Posts Tagged ‘IPR’

A “Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights” in a Global world of standards and competition policies

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

The IPR Strategy recognizes explicitly that IPRs create a host of ways for innovators to extract value and reward, and that each is valid. It recognizes that businesses should not be hampered in finding new models to value their IPR. Most strikingly for the standards world, the Communication expressly recognizes in the context of standardization that licensing is an important part of it and that “many European companies nowadays generate a large part of their revenue through licensing of their IP portfolios (page 5)”. The IPR strategy only refers to standardization once, at page 5, and it is interesting that the text looks only at the importance of IP licensing regimes (and by implication the success of the current FRAND patent policy underlying the global standards world), not only in fostering take up for standards, but in incentivizing repeat contributions to allow the standards to evolve. However, as relates the text’s reference to ‘diligent management of IPR’, the management of IPR should be based on commercial decisions, not state involvement (as occurs in copyright). The GSM patent pool model is not necessarily capable of replication.  The success of UMTS, also referred to in the Communication is based on an open licensing model.  It is up to the owners of IPR to decide how best to manage their IPR, and if they are considering joining a standards organizations that standards organization’s IPR rules are clear and balanced so that potential members can make decisions about participation.
Read More…

A Single Market for IPR – Necessary, but not Comprehensive Enough to Boost Innovation and Growth in Europe

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

The Communication of the European Commission about a “Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights” provides a comprehensive approach of initiatives covering all relevant Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs).  All proposed initiatives are justified based on the current knowledge about the economic impacts of IPRs and other intangibles on companies’, but also economies’ competitiveness and growth. Furthermore, the current fragmentation of the markets for IPRs in Europe is certainly a disadvantage for European companies especially related to the United States of America, Japan and, meanwhile, also China. However, the approach is not comprehensive enough to boost innovation in Europe.


Read More…

Putting Knowledge into Practice

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

Most European-based institutions – not least the European Commission – consider IPRs to be an important aspect (among other issues) in the EU’s ability to compete in the global economy, as EU growth and jobs are hampered when ideas, brands and products are counterfeited and pirated.

Indeed IPRs, including patents, trademarks, design rights and copyrights, can serve as incentives for innovation and can help identify trusted producers. In this context, there is no doubt that the latest Strategy for European Intellectual Property Rights reflects the belief in the IP system as a power-hub for innovation in Europe.

Yet the success of this strategy does not only depend on the EU’s ability to effectively implement this strategy, not least with regard to the registration, protection and enforcement of IPRs in Europe.


Read More…

Upcoming: Balancing Antitrust and IPR Protection in EU Legislation

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

The IPR Strategy recognizes explicitly that IPRs create a host of ways for innovators to extract value and reward, and that each is valid. It recognizes that businesses should not be hampered in finding new models to value their IPR. Most strikingly for the standards world, the Communication expressly recognizes in the context of standardization that licensing is an important part of it and that “many European companies nowadays generate a large part of their revenue through licensing of their IP portfolios (page 5)”. The IPR strategy only refers to standardization once, at page 5, and it is interesting that the text looks only at the importance of IP licensing regimes (and by implication the success of the current FRAND patent policy underlying the global standards world), not only in fostering take up for standards, but in incentivizing repeat contributions to allow the standards to evolve…..


Read More…

Upcoming: A Single Market for IPR – Necessary, but not comprehensive enough

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

The Communication of the European Commission about a “Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights” provides a comprehensive approach of initiatives covering all relevant Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). However, the approach is not comprehensive enough to boost innovation in Europe……


Read More…

Upcoming: Putting Knowledge into Practice

Monday, June 6th, 2011

Most European-based institutions – not least the European Commission – consider IPRs to be an important aspect (among other issues) in the EU’s ability to compete in the global economy, as EU growth and jobs are hampered when ideas, brands and products are counterfeited and pirated.


Read More…

Summary: EU Standardization – From Formalism to Pragmatism?

Monday, February 28th, 2011

On wednesday February 23, Talkstandards.com held an online open forum to discuss a number of issues related to recent EU policy developments, building upon our December 22nd mini-event “European Interoperability Strategy“.  Two communications released late last year by the European Commission related to e-Government and standardization – the European Interoperability Framework version 2 and updated Guidelines for the assessment of horizontal cooperation agreements – were central to the discussion, particularly the inclusion of FRAND licensing within the EIF specification of a open standard.


Read More…

A More Pragmatic Approach to IPR

Wednesday, February 23rd, 2011

The topic of the forum this week is: EU standardization – from formalism to pragmatism?

The ‘question mark’ depicts an open ended question which leads to other questions:

• Was EU standardization based on formalism?
• Is it now based on pragmatism?
• What do these two terms mean anyway?
Read More…

H.264: Double Standards in the Standards World – PART 2

Friday, February 4th, 2011

I posted about H.264 and WebM earlier this week and this post extends that discussion to an ecosystem perspective.

The H.264 vs WebM discussion goes to the heart of how we define the term ‘standard’.  There are many interpretations of what exactly constitutes a standard, but central to the meaning of a standard is the notion of collaboration between companies and the creation of a viable ecosystem. Hence, standards are often tied to the idea of shared control and a defined governance process. Control can take many facets: the ability to contribute to the specification, the ability to change the specification, transparency etc.  People often conflate the concept of open standards and open source software and this is one area where confusion can be problematic.
Read More…

H.264: Double Standards in the Standards World

Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011

The H.264 standard has been getting a lot of press recently due to the announcement that Google will drop H.264 support from Chrome in favour of WebM, and the subsequent clarification of H.264 support from Google. In this post, we try to clarify the issue from a standards perspective and explain the complexities in the standards and open source world.


Read More…




An active online community where developers, researchers, policymakers and other interested parties can share ideas and collaborate on the global standards system.