4. Patent litigation – should we be in this business?
Jackie Hutter of the Hutter Group IP strategy consultancy has a great post on her IP Asset Maximizer blog about a simple way to reduce expenses and improve business outcomes of patent litigation. The solution – divorce the emotion from the issue and focus on one simple question – Should we be in this business?
