A traditional definition of intellectual property auditing is "cataloging the organization's intellectual property assets". The organization must meet its due diligence requirements for mergers, acquisitions or other transfers. Today, organizations believe that intellectual property audits are not only a balance sheet of intangible assets, but more importantly, as a self-assessment, organizations are consistently involved in determining the value of their assets and determining how best to be in a changing economy. In the face of the legal ecosystem, use these assets to keep abreast of changes in the value of their assets.
Who should conduct an intellectual property audit?
"Intellectual Property Audit" is a bit of a misnomer. It shows that auditing is simply the calculation of assets, and the person conducting the audit simply adds up the intellectual property found in the organization and reports its value. Nothing will be far from the truth. Intellectual property audits are essentially a legal commitment and should be contracted by attorneys with at least intellectual property law expertise, internal or external legal counsel, or by internal staff. Organizations, if they have sufficient knowledge of the organization's intellectual property, can perform the activities required to organize an IP audit. Intellectual property auditing is not an accounting function. Intellectual property audits are an assessment of the legal status and value of an organization's intellectual property, particularly in relation to the organization's marketing and management objectives and the existing protection of the organization's intellectual property. Somehow not suitable for each other. Lawyers or lawyers and other team members [teams may consist of intellectual property attorneys and at least one representative in each of the management, marketing and technology fields; due to the inherent legal significance of intellectual property audits, at least one member if prior to the organization's technology, The organization's marketing and management objectives have a certain level of expertise, and have a certain understanding of the content of intellectual property, then the team must be protected by the intellectual property lawyers selected to audit: through the litigation and appeal procedures to sue registration applications, maintain property and By protecting intellectual property rights.
When to conduct an intellectual property audit
When should the organization consider conducting an IP audit? Attorney Leslie J. Lott identified several specific IP audit times in the life of an organization; in this section, I borrowed heavily from her listings and reviews.
New intellectual property management
If the organization has new IP management, the new IP manager should conduct a thorough IP audit to familiarize with the state of the portfolio.
Merger, acquisition, major stock purchase
Significant company changes [mergers, acquisitions, major stock purchases] may affect intellectual property ownership; this is another sign of intellectual property auditing.
Transfer or transfer of intellectual property rights
Transferring or transferring intellectual property from one organization to another requires an intellectual property audit of both organizations. Intellectual property. Here, intellectual property audits allow organizations to ensure that transfers or transfers are in the interests of both, to ensure that intellectual property rights are properly protected, and to enhance the existing intellectual property interests of the acquiring organization. Intellectual property rights do not leave any plans for the transfer of interest. Vulnerabilities.
Licensing plan
When an organization establishes an intellectual property license or licensing program, it should periodically conduct an intellectual property audit. Whether the organization is a licensor or a licensee, this is important.
If an organization licenses its intellectual property to others, it must of course have licensed intellectual property. In addition, there must be no existing licenses that may interfere with the proposed new license.
If the organization is the licensee and obtains the intellectual property rights of others, the audit determines that the scope and scope of the license is sufficient for its purpose.
Major changes in the law
Significant changes in the case or statutory law may require the organization to reassess its intellectual property.
When the Congress passed the federal anti-dilution regulations, the statutory law changed. This change in law has had a major impact on the analysis of the potential liability of organizations to infringe on the trademarks of others, as well as an analysis of whether others have violated organizational rights.
Four examples of case law that trigger the need for intellectual property audits are Qualitex case Case [involving color protection as a trademark], Sony Case [addressing whether the device that can be used for copyright infringement itself violates copyright], Festo Case [involving the equivalent principle in patent application] and case KSR Case [involving the concepts that are obvious in patent law].
Financial transactions involving intellectual property
Financial transactions involving intellectual property may include loans, public offerings, private placements, or any other transaction directly related to the organization's intellectual property, or any other transaction in which the organization's intellectual property has or may be significant.
New customer plan or policy
The organization shall conduct intellectual property audits of new programs or policies, such as active foreign application plans, new marketing methods or directions, product line or service expansion, corporate restructuring or any interaction between the intellectual property and the market that may affect the organization.
Continued Part III.
Copyright 2003, 2007, Nancy Baum Delain. all rights reserved.
Orignal From: Intellectual Property Audit - Find what you have (Part 2)
No comments:
Post a Comment