Archive for the ‘Franchises’ Category
The concept of a patent pool is fairly new, if not totally unknown in the South African IP protection context.
The concept of a patent pool is however not new in the world. The first example of a patent pool date back to 1856 where sewing machine manufacturers, Grover, Baker, Singer, Wheeler and Wilson had patents and were in the process of instituting patent infringement actions against each other. This obviously led to the danger that profits can be diluted because of legal fees.
The parties then entered into cross-licensing agreements to make technology available to each other whilst limiting cross-licensing fees and thereby to lower the costs of products to the consumer.
Another example of a patent pool dates back to 1917 when patent held by the Wright Company and the Curtiss Company hampered the development of new airplanes that were needed for World War I. The solution was that the parties "pooled patents" by entering into cross-licensing agreements which allowed the relevant parties to use each other technologies whilst earning a realistic income from their patents.
In essence the basis of a patent pool is a cross licensing arrangement, to the benefit of the patent contributors and administered by an independent administrator.
However, in most instances patent pools are complex arrangements, which need to be set up by experienced practitioners in order to achieve their aims for the benefit of the contributors, and the end user, whilst avoiding anti-trust/price, fixing enquiries.
For more information on Patent Pools, Cross-Licensing, and Intellectual Partnering, you are welcome to contact Smit & Van Wyk, Inc.
Some of this information has been taken from Wikipedia, and for further reading, the following links make for interesting reading matter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_pool
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wright_brothers_patent_war#The_patent_pool_solution
No Comments »
The remark is often made that institutions do not protect their IP because they favour an "open source development" or "open source innovation" model.
The basis of this viewpoint is that knowledgeable individuals contribute "free of charge" to provide products (software etc.) which is available to other contributors. In exchange such individuals has access to the development of other contributors "free of charge". This development model is used to develop cutting edge technology in a rapid changing technological environment.
Opposed to the open source development model there is the "Legally protected" development model, which use legal tools to protect IP for the benefit of the individual or the institution. The advantage of this system is that the individual or institution can recover their investment in research and development over a period of 20 years. This model is used by pharmaceutical companies to develop new health solutions for the benefit of mankind, but with the knowledge that their (very costly) investment will be recovered in future.
These viewpoints are often presented as opposing viewpoints with proponents of each justifying the one against the other. However it is a widely accepted fact that each of these models has its own benefits and their own drawbacks.
Smit & Van Wyk, Inc. with individuals coming from a background of high technology development, but being at the forefront of legal protection of our clients rights, have the view that these two diverse models can be combined into a new "Legally protected open source model" (LPOSM) to maximise the benefits of each model whilst minimising the disadvantages of each model.
The LPOSM model incorporate use of open source technologies as input to new development and making available new developments to the open source community where appropriate, but to incorporate certain technologies (normally not available in the open source market) into products by using patent pools and commercial agreements to access such technology whilst legally protecting certain core competencies.
Smit & Van Wyk, Inc. can be contacted for more information on open source development, the LPOSM model, and legal protection of IP rights.
No Comments »
South Africa Patent Laws favour the usage of attorneys Even though it is possible to file a patent application directly without the usage of a patent lawyer or attorney, it cannot be recommended. The reason is simple. The South Africa patent laws favour the usage of an attorney. The South African Patent Office is a non-investigating office. This means that you can complete the application, file it and even receive the patent right upon payment of the required fees without the invention complying with all the requirements. It is not a loophole in the system. It simply means that the responsibility lies with the applicant to ensure that the invention is indeed patentable and that the application will be done correctly. The snag comes in when another applicant or company questions the patentability of the invention down the line or argues that the idea was not original at all. Lawsuits may follow and all the money already spent in the commercial development of the patent may be lost forever. You will need the help of a patent lawyer who knows the South Africa patent laws and will conduct the novelty searches and apply in the correct manner right from the word go.
Click here for more information regarding the LESI Conference 2010
No Comments »
September 25, 2008 | Franchises
One of the more common ways in which the commercial value of intellectual property is utilized is in franchising. Franchising is a method of doing business where a franchisor licenses trademarks as well as tried and proven methods of doing business to a franchisee in exchange for a recurring payment, and usually a percentage piece of gross sales or gross profits as well as the annual fees. In most cases the franchisor is a business that has proven commercial value (for example a chain store or fast food outlet). Various support services such as advertising and training are generally made available by the franchisor, and may indeed be required by him. This generally requires audited books, and may subject the franchisee or the outlet to periodic and surprise spot checks.
No Comments »
In recent years, franchising (a very specialized and unique form of licensing) has become an increasingly popular way of doing business. One of the explanations for doing this is that franchising combines the strength of their corporations with those of small businesses. It is a relatively low risk way for people to get into business themselves and offer people the freedom to earn, manage and to direct their own business, while having the support of an established business. As the same time it also provides a means for companies to expand effectively without incurring the high overheads and management difficulties usually associated with the establishment of a branch network.
No Comments »
