Laws of nature: Galileo would not be able to patent his findings from his experiments at the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Physical phenomena: Patent law classifies physical phenomena as products of nature. Thus, if your invention occurs in nature, it is a physical phenomenon and cannot be patented. Abstract ideas: Abstract ideas are concepts like pure mathematics and algorithms. You cannot patent a formula. However, you can patent an application of that formula. Thus, while you cannot patent a mathematical formula that produces nonrepeating patterns, you can patent paper products that use that formula to prevent rolls of paper from sticking together. Literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works: These can be Copyright protected. Inventions, which are considered not useful or possible: For example, the USPTO will not issue a patent on a perpetual motion machines; or offensive to public morality.

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.

Let IPstreet.com help you keep your patent portfolio organized. Organize your patents into groups, related to your product offerings. Identify each patent into a few tiers, where top-tiered patents are of higher commercial importance. This internal ranking can help identify which patents to maintain both domestically and internationally. Additionally, such a simple ranking will allow for establishing strategic enforcement guidelines. Resources are limited, so knowledge to identify which patents are most important can result in better utilization of resources. Using our patent search tools, you can better understand the value of a patent and analytics behind it.

"Reputation management is an important factor in attracting partners and external funding. From interviews with CEOs and CTOs of nine large industrial and publicly funded firms, we have a clear indication that a corporate R&D lab's well-managed reputation has a direct impact on the firm's brand value. In other words, corporate research labs should not be measured only by their technological outcome, but also by the impact they have on a firm's brand value," according to Gassman et al., 2009, Research Technology Management, "R&D Reputation and Corporate Brand Value." The tools IP Street offers will help you identify (1) patents that significantly influence your brand (2) why the patents are significant (3) Internally communicate what, why, and how a patent influences brand to get executive-level buy-in and (4) Communicate to your customers what, why, and how to further develop the brand's impact.

Patents to plants which are stable and reproduced by asexual reproduction, and not a potato or other edible tuber reproduced plant, are provided for by Title 35 United States Code, Section 161 which states: Whoever invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of plant, including cultivated sports, mutants, hybrids, and newly found seedlings, other than a tuber propagated plant or a plant found in an uncultivated state, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of title. (Amended September 3, 1954, 68 Stat. 1190). The plant patent must also satisfy the general requirements of patentability. The subject matter of the application would be a plant which developed or discovered by applicant, and which has been found stable by asexual reproduction. To be patentable, it would also be required: (1) That the plant was invented or discovered and, if discovered, that the discovery was made in a cultivated area. (2)That the plant is not a plant which is excluded by statute, where the part of the plant used for asexual reproduction is not a tuber food part, as with potato or Jerusalem artichoke. (3) That the person or persons filing the application are those who actually invented the claimed plant; i.e., discovered or developed and identified or isolated the plant, and asexually reproduced the plant. (4) That the plant has not been sold or released in the United States of America more than one year prior to the date of the application. (5)That the plant has not been enabled to the public, i.e., by description in a printed publication in this country more than one year before the application for patent with an offer to sale; or by release or sale of the plant more than one year prior to application for patent. (6) That the plant be shown to differ from known, related plants by at least one distinguishing characteristic, which is more than a difference caused by growing conditions or fertility levels, etc. (7) The invention would not have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of invention by applicant.