Although, the length of utility and plant patent protection (patent term) was previously seventeen years from the date of patent grant, utility and plant patents filed after June 8, 1995 now have a patent term of up to twenty years from the date of filing of the earliest related patent application. Utility and plant patents which were applied for prior to June 8, 1995, and which were or will be in force after June 8, 1995, now have a patent term of seventeen years from the date of patent grant or twenty years from the date of filing of the earliest related patent application, whichever is longer. Utility patents are subject to the payment of periodic maintenance fees to keep the patent in force. Patent terms can be extended under some specific circumstances. See the U.S. Code Title 35 - Patents for a full description of patent laws. Understanding patent duration is important and here at IPStreet.com, we care about your patent duration, threats of patent infringement and the value of patent business intelligence.

Historically, commercial use of university research has been viewed in terms of spillovers. Recently, there has been a dramatic increase in technology transfer through licensing as universities attempt to appropriate the returns from faculty research. This change has prompted concerns regarding the source of this growth—specifically, whether it suggests a change in the nature of university research. (Thursby 2002) ^ University-based firms are receiving growing interest from policy makers and researchers. Such firms obtain a variety of tangible and intangible resources from their academic partners, and are expected to translate these advantages into substantial gains. (Bonardo 2011) ^Technology transfer is a big concern for universities, how can they identify business opportunities from IP developed? We have created relationships with universities to help them do just that. Contact us to learn more.

Building such a fortress around the invention makes it difficult for others to use the invention without getting a license. Depending on the policy of the organization and the type of the invention, the organization can then grant either exclusive or nonexclusive licenses to use the product. There are several ways to protect IP, but one should always remember that protecting IP is expensive. Therefore, an organization needs to think carefully about its competitors, likely infringers, and the geographical area where the invention is to be marketed. Sometimes keeping an invention as a trade secret might be the cheapest way to protect it. Sometimes patenting, even if more expensive, might give better protection. Finding the best way to build and protect an IP portfolio requires imagination, in addition to a thorough knowledge of the company and its product lines. A comprehensive IP portfolio can be of substantial value to both private and public sector entities. For both sectors, patents are a key element of an IP portfolio. Large companies can afford an offensive patent strategy, but small companies may not have the necessary resources for this. Therefore, especially for small- and middle-sized companies, proper planning and parallel thinking is required to develop an effective and cost efficient strategy. Join the IP Street community and learn more about protecting your intellectual property. We have developed a comprehensive network of patent lawyers to connect you to others that can help license, protect and commercialize your idea. Patent infringement is a serious threat and protecting your invention or patent idea is critical.

Myopia is generally what happens when unprecedented opportunities are placed before them. Those in the know generally do better than those in the worry. Consider Cetus, a startup biotech with a focus on a liver drug. The FDA delayed the approval of the drug, and a major funding crisis ensued. Chiron offered to take over the liabilities contingent on the sale of two patents (# 4,683,202 and # 4,683,195) to a third party, Roche Molecule for $300M (in 1993). This sale was stalled because DuPont challenged the validity of the patents, based on the formal claims written by the inventor (not a patent attorney), Kary Mullis. In the end, the soap opera turned out well for the investors with weak constitutions. For $300M, they sold the two patents to Roche, turned the company over to Chiron, and walked away. Kary Mullis won the Nobel prize for his invention embedded in these two patents, known as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) which allows DNA to be cloned. Over 4000 patents in biotech cite these original two patents. In our estimation, $300M represents "pennies on the dollar" valuation of these patents. The shareholders got a payday, and left the game. Roche on the other hand is thriving based on its intangible assets. Let IPstreet.com assist you.

The Japanese commissioner in Washington DC in the 1900's studying the American patent system said, "We have looked about us to see what nations are the greatest, so that we can be like them... We said, 'What makes the United States such a great nation?' and we investigated and found that it was patents, and we will have patents."