The Impact Of Intellectual Properties Protection Essay
Paper type: Essay
Words: 1477, Paragraphs: 77, Pages: 6
Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website!
Some of the aims and objectives of the project include: –
- Determine the responsibility and functioning of the intellectual property domain in the IT and automobile industry.
- The manner in which each type of Intellectual property (IP) instrument could be applied in the software and automobile industry.
- The extent and level of protection various other intellectual property rights instruments (such as copyrights, database protection, IC protection, trade secrets, designs, trademarks, etc) that could be provided.
- The obstacles, hurdles, ideas, conceptions, etc, that could oppose the implementation of the various intellectual property instruments for protection in the software and automobile fields.
- The impact and scope patents and other intellectual property right instruments could have in the IT and automobile industry.
- Determining the ways in which IP could act as a hindrance to the development of the software and the automobile fields
- To promote an inter-professional relationship that could exist between IP, management, technology and law.
- To equip the stakeholders in the technological field about the way they could protect their applications or intelligence of their mind.
- To suggest potential ways in which the hindrance and monotony caused by IP could be removed in the software and the automobile industry.
- To promote healthy competition between organizations in the field of technology such that it would be a win-win situation for them and for the public.
- The application of antitrust laws in the field of IP especially for patent nonuse
- To determine the circumstances under which Procedures used to benefit the public (such as revocation of the patent and compulsory licensing) can be imposed (especially to ensure that a healthy competition exists in the market).
Technology is improving each and every day. It is very important that IP is protected completely so that the owner reaps the fruits of the intellectual labor. Each intellectual property instrument (such as patent, copyright, trade secrets, designs, trademarks, database protection, chip protection, etc) tries to protect certain aspects of technology. For example patents try to protect the revolutionary aspect (such as inventions), whereas Semi-conductor protections tries to protect evolutionary aspects (as the development in semi-conductor technology is incremental in nature). To a certain extent the trademark and copyright laws flow automatically and several other IP instruments have to compulsorily be registered. However, copyrights may not offer complete protection (it may also be difficult to apply copyrights to the field of software or the internet as websites and software is constantly updated). A certain amount of trade secret is lost whenever an employee quits a company.
A company’s intellectual property forms a very important resource. However, the company should be able to determine the nature of its resources and the manner in which it could be exploited. A company with a good IP strategy could gain a competitive edge in the industry to a certain extent and within varying periods of time (depending on its competitiveness).
It can be seen that a company having a single patent would have a distinct advantage in the market. The opponents of the company may begin to take up alternative strategies that may be ineffective in nature, consume a lot of time or prove to be very costly. A company should conduct a SWOT analysis of its IP situation. Even small corporate are beginning to identify IP as an invaluable assets and are using it to enable growth. The key to success of a company would be to manage it IP resources effectively (through proper identification, maintenance, evaluation, protection, sharing and utilization).
In such a competitive age, could the IT and the automobile industry ignore IP and related laws? I do feel that this could be a very good research question, and each and every aspect including past cases, benefits and limitations of each IP instrument and the manner in which a company could develop an effective IP strategy may be discussed. Even the potential ways in which the IP owner could misuse his/her laws could be suggested, so that unhealthy competition or monotony is created in the market. In such circumstances, the law-makers need to bring about certain laws that would create a balance between public interest and the owner of the IP.
A company can possess various IP’s and in different fields. The IP may be a technology which is new and revolutionary or a slight modification of evolution of current technology. Some of the IP’s that a company could possess include patents, copyrights, database protection, designs protection, trademarks, IC protection, trade secrets, etc. A company can protect it’s IP in several ways:-
- Use the trade-secret mechanism to protect its IP (in this way the company would just be protecting its property and not be using it to gain extensive profits).
- Disclose its IP to the appropriate statutory authorities and obtain relevant IP registrations.
- Protect it’s IP through contractual means (e.g. licensing of a software) – The contract for use may be for a certain periods of time or may be restricted for use within a certain geographical area.
– Table of Cases
-Table of Statues
I.e. 1.Chapter one: Literature Review
1.1. Introduction to intellectual property
1.1.1. What is inventions and what’s not?
1.1.2. Protecting inventions
1.2. Forms of intellectual properties protection
1.3. Cost of the protection, durability, and its effectiveness
- 1. Chapter two: Need to Protect IP in the software and the automobile industry
2.1.1. Secrecy and confidentiality
2.1.2. Need to reward the owner for helping develop and advance technology for the benefit of the society
2.1.3. Creating a health business environment in the Market
2.1.4. Public Benefit (duty of the patent owner to make known new and useful technology for the benefit of the public i.e. to work the invention, and not to wrongfully suppress or hide the technology from the public after obtaining a patent from the patent office), Relevant cases – Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.; Pfizer V. Government of India [434 US 308 (1978)]; Remington Products V. North American Philips corporation; Image Technical Services V. Eastman Kodak Co. [504 U.S. 451 (1992)]; Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. v. Michelson case, etc.
3.1. Chapter three: Ways in which the different IP instruments could be implemented and the level of protection provided by each instrument
220.127.116.11. Database protection
3.1.5. Trade secrets
3.1.6. IC protection
3.1.7. A combination of these
4.1. Chapter four: Business Competition and IP
4.1.1. Instances in which IP has created a healthy competition in the Market
4.1.2. Instances in which IP has created an unhealthy competition in the Market
4.1.3. Manner in which IP has helped to develop technology further
4.1.4. Manner in which IP is acting as a hindrance to the development of technology
Case Studies – IBM (they currently hold the most number of patents in the US) – http://www.ibm.com/ibm/governmentalprograms/ippatent.html#resources; Microsoft http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/intellectualproperty/default.mspx; Dell
5.1. Chapter five: Problems concerning the Use of IP
5.1. 1 Public Interest
5.1.2. Unhealthy competition
5.2. Ways in which the problems could be solved
6.1. Chapter six: IP Processes in a Company
6.1.1. IP Policy
6.1.2. IP Resources at the Company
6.1.3. Planning and Strategizing
6.1.4. Monitoring and Evaluation
6.1.5. SWOT analysis
6.2.1. Infringement Situations or Issues Concerning IP – Sega Enterprises V. Richards; Apple Computers V. Computer Edge, IBcos V. Barclay, Lotus V. Lotus V. Paperback, Lotus V. Borland, Whelan V. Jaslow, Computer Associates V. Altai (1992), John Richardson V. Flanders (1993), Gottschalk V. Benson (1972), Parker V. Flock (1978), in re Abele (1982), Canter Fitzgerald V. Tradition (UK), Lab Corp v Metabolite, in re Walter (1980), in re Freeman (1978), Microsoft Clipboard Application (2006), Arryhythmia Reascarhe
V. Corazonix (1992), Re Alapatt (1994), Softman v. Adobe, Koch and Sterzelix-ray apparatus (1988), VICOM Application (1987), Fujistu’s Application (1997), MAI V. Peak Computers, State Bank V. Signature Financial (1998), AT&T V. Excell Comm. (1999), Amazon V. Barnes and noble.com (1999), Mark and Spencer V. One in a Million (1998), Tata Tea V. Gem Lifts (D2000-1823), Novell V. CPU, IBM Text processing Appication (1989), Geodynamik device (2002),
7.1.1. The Future of IP in the software and automobile industry
7.1.2. The unanswered questions
Calton, J. 2001, “Dissolving the Digital Dilemma: metatheory and intellectual property”, Human Systems Management, vol. 20, pp. 19-23.
Edward Lowe Foundation 2003, How to Gain a Competitive Edge, [Online], Available: http://www.lowe.org/index.elf?page=sserc&storyid=8869&function=story, [Accessed: 2007, May 17].
Kurth, A. 2005, Software/Electrical Lawyers, [Online], Available: http://www.andrews-kurth.com/Page.aspx?BD_ID=5555, [Accessed: 2007, May 17].
Maheswari, U. 2002, Implications of Biotechnology on Patents and Food Security, [Online], Available: http://www.altlawforum.org/Resources/lexlib/biotech, [Accessed: 2007, May 17].
NSW 2007, Intellectual Property (IP), [Online], Available: http://www.smallbiz.nsw.gov.au/smallbusiness/Technology+in+Business/Intellectual+Property/, [Accessed: 2007, May 17].
Ramakrishna, T. 2005, Basic principles and Acquisition of Intellectual Property Rights, NLSIU, Bangalore.
Ramakrishna, T. 2005, Information Technology Related Intellectual Property Rights, NLSIU, Bangalore.
USPTO 2005, General Information Concerning Patents, [Online], Available: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/novelty, [Accessed: 2007, May 17].
WIPO 2007, What is Intellectual Property?, [Online], Available: http://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/index.html, [Accessed: 2007, May 17].