1. Recently I participated in an event sponsored by Briggs and Morgan, P.A. and the University of Minnesota Law School, titled "Non-Practicing Entities: Abusive 'Patent Trolls' or Free Enterprise Drivers of Innovation?" The conference was not recorded, but all of the written materials from the event are now available on the IntellectualIP.com blog. (My own written materials are also separately available here.) Speakers included me ("Do Patent Assertion Entities Help or Hinder Innovation? A Review of the Principal Arguments"); my colleague Professor Ruth Okediji ("Issues and Trends in State Actions Against NPEs"); Karen McDaniel ("Litigation When Sued by a Patent Assertion Entity"); 3M's Eric Drange ("Litigating Against NPEs--In-House Strategies"); and Michael Lafeber ("'You Can't Tell the Players Without a Program!': Pending Legislation Aimed at NPEs"). (As I reported on May 21, however, one of those pieces of pending legislation got pulled from consideration just as the conference was ending!) We had some excellent discussions, and I urge you to check out the written materials.
For more on the same topic, see this recent article from the Wall Street Journal on state efforts to combat patent trolls. See also this article by Joe Mullin and this blog post by Ben Snitkoff, on a bill recently introduced in the House that is intended to make it more difficult for PAEs to proceed before the U.S. International Trade Commission, which (as I have discussed previously) is authorized only to award injunctive relief (exclusion orders).
2. As I mentioned last month, I also will be participating in Global Competition Review's Live 2d Annual IP & Antitrust Conference in Brussels, Belgium, on Monday, June 23, 2014. Here is a link to the event. (In response to a question I received last month, I don't know at this point whether an audio recording of the event will be available on GCR's website after the event. I don't believe the event will be streamed.) Here is the full program:
8.30: Welcome coffee and registration
9.00: Chairs' welcome
9.10: Keynote address
Bo Vesterdorf, Herbert Smith Freehills, former President of The European Court of First Instance
9.50: Session one: Reflections on the new Technology Transfer Block Exemption and its implications
Moderator:
Nadine Herrmann, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan
Introductory Speaker: Anna Vernet, Policy Analyst, DG Competition, European Commission
Panel:
David Hull, Van Bael & Bellis
Paul Lugard, Baker Botts
11.00: Coffee break
11.20: Session two: Patent “hold up”- the theoretical and empirical basis for antitrust intervention
The panel will focus on two questions: (i) holdup is an old theory in economics, but applied to IP more recently, in the early 2000s. How well does the theory translate to patents? Does holdup apply only to patent holders or to licensees as well? What assumptions underlie the theory? Are all of the assumptions met in practice?; (ii) What evidence is available that holdup is a real and not just theoretical concern? What kinds of evidence should we see if holdup were a commonplace problem?
Moderator:
Anne Layne-Farrar, Charles River Associates
Panel:
Thomas F. Cotter, University of Minnesota Law School
Jorge Contreras, Washington College of Law, American UniversityDavid Teece, University of California, Berkeley
12.40: Networking lunch
14.00: Chairs' introduction
14.15: Session three: Injunctive relief and SEPs after the Samsung Article 9 commitment and Motorola Article 102 infringement decisions
Moderator:
Trevor Soames, Shearman & Sterling
Introductory speaker: Nicholas Banasevic, Head of Unit, Antitrust - IT, Internet and Consumer Electronics, DG Competition, European Commission
Panel:
Maurits Dolmans, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton
James Flynn Q.C., Brick Court Chambers
Nicolas Petit, IEJE University of Liège
Sven Völcker, Latham & Watkins
15.45: Coffee break
16.05: Session four: Licensing under FRAND commitments: current practice and recent debate
Moderator:
Jorge Padilla, Compass Lexecon
Panel:
Benno Buehler, Economist, DG Competition, European Commission
Bart van den Broek, Hoyng Monegier
Miranda Cole, Covington & Burling
Patrick Hofkens, Ericsson Jenni Lukander, Director, Global Head of Competition Law, Nokia
17.30: Chairs’ closing remarks
17:45 Close of conference
For more on the same topic, see this recent article from the Wall Street Journal on state efforts to combat patent trolls. See also this article by Joe Mullin and this blog post by Ben Snitkoff, on a bill recently introduced in the House that is intended to make it more difficult for PAEs to proceed before the U.S. International Trade Commission, which (as I have discussed previously) is authorized only to award injunctive relief (exclusion orders).
2. As I mentioned last month, I also will be participating in Global Competition Review's Live 2d Annual IP & Antitrust Conference in Brussels, Belgium, on Monday, June 23, 2014. Here is a link to the event. (In response to a question I received last month, I don't know at this point whether an audio recording of the event will be available on GCR's website after the event. I don't believe the event will be streamed.) Here is the full program:
8.30: Welcome coffee and registration
9.00: Chairs' welcome
9.10: Keynote address
Bo Vesterdorf, Herbert Smith Freehills, former President of The European Court of First Instance
9.50: Session one: Reflections on the new Technology Transfer Block Exemption and its implications
Moderator:
Nadine Herrmann, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan
Introductory Speaker: Anna Vernet, Policy Analyst, DG Competition, European Commission
Panel:
David Hull, Van Bael & Bellis
Paul Lugard, Baker Botts
11.00: Coffee break
11.20: Session two: Patent “hold up”- the theoretical and empirical basis for antitrust intervention
The panel will focus on two questions: (i) holdup is an old theory in economics, but applied to IP more recently, in the early 2000s. How well does the theory translate to patents? Does holdup apply only to patent holders or to licensees as well? What assumptions underlie the theory? Are all of the assumptions met in practice?; (ii) What evidence is available that holdup is a real and not just theoretical concern? What kinds of evidence should we see if holdup were a commonplace problem?
Moderator:
Anne Layne-Farrar, Charles River Associates
Panel:
Thomas F. Cotter, University of Minnesota Law School
Jorge Contreras, Washington College of Law, American UniversityDavid Teece, University of California, Berkeley
12.40: Networking lunch
14.00: Chairs' introduction
14.15: Session three: Injunctive relief and SEPs after the Samsung Article 9 commitment and Motorola Article 102 infringement decisions
Moderator:
Trevor Soames, Shearman & Sterling
Introductory speaker: Nicholas Banasevic, Head of Unit, Antitrust - IT, Internet and Consumer Electronics, DG Competition, European Commission
Panel:
Maurits Dolmans, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton
James Flynn Q.C., Brick Court Chambers
Nicolas Petit, IEJE University of Liège
Sven Völcker, Latham & Watkins
15.45: Coffee break
16.05: Session four: Licensing under FRAND commitments: current practice and recent debate
Moderator:
Jorge Padilla, Compass Lexecon
Panel:
Benno Buehler, Economist, DG Competition, European Commission
Bart van den Broek, Hoyng Monegier
Miranda Cole, Covington & Burling
Patrick Hofkens, Ericsson Jenni Lukander, Director, Global Head of Competition Law, Nokia
17.30: Chairs’ closing remarks
17:45 Close of conference
No comments:
Post a Comment