2013: how was it for you?

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

2013: how was it for you?

Was 2013 a tough year for patent owners, or did it bring positive developments? And what does 2014 have in store?

scotus.jpg

According to IP Nav, a company which monetises clients’ IP portfolios, 2013 was “a tough year for patent owners”.

Exhibit number one, according to IP Nav’s blog post, was that “[US] Congress seems hell-bent on eroding the rights of patent owners”. Further evidence came in the form of attacks on IP by economists (which we commented on here) and proposed intervention by the US Supreme Court on fee awards and software patentability.

You might add that developments outside the US reinforce this argument, such as the Glivec decision in India and Commissioner Almunia’s comments about competition and patents in Europe.

However, I’m not sure all patent owners would agree with IP Nav’s analysis: some at least welcome the Congressional action; data suggests that inventors are still filing patents in record numbers, particularly in emerging markets in Asia; there were some significant damages awards; patent portfolios are still being traded; and there are signs that transparency is increasing. Many patent practitioners say they had their busiest, and most lucrative, years ever.

jorna-kerstin-400.jpg

The past 12 months also saw a number of developments that may or may not lead to good news for patent owners in the longer term, depending on what happens this year (and to some extent on your personal perspective). As well as the Innovation Act and its siblings in Congress, there is the EU Unitary Patent and UPC (discussed by European Commission official Kerstin Jorna (left) this week); plans to harmonise trade secrets protection in the EU; and the global PPH which launched this week.

What else can we expect in 2014? Some clarity about patent eligibility from the US Supreme Court in the Alice case would be welcome along with strong leadership, or indeed any leadership, at the USPTO. European practitioners would like to see more details about the UPC rules and the unitary patent costs while in China we will find out what Shen Changyu brings to the role of SIPO director. More generally, competition issues and particularly FRAND cases will get lots of attention and hopefully some resolution.

Here are two further predictions, though Managing IP accepts no responsibility if they turn out to be wrong: Apple and Samsung will settle their multi-jurisdiction dispute; and consolidation of IP practices, particularly in Europe, will accelerate.

How was your 2013 in patents? And what are your hopes and fears for 2014? Please send us your comments.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The renowned food brands were represented by a host of lawyers, including members of the firms’ IP teams
Partners at Bird & Bird and Taylor Wessing discuss how Saudi Arabia offers unique opportunities for firms dealing in IP and tech
Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Gift this article