Patently Obvious ™
…powered by
™
Intellectual Property Analysis of Jones Soda Company U.S. Patent No. 6,493,677 Qu
Quark Images LLC v. Adidas AG et. al. August 27, 2010 “We intend to explore potential licensing arrangements with third parties to commercialize this patented methodology and defend against patent violations. We consider our trademarks, patents and trade secrets to be of considerable value and importance to our business." ‐ Jones Soda Co. 10‐K Report, FY 2009 Background Jones Soda Company was founded on the idea of offering unique alternative beverages. With a company motto of “Run with the little guy… Create some change,” Jones entered into an established market dominated by big names such as Coca‐Cola and Pepsi, advertising themselves as a home‐grown independent, providing niche craft‐style juice, energy, and soft drinks. One marketing technique the Jones Soda Company employed was to offer customized labels to their drinks. Through a simple online ordering process, a customer could upload a picture and order a set of six‐packs with the label personalized to their specifications. Though intended simply as a novelty, the concept resonated with Jones’ customer base, becoming a staple of their identity today. Seeing that no one else seemed to offer this service, the Jones Soda Company filed patents on the process in January of 2000. Recognizing the value of their intellectual property, Jones stated in their fiscal year 2009 annual report that they intended to pursue licensing arrangements with third parties in order to defend against patent violations. One such licensee was Longview, TX based Quark Images, LLC. On August 13th, Quark Images filed a suit against Adidas AG and 25 other defendants including Nike, Inc., Mars Inc., Capital One, Zions Bancorporation, BMW AG, and Hallmark Cards, Inc. Each of these defendants offer custom‐designed products and merchandise for order through their websites, whether they be running shoes, candy, or credit cards. Quark Images is requesting that the court prevent the defendants from future infringement of the patents in question and demands the award of money damages, attorney fees, and litigation costs. It is unclear whether the Jones Soda Company will receive compensation directly as a result of the outcome of this lawsuit. The information in this report was prepared by M•CAM, Inc. (“M•CAM”). M•CAM has used reasonable efforts in collecting, preparing and providing quality information and material, but does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, adequacy or currency of the information contained in this report. Users of the information do so at their own risk and should independently corroborate said information prior to any use of it. M•CAM is not responsible for the results of any defects that may be found to exist in this material, or any lost profits or other consequential damages that may result from such defects. The information contained in this report is not to be construed as advice and should not be confused as any sort of advice. M•CAM does not undertake to advise the recipient or any other reader of this report of changes in its opinions or information. This information is provided “as is.” M•CAM or its employees have or may have a long or short position or holding in the securities, options on securities, or other related investments of companies mentioned herein. This report is based on information available to the public. © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 1
Though founded on the premise of being the “little guy” benefiting consumers, Jones, via Quark Images, has initiated the equivalent of taking lunch money from the kindergarteners on the first day of school within the item customization space. If Quark Images wins this suit, regardless of the value that may result in the judgment, it will set a precedent establishing a serious liability that will hurt the consumers to which the Jones Soda Company originally catered. M•CAM has conducted an intellectual property analysis of Jones Soda Company’s U.S. Pat No. 6,493,677 licensed to Quark Images to understand the strength and defensibility in the face of prior and concurrent art innovations. Using M•CAM DOORS™ software platform, the innovation space surrounding the ‘677 patent was examined to determine which patent or patents may provide alternatives to or alter the value of ‘677 patent. Jones Soda Company patents licensed to Quark Images listed in the lawsuit against Adidas, et. al.: Document # US 6,845,365 US 6,493,677 Title Assignee Name Method and apparatus for creating and ordering customized branded merchandise over a computer network Method and apparatus for creating and ordering customized branded merchandise over a computer network Priority File Issue Jones Soda Co. 19‐Jan‐00 6‐Dec‐02 18‐Jan‐05 Jones Soda Co. 19‐Jan‐00 19‐Jan‐00 10‐Dec‐02 Intellectual Property Analysis Technology in ‘677 The ‘677 patent was filed with the USPTO on January 19, 2000. The ‘677 patent abstract reads as follows: “The present invention provides a method and apparatus for creating and ordering customized branded merchandise over a computer network. A Internet site is provided that allows a consumer to create and order customized branded merchandise, such as bottles of soda. A customer may visit the WWW site utilizing a standard WWW browser executing on a computer. Once the customer has registered with the WWW site, the customer may place an order for an item of customized branded merchandise. The customer may also be asked to identify a graphic image for customizing the requested merchandise. The graphic image may be a digital photograph taken by the customer or other type of graphic image. Once the customer has identified a graphic image, the graphic image may be displayed for editing. The customer may be permitted to crop the graphic image or perform other types of image manipulations. A preview of the cropped or manipulated image may also be provided for the customer. Once the customer is satisfied with the graphic image, the graphic image may be transmitted to the WWW server. Once the customer has specified order details, the customer may be asked to provide a billing and shipping address. The customer may then be asked to identify a payment method, and provide a credit card or other billing number. The customer may then be provided with a summary of the order details and asked to verify that all of the information is correct. If the information is correct, the customized branded merchandise item ordered by the customer will be created and shipped to the customer at address they provided.” Using M•CAM DOORS™, many examples of un‐cited prior art were identified that may limit the strength and breadth of the ‘677 patent claims. Three instances of precedent innovation (U.S. Pat. No. 6,088,710, held by R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company; U.S. Pat. No. 6,167,382, held by F.A.C. Services Group, L.P.; and U.S. Pat. No. 6,086,702, held by Reaperot Ltd. Inc.) are of particular interest. Document # Title Assignee Name Priority File Issue US 6,167,382 Design and production of print advertising and commercial display materials over the Internet F.A.C. Services Group, L.P. 1‐Jun‐98 1‐Jun‐98 26‐Dec‐00 US 6,086,702 Method for personalizing beverage container Reaperot Ltd. Inc. 14‐Jul‐98 14‐Jul‐98 11‐Jul‐00 US 6,088,710 Apparatus and method for producing fulfillment pieces on demand in a variable imaging system R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company 7‐Jun‐95 29‐Oct‐97 11‐Jul‐00 Excerpts from the claims of the ‘677, ‘382, ‘702 and ‘710 patents are provided to illustrate the similarities in innovation in this technology space. Key similarities are shown in bold. © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 2
Excerpt of claims from Jones Soda Company’s U.S. Patent No. 6,493,677 1. A method for creating and providing customized branded merchandise over a computer network, comprising: receiving a request for a merchandise item including a specification, wherein the merchandise item is associated with a manufacturer provided brand and wherein the specification corresponds to customizing an appearance of the merchandise item; customizing said merchandise item in accordance with said specification to create a customized merchandise item; branding said customized merchandise item with the manufacturer provided brand to create a branded customized merchandise item; and providing said branded customized merchandise item to a requestor of said merchandise item; wherein customizing said merchandise item, branding said customized merchandise item, and providing said branded customized merchandise item are part of an integrated process. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said specification comprises a graphic image provided by said requestor of said merchandise item. 3. The method of claim 2, wherein said specification further comprises a text message provided by said requestor of said merchandise item. 4. The method of claim 3, wherein customizing said merchandise item in accordance with said specification comprises displaying said graphic image and said text message on said merchandise item to create said customized merchandise item. 5. The method of claim 4, wherein branding said customized merchandise item comprises displaying a trademark on said customized merchandise item to create said branded customized merchandise item. © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. Excerpt of claims from R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company’s U.S. Patent No. 6,088,710 Excerpt of claims from F.A.C. Services Group, L.P.’s U.S. Patent No. 6,167,382 1. A method of reproducing books and fulfillment pieces in distribution order, wherein each book and fulfillment piece may include variable data, comprising the steps of: (a) modifying a database containing variable data for pages in the book to include reference to the fulfillment pieces; (b) creating template page files, the page files having fixed information and a placeholder at the location on the page where the variable data will be reproduced; (c) generating a press command file to specify the distribution order in which the pages and the fulfillment pieces should be reproduced; (d) interpreting the pages and fulfillment pieces according to the press command file, including incorporating the variable data from the database into the pages at the location of the corresponding placeholder; and (e) transmitting the pages and fulfillment pieces to a display device in distribution order. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the display device is a demand printer that prints the pages and fulfillment pieces. 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the display device is a computer. 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the pages and fulfillment pieces are transmitted to a computer network. 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of modifying the database comprises: (i) creating a controlling database containing variable data for the book, a record for each person and a column including a unique identification for each person; and (ii) creating a fulfillment database for each fulfillment piece, wherein each fulfillment database contains variable information for 1. A method for designing and producing a marketing piece as ordered by a client from a remote location, comprising the steps of: establishing a web site on a host computer, the client having access to the web site from the remote location; organizing an object database to have a plurality of objects, each of the objects having an address and a row in a record table, the objects including content objects, shell objects and slot objects, the content objects including image objects, each image object having associated therewith a low‐
resolution image file and a high‐resolution image file; storing the object database in a memory associated with an image processor; using search logic associated with the web site and search criteria supplied by the client, searching for one or more images for use in assembling the marketing piece, the search logic returning image search results; selecting at least one image from the search results for inclusion in the marketing piece; transmitting a low‐resolution image file to the client in response to the step of selecting; using design logic loaded on the web site, permitting the client to select among a plurality of shells, each of the shells corresponding to a shell object stored in the database, the shells each having at least one slot for the insertion of a content object, said at least one slot corresponding to a slot object stored in the database; inserting a selected image into said at least one slot; responsive to the step of inserting, forming a completed marketing piece design; transmitting parameters of the completed marketing piece design as a marketing piece order to the image processor through the web site; responsive to the image processor receiving 3
the fulfillment piece, a record for each person and a column including the unique identification for each person. the marketing piece order, creating a marketing piece design using at least one high resolution image file corresponding to the image inserted into said at least one slot; and using the completed marketing piece design to produce one or more copies of the marketing piece. Excerpt of claims from Reaperot Ltd. Inc.s U.S. Patent No. 6,086,702 1. A method for personalizing a beverage dispenser including the steps of (a) providing a container holding a beverage; (b) providing a field of labels each including (i) a front side and a back side, (ii) at least one letter of the alphabet imprinted on said front side; (c) mounting said labels on said container each at a selected location to permit said labels to be removed and adhered to said container at a location other than said selected location; and, In addition to the ‘382, ‘702 and ‘710 patents, M•CAM DOORS™ has identified other documents in the innovation space that may contain critical elements of enabling technologies that predate key aspects of the innovations described in the claims of the ’677 patent and may be of material importance to the litigation. For a sample list of these findings, please see Appendix 1. Public Domain Alternatives Many patents in the public domain go unconsidered and unnoticed by businesses. Incorporating public domain technologies into product development strategies can give existing research and development initiatives a head‐start with no additional investment, provide cost savings over proprietary alternatives, minimize licensing costs, stimulate overall innovation in this technology area and offer an avenue free of costly patent litigation suits. M•CAM DOORS™, has identified many patents which may provide public domain alternatives to the ‘677 patent, a sampling of which is included below. © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 4
Sample of Public Domain Patent Holdings related to customized branded merchandise: Document # US 6,925,196 US 6,522,945 Title Assignee Name US 5,768,135 Method and system for product selection Customer specific packaging line Digital image processing method and computer program product Electronic shopping system and method of defining electronic catalogue data therefor Custom apparel manufacturing apparatus and method US 5,765,874 Method for mass customization of printed materials US 5,748,755 Picture checks Custom product estimating and order processing system Apparatus and method for purchasing floral arrangements System for designing custom‐made, formfitted clothing, such as bathing suits, and method therefor System and method for automated selection of equipment for purchase through input of user desired specifications Order entry system having catalog assistance Design component selection computer with specification of product characteristics and of color by machine readable device US 6,154,577 US 6,128,600 US 5,570,291 US 5,440,479 US 5,163,006 US 4,992,940 US 4,984,155 US 4,931,929 US 4,926,344 US 4,916,624 Data storage structure of garment patterns to enable subsequent computerized prealteration Computerized system for prealteration of garment pattern data Priority File Issue The Robert Allen Group Merck & Company, Inc. 30‐Jan‐01 6‐Sep‐96 22‐Jan‐02 12‐Oct‐01 2‐Aug‐05 18‐Feb‐03 Eastman Kodak Company 30‐Nov‐95 13‐Nov‐96 28‐Nov‐00 Hitachi, Ltd. Custom Clothing Technology Corporation Custom Creative Insights Corporation Moore Business Forms, Inc. Wallace Computer Services, Inc. 28‐Feb‐97 23‐Feb‐98 3‐Oct‐00 12‐Aug‐94 19‐Apr‐96 16‐Jun‐98 9‐May‐95 9‐May‐95 16‐Jun‐98 8‐May‐92 25‐Apr‐96 5‐May‐98 24‐Aug‐94 31‐Aug‐94 29‐Oct‐96 Glenn W. Hutton 22‐Mar‐94 22‐Mar‐94 8‐Aug‐95 Deziel; Michelle 15‐Feb‐90 15‐Feb‐90 10‐Nov‐92 H‐Renee, Incorporated Square D Company 13‐Mar‐89 29‐Aug‐88 13‐Mar‐89 29‐Aug‐88 12‐Feb‐91 8‐Jan‐91 Search & Source, Incorporated 12‐Apr‐84 14‐Aug‐87 5‐Jun‐90 16‐Mar‐88 16‐Mar‐88 15‐May‐90 16‐Mar‐88 16‐Mar‐88 10‐Apr‐90 Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company Conclusion M•CAM’s intellectual property analysis has identified several examples of un‐cited prior art that may limit the strength and defensibility of Jones Soda Company’s U.S. Pat No. 6,845,365. The ripple effect of Quark Images’ antagonistic litigation of the Jones Soda Company merchandise customization patents will notably affect a growing industry and hinder its expansion in the future. Interestingly, the parties involved have focused primarily on sifting through patent prior art rather than considering relevant non‐patent information. The methods and processes described in the Jones Soda Company patents referenced in this lawsuit have their origins in the birth of the fulfillment industry, which for decades has matched uncorrelated products and built customer loyalty and customer experience. Just think back to the days when you got a toaster at the bank for opening an account or bought enough milk to complete your Corningware set. Today, this is performed by companies such as AGS Printing or CafePress, bCreative, Inc. and even Hallmark with customized greeting cards as far back as 1994. A defensive strategy would benefit greatly by looking outside of the patent system for usage examples of this concept. If these patents are enforced by the courts, licensing fees could be demanded from any entity, large or small, that provides customized products via the internet. Additionally, it could open up the Jones Soda Company to the threat of litigation brought forth by its own strategy. On their website, Jones states that they have always been about the people and interacting with the consumer. In the name of defending its intellectual property, Jones has shed its unconventional identity and donned the conventional suit and tie of the courtroom. © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 5
Appendix 1 Samples of Precedent Innovation: Document # Title Assignee Name US 6,414,693 System and method for generating computer displays of custom bag designs The Gem Group, Inc. US 6,167,382 US 6,086,702 Design and production of print advertising and commercial display materials over the Internet Method for personalizing beverage container Priority File Issue 12‐Oct‐99 12‐Oct‐99 2‐Jul‐02 F.A.C. Services Group, L.P. Reaperot Ltd. Inc. 1‐Jun‐98 14‐Jul‐98 1‐Jun‐98 14‐Jul‐98 26‐Dec‐00 11‐Jul‐00 US 6,088,710 Apparatus and method for producing fulfillment pieces on demand in a variable imaging system R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company 7‐Jun‐95 29‐Oct‐97 11‐Jul‐00 US 6,484,149 Systems and methods for viewing product information, and methods for generating web pages Microsoft Corporation 10‐Oct‐97 10‐Oct‐97 19‐Nov‐02 General Electric Company 16‐Apr‐99 16‐Apr‐99 19‐Feb‐02 Citibank, N.A. 30‐Jun‐98 30‐Jun‐99 19‐Feb‐02 Alcone Marketing Group 6‐Jan‐00 6‐Jan‐00 5‐Feb‐02 F.A.C. Services Group, L.P. 1‐Jun‐98 1‐Jun‐98 26‐Dec‐00 Anthony W. Ulwick 12‐Sep‐96 11‐Dec‐96 4‐Jul‐00 US 6,349,290 Method and system for selecting product colors Automated system and method for customized and personalized presentation of products and services of a financial institution US 6,344,853 Method and apparatus for selecting, modifying and superimposing one image on another US 6,349,300 US 6,167,382 US 6,085,165 Design and production of print advertising and commercial display materials over the Internet Process and system for outcome based mass customization Justsystem Corp. 13‐Nov‐97 29‐Jan‐98 4‐Apr‐00 US 6,016,504 US 5,999,908 Online gift‐presentation system including, a server system, terminal equipment, a gift‐
presenting method, and a computer‐readable recording medium Method and system for tracking the purchase of a product and services over the Internet Customer‐based product design module InfoSpace.com, Inc. Daniel H. Abelow 28‐Aug‐96 6‐Aug‐92 28‐Aug‐96 19‐Sep‐97 18‐Jan‐00 7‐Dec‐99 US 5,963,953 Method, and system for product configuration Siebel Systems, Inc. 30‐Mar‐98 30‐Mar‐98 5‐Oct‐99 US 5,950,173 System and method for delivering consumer product related information to consumers within retail environments using internet‐
based information servers and sales agents IPF, Inc. 25‐Oct‐96 12‐May‐97 7‐Sep‐99 US 5,748,484 System for printing social expression cards in response to electronically transmitted orders Onkor, Ltd. 23‐Sep‐92 7‐Feb‐96 5‐May‐98 US 5,710,887 US 5,664,110 Computer system and method for electronic commerce Remote ordering system Broadvision Highpoint Systems, Inc. 29‐Aug‐95 8‐Dec‐94 29‐Aug‐95 8‐Dec‐94 20‐Jan‐98 2‐Sep‐97 US 5,548,519 Custom apparel manufacturing apparatus and method Custom Clothing Technology Corporation 12‐Aug‐94 12‐Aug‐94 20‐Aug‐96 US 5,442,771 Method for storing data in an interactive computer network Prodigy Services Company 15‐Jul‐88 26‐Nov‐93 15‐Aug‐95 US 5,383,111 Visual merchandizing (VMD) control method and system 6‐Oct‐89 9‐Oct‐90 17‐Jan‐95 US 5,377,097 Customer order processing system Hitachi, Ltd. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. 26‐Nov‐91 20‐Nov‐92 27‐Dec‐94 US 5,341,305 A computerized pattern development system capable of direct designer input Gerber Garment Technology, Inc. 2‐May‐91 2‐May‐91 23‐Aug‐94 US 6,047,265 © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 6
Samples of Concurrent Innovation: Document # US 7,216,092 US 6,901,378 US 6,782,418 US 6,705,218 US 7,627,695 US 7,627,503 US 7,580,871 US 7,568,017 Title Assignee Name Intelligent personalization system and method Method and system for automatically displaying an image and a product in a page based on contextual interaction and metadata Method and apparatus for secure data file uploading Method and apparatus for printing a beverage label having a static part and a variable part Network‐based system for configuring a programmable hardware element in a system using hardware configuration programs generated based on a user specification Online system of ordering and specifying consumer product having specific configurations Method to generate a customizable product configurator Generating a configuration diagram based on user specification of a task US 7,397,579 Network‐linked interactive three‐dimensional composition and display of saleable objects in situ in viewer‐selected scenes for purposes of object promotion and procurement, and generation of object advertisements Producing printing images having personalized features In‐line fabric labeling printing system and associated method of use US 7,386,491 Merchandise order receiving system and merchandise order receiving method US 7,523,411 US 7,437,024 Priority File Issue Deluxe Corporation 14‐Apr‐00 14‐Apr‐00 8‐May‐07 Corbis Corporation 2‐Mar‐00 2‐Mar‐00 31‐May‐05 General Electric Company 24‐Jan‐00 24‐Jan‐00 24‐Aug‐04 The Jolt Company, Inc. 20‐Dec‐01 23‐Apr‐02 16‐Mar‐04 National Instruments Corporation 18‐Jan‐05 18‐Jan‐05 1‐Dec‐09 Ford Motor Company 5‐Nov‐99 5‐Apr‐00 1‐Dec‐09 Siebel Systems, Inc. 31‐Aug‐01 31‐Aug‐01 25‐Aug‐09 National Instruments Corporation 15‐Aug‐01 8‐Jan‐03 28‐Jul‐09 Not Available 22‐Aug‐00 20‐Feb‐02 21‐Apr‐09 Shutterfly, Inc. 24‐Nov‐99 12‐Oct‐04 14‐Oct‐08 1‐Oct‐03 24‐Dec‐03 8‐Jul‐08 16‐Oct‐00 10‐Oct‐01 10‐Jun‐08 The Coburn Company, Inc. Sony Corporation © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 7
M•CAM’s Patent Glossary Aligned Sector: The business sector in which the product(s) resulting from the patent(s) is currently or intended to be sold. Applicant: The person or corporation that applies for a patent with the intent to use, manufacture or license the technology of the invention; under U.S. law, except in special situations, the applicant(s) must be the inventor(s). Application: Complete papers submitted to the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office seeking a patent including oath, specification, claims, and drawings. This usually does not signify a Provisional Patent Application, but only a regular patent application. Art: The established practice and public knowledge within a given field of technology. This also identifies a process or method used to produce a useful result. A term used in consideration of the problem of patentable novelty encompassing all that is known prior to the filing date of the application in the particular field of the invention. Assignee: The person(s) or corporate body to whom the law grants or vests a patent right. This refers to the person or corporate entity that is identified as the receiver of an assignment. Business Method A patent that controls the way a business process is undertaken. The issuance of these patents by the United Patent: States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is new and controversial, since many allege that it is unfair to allow a patent on a way of doing business. Citation: This may include patents or journal articles that the applicant or examiner deems relevant to a current application. A reference to legal authorities or a prior art documentation are examples of a citation. Claim: The language in a patent application that defines the legal scope of the patent. Most patents have numerous claims. This is typically the single most important section in the application. Concurrent Art: Concurrent art occurs when related patent applications are being examined by the USPTO at the same time. It is difficult for any company or inventor to know, at the time they file for a patent, whether a “related” patent application exists. Filing Date: The date when a properly prepared application reaches the patent office in complete form. Innovation Cycle: A description of the commercialization timeframe for the intellectual property. Innovation Space: M•CAM’s representation of the innovation(s) that occur before, during, and after the pending period of the subject patent. The innovation space is the first place to look for patents that are closely related to the subject patent and that may impact the defensibility of the subject patent or create opportunities for patent licensing. Issue Date: Non‐Aligned Sector: Pod: Not to be confused with the filing date, which is the date the patent application was physically received by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. This is the date on which the patent actually issues. Any sector in which the patent can be used or sold, other than the sector for which the patent or resultant product was invented or intended. A group of patents owned by a company that should be treated as a single unit of innovation (e.g., a certain group of patents that comprise a single product or multiple related products). Prior Art: Any relevant patent that was issued before the patent being analyzed. If this previous patent was specifically mentioned in the new patent’s application, the previous patent is referred to as “cited prior art”. If it was NOT mentioned, then that previous patent is referred to as “uncited prior art”. Subsequent Art: Any patent that has a filing date with the USPTO that is after the issuance date of the subject patent. This subsequent art patent may or may not have cited (see “Citation” above) the subject patent. As subsequent art represents more recent innovation than the subject patent, it has great potential to shrink the market opportunity for the subject patent. © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 8
A Brief Primer on the Patent System In recent years, the importance of patents and intellectual property rights as an important variable in the marketplace has come to the forefront of the public consciousness as world leaders declare their country’s lead in the innovation race. Damaging intellectual property litigation is becoming increasingly common across all industries. This is exacerbated when patent rights are granted for non‐novel ideas. A vast amount of precedent innovation is unconsidered by patent‐granting authorities in the creation of new IP rights. Patent granting authorities including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), European Patent Office (EPO), Japanese Patent Office (JPO), Chinese State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO), Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) and many others are constrained by the use of patent classification systems which are routinely circumvented by patent applicants. There is a two‐way social contract underlying the patent system. In the United States, patent terms are generally limited to 20 years from the date of application. By statutory intention, once a patent has expired, the patent holder loses the right to exclude others from fully utilizing any innovation described in the patent. A large number of patents enter the public domain when they are “abandoned” – when owners discontinue paying patent maintenance fees. Patents also only provide an exclusionary right in the country for which the patent is filed. As demonstrated by the Global Innovation Commons1 (G.I.C.), using intellectual property available in the public domain eliminates the need to pay licensing fees on those innovations in countries where the patent was never registered, or worldwide, if abandoned. Patently Obvious™ is a weekly report focusing on select groups of patents in order to increase transparency in markets, addressing information asymmetries, and providing a more level playing field for all parties. 1
http://www.globalinnovationcommons.org/ © 2010 M•CAM, Inc. 9