I was at a Society for Computers and Law event this week entitled IPR - is it good or bad for business? The speakers were a good mix of lawyers, commercial managers and patent attorneys. Most of the audience were lawyers or patent attorneys, keen to discuss some of the issues, with a particular focus on the approaches to managing IP.
A variety of speakers managed to fit in a range of topics as broad as open source software, managing IP dispute risks and dealing with IP in a public procurement context. The floor was then open to any questions, which allowed people to pose questions about the potential impact of the Gower's review, the demise of 'look and feel' and how businesses manage the risks in practical terms.
Personally I rather enjoyed Stephen Bennett's talk on IP dispute management. He started the talk in dramatic fashion with 'nearly 80% of US murders are committed by someone the victim knows'. Not the sort of thing you expect from a talk on IP! How would he go on, the audience were wondering. His point was that the majority of patent disputes are between parties who are already aware of each other. Whether licensor or licensee or simply participants in the same market, patent owners know who their principle threat is. Simply considering this at the outset had the potential to seriously reduce the risks for a business.
The overall theme of the night was that managing IP does not simply involve calling the lawyers when an issue arises. It involves considering the potential for future problems, putting policies in place internally to manage IP, considering how your IP is created and by whom and thinking about whether anyone might object to your conduct in the future based on IP rights. It is an almost universal truth among lawyers that trying to tackle an IP problem long before it occurs is far cheaper and more likely to have a positive result than only taking action once IP becomes an issue. There's no point in shutting the stable door once the horse has bolted.
Comments