What I learned this semester

            The class that I most looked forward to lecture and doing the homework for was by far IEOR 190G with professor Tal Lavian. This is one of the first classes that I have taken at Cal in which the material we learned was directly relevant to the real world. Our homework even included write-ups on real world cases, which kept me knowledgeable with regard to what was happening in the industry. One of my favorite aspects of the class were the guest speakers from the Intellectual Property community. As a business major, I was really interested in how patents affect the value of a company, and the importance of patents in creating a business strategy. I also learned a lot about the niches of patent litigation. For example, the East District of Texas sees a lot of patent cases due to its pro-plaintiff bias! This class has really sparked an interest in patents for me, which I had little to no knowledge before. This week, I was a volunteer at the Keiretsu Forum, a venture capital expo with 12 startups pitching. A lot of the investors questions had to deal with the companies patent portfolios and hot the licensing and sale of patents could help mitigate failure risk and loss of investment. Having taking IEOR 190G, I was able to understand the different types of intellectual property protection. When I am evaluating devices and services, I now look at things through a patent perspective, which I had never before thought of. I really enjoyed this class, and am excited to continue my involvement with SCET and hopefully take other classes with Professor Lavian.

Social media as a learning tool

This semester, I maintained a blog, twitter, and YouTube channel for my IEOR class. The use of social media in the class was very interesting, as it enabled me to develop a learning community with my peers. I subscribed to my peers in the class on twitter, which enabled me to receive live updates on cases that were happening in the patent and intellectual property world. Students utilized the hashtag #Berkeley190G which enabled us to filter the twitter and get only intellectual property related content. Many students imbedded links into their tweets, which enabled their peers to go to the site and read more about the specific case. During my time in the class, I purchased a subscription to Law360, which by far had the best content on Intellectual Property. My favorite part of using social media was commenting on my peers blogs and videos. I was able to learn about a variety of cases from my peers, as they included more analysis than many of the news articles that are available on the web.

I also liked the YouTube videos, as it was helpful to hear my peers elaborate even further on the articles. The videos also included their opinion on the case, which was insightful to see how they interpreted the case. Social media also made doing the homework fun, as it was a good change from the traditional style of all my other courses. As a business major, this is the first time I had taken a course in the engineering department, and I thought that the peer community developed through social media helped me to understand the technical aspect of patents. I was able to meet with peers in technical majors outside of class to further discuss patents.

Apple and Google call truce in Smart Phone Patent War

Two technology titans, Apple and Google, called a truce in mid-May 2014. In a joint statement, Apple and Google agreed to dismiss all current lawsuits that exist directly between the two companies. The patent lawsuits that the companies filed against each other stemmed from Apple suing Motorola in a federal court four years ago. When Google acquired Motorola Mobility in 2012, it was forced to take on the huge legal tasks of settling the pending lawsuits. Apple has been active in suing those who infringe, including Google for its android software and Samsung for its design features.

    

     The legal truce between Apple and Google does not take the pressure off of smartphone maker Samsung, who is seeking minimal damages from Apple in patent infringement litigation. The Japanese Intellectual Property High Court ruled that Apple infringed on data transmission technology in their iPhone 4 and iPad 2, which Samsung has patents on. Apple and Samsung are involved in several patent litigation cases in several different countries and courts at the same time. Apple was awarded $119.6 million in damages by jurors in a Silicon Valley trial. While this may seem like a large award, it is only a small fraction of the $2BN + that Apple has sought from Samsung in the smartphone and tablet war. In this particular case, Samsung violated three of five key patents. Often times there is no clear winner in the cases, as the firms appeal the cases and they are sometimes over turned or invalidated.

Apple Requests Additional $180 million

In December 2015, Apple won a patent battle with smart phone maker Samsung that forces the Korean phone manufacturer to payout $548 million in damages to Apple. Now, Apple is asking a U.S Court to force Samsung to pay an additional $180 million that they believe Samsung owes them. The infringement occurred on five mobile phones that were sold beginning in 2012. The requested $180 million includes both interest and supplemental damages. Apple in the initial case demanded that Samsung pay $2.5 billion. The appeals court went through will the infringement case when they found merit to the legality of Apple’s trademark claim on the iPhone’s custom designed back.

The majority of the damages are based on a jury finding Samsung guilty of infringement on appearance, and Samsung argues that it makes no sense for a maker of complex devices to have to pay damages of “full profit” for infringing on a minor design element. Samsung is particularly concerned with this patent litigation because it allows “design patents alone among intellectual property rights as a basis to obtain windfall awards far exceeding any inventive contribution” (Law360). It has been standard procedure for full profits to be paid out for design patent infringement, so it is going to be hard for Samsung to recoup some of its money. Samsung is going to have to get a high court to hear the case and ultimately rule that the damages awarded to Apple were excessive. There is one way out that is up in the air for Samsung. The claims of Apple patents that Samsung was found to infringe on were found invalid by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in a re-examination this year. Apple is appealing that ruling, but if it is upheld, then Samsung will be off the hook for paying Apple.

                          

Silly Patents - Baby Bottom Art

         Baby bottom art is one of the most insane patents that exist, and whoever in the USPTO approved this should definitely reconsider. Essentially, baby bottom art is the process and an associated kit including the materials required dipping the posterior of an infant in pain and stamping it on a material to make a print. This patent makes no sense, because it probably was done way before it was patented in 2001, and also is just a body part used as a painting tool. The patent states in its background that, “the addition of a newborn infant to a family inspires feelings of nostalgia and the related desire to create a lasting remembrance of the child’s infancy. This patent satisfies the need of a remembrance, but are all either utilitarian or unfinished in nature.” The patent was published by Elise Cohen as US6213778.

They key claims of the patent are A method of painting using the posterior of an infant, said method comprising the acts of:

1. A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the act of rolling the posterior of the infant during the stamping step.

2. A method as defined in claim 2 further comprising the act of rolling the posterior of the infant during each stamping step.

3. A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the act of overlapping