Open data offer risks and rewards for conservation; Nature, July 24, 2018

Editorial, Nature;

Open data offer risks and rewards for conservation

"In a Perspective published this week in Nature Ecology & Evolution (A. I. T. Tulloch et al. Nature Ecol. Evol. 2, 1209–1217; 2018), conservation experts offer a way to help scientists and officials to decide when to publish such sensitive information — and when not to. It’s the latest development in an ongoing debate that pits advocates of open data against those who take a harder line and want more restrictions. The authors warn that a default position in which location data are withheld if a species is identified as being of high biological significance and under high threat — as recommended by the Global Biodiversity Information Facility — risks missing out on the benefits of data sharing.

To aim for a more balanced approach, the scientists drew up a decision tree to help people judge what to do with information gained from wildlife monitoring and surveys. A series of steps asks questions such as “Could data be used to mitigate threats to species?” and “Would sharing location data increase risk of species decline through increased visitation?” In some cases — fish spawning locations for one, because the fishing industry would love to target them — the recommendation is to keep everything from the name of a species to its location under wraps. But in other cases, the need for secrecy is trumped by the possible benefits of transparency. Open data could help local communities fight to protect a habitat when development is threatening a species."

Protecting trade secrets in China; Lexology, July 26, 2018

Baldwins - Chris Way and Solanda Chen; Lexology;

Protecting trade secrets in China

"What should I do to protect my trade secrets in China?

Taking necessary measures to prevent your trade secrets being used or disclosed by others is crucial to success, particularly in China. Some simple precautions can save you time and money down the track:

• Ensure employees are educated concerning the confidentiality of information and their obligations;
• Label all confidential information or documents as such;
• Control/monitor access to trade secrets limiting access only to those individuals who need the information;
• Sign non-disclosure or confidentiality agreements with employees and all existing/potential co-operating partners;
• Ensure company computer systems are well-protected and conduct risk assessments regularly."

Does Kit Kat’s Shape Deserve a Trademark? E.U. Adds a Hurdle.; The New York Times, July 25, 2018

Milan Schreuer, The New York Times; 

Does Kit Kat’s Shape Deserve a Trademark? E.U. Adds a Hurdle.

"It was a good day for Kit Kat copycats.

Nestlé, which makes the candy bar outside the United States, could lose exclusive rights in the European Union to its four-fingered shape, the region’s highest court ruled on Wednesday.

The company has long argued that the Kit Kat’s four trapezoidal bars, linked by a rectangular base, had enough of a “distinctive character” that they deserved a trademark across Europe.

The European Court of Justice, however, told Nestlé that it had not presented evidence that shoppers in Belgium, Greece, Ireland or Portugal would recognize a Kit Kat by shape alone."

IBM wins $83 million from Groupon in e-commerce patent fight; Chicago Tribune, July 30, 2018

Christopher Yasiejko, Chicago Tribune; IBM wins $83 million from Groupon in e-commerce patent fight

"A U.S. jury awarded IBM $82.5 million after finding that Groupon infringed four of its e-commerce patents.

Friday's verdict is a boon to IBM's intellectual-property licensing business, which last year brought in $1.19 billion for the company, holder of more than 45,000 patents.

IBM sued Chicago-based Groupon for $167 million, accusing it of building its online coupon business on the back of the IBM e-commerce inventions without permission. Midway through their first full day of deliberations in Wilmington, Delaware, jurors sided with IBM, finding that Groupon infringed the patents intentionally. The ruling means the judge can increase the damages award."

10 Effective Ways To Protect Your Intellectual Property; Forbes Technology Council, July 23, 2018

Forbes Technology Council; 10 Effective Ways To Protect Your Intellectual Property

"As your new invention comes to light, your initial thought may be to let the world know. While shouting your success from the rooftops is appealing, before you do, you need to consider how best to protect what you have worked so hard to develop.

Patents and copyrights can offer you some security, but don’t always mean that your design is completely protected, as copies can certainly emerge. There are, however, a number of other options available to you, each with their own strengths.

Below, 10 members of Forbes Technology Council weigh in on some less-common, yet still effective, ways to protect your intellectual property. Here’s what they recommend:"

2018 National Trademark Exposition, Washington, D.C.: Photos and Observations

Kip Currier, 2018 National Trademark Exposition, Washington, D.C.: Photos and Observations

I attended the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's 2018 National Trademark Exposition, a free 2-day event held at the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History (home of famous artifacts like Abe Lincoln's Stovepipe Hat and Judy Garland's Ruby Slippers), July 27-28, 2018.

I was fortunate to be able to attain registration for the two free Continuing Legal Education (CLE) seminars. 

The first CLE seminar, Who Owns You When You Are Dead?, was a revealing look at the not-widely-known-or-well-understood Right of Publicity, which can be particularly critical for tax implications and estate planning. The presenters discussed interesting examples involving the estates of Marilyn Monroe, Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston, and Prince--who, unfortunately, died without a will! Not a good idea!

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, famed former NBA basketball player and best-selling author, spoke at the Opening Session, as well as USPTO leaders Andrei Iancu and Mary Boney Denison:

This session on Counterfeits and Cybercrime provided powerful examples of the impacts of counterfeit goods, such as defective airbags in cars and tainted medicines and drugs:

Brian Levine (speaking, in the above photo), Senior Counsel and National CHIP Coordinator with the U.S. Department of Justice's Criminal Division, mentioned that defective Apple iPhone chargers have caused fires and electrocutions:

The International Trademark Association (INTA) had a booth giving attendees a chance to try to discern the fake good from the genuine good produced by the brand owner.

 In this pic, the counterfeit Uggs boot is...the one on the left (got that one correct!):

This Under Armour counterfeit-spotting test was harder. The grey backpack on the right is the genuine article. The giveaway, per the Under Armour paralegal with whom I chatted, is the higher quality ergonomic straps on the real backpack. Counterfeit goods frequently use inferior manufacturing elements. It can be really hard to spot the differences though, especially when a fake one and a real counterpart aren't side by side.

Interesting chat with several summer interns for NASA. NASA's Booth gave out these cool Inventor's Notebooks--with a great Thomas Edison quote on the back--and information on Open Source NASA Software and Patent licensing and use:

Displays by, in alphabetical order, the DC Roller Girls, Safeway, and Velcro:

I took a USPTO Trademark Examiner and a Trademark Attorney up on their offer to talk about soundmarks (e.g. the NBC chimes, MGM lion, Homer Simpson's D'Oh, and the Harlem Globetrotters theme), as well as smellmarks, like the recently registered smellmark for Playdoh.

The Mouseketeers cap, Coca Cola bottle, and Mrs. Butterworth's Maple Syrup bottle are memorable kinds of shapemarks: 

A woman working the Girl Scouts display shared with me a humorous "teachable moment": a USPTO attorney at the Expo informed her that one of the Girl Scout exhibits (which another employee had created) mistakenly described Juliette Gordon Low's application filed for a 1913 patent when it was actually a trademark:

It's an example that highlights widespread confusion between the four types of Intellectual Property (Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, and Trade Secrets).


A lifelong aficionado of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS), thanks to many early trips with my family, I also visited their booth. This is their primary logo, the arrowhead:

This is their new "secondary logo", I was told:

And this is an example of the kinds of collaborations between the NPS and corporate partners:

My time at the 2018 National Trademark Expo was very informative and worthwhile. Metro got me around part of the time and I walked the rest--despite scooters, bikes, and cars ubiquitously available for rental:

And I also got to visit two great D.C. area bookstores, Politics and Prose (who had a booth at the Trademark Expo) and KramerBooks:

 

Intellectual property, not intellectual monopoly; Brookings, July 11, 2018

Zia Qureshi, Brookings; 

Intellectual property, not intellectual monopoly

"Editor's Note: This op-ed was originally published by Project Syndicate.

“The copyright and patent laws we have today look more like intellectual monopoly than intellectual property,” wrote Brink Lindsey and Steven Teles in their recent book about the U.S. economy. Concerns about overprotection of intellectual property acting as a barrier to innovation and its diffusion are not new. But they have gained greater salience now that knowledge has emerged as a dominant driver of economic activity and competitive advantage.

Digital technologies have enabled the emergence of an “intangible economy,” based on soft assets like algorithms and lines of code, rather than physical assets like buildings and machinery. In this environment, intellectual-property rules can now make or break business models and reshape societies, as they determine how economic gains are shared."