ROR Subcommittee 05-3
Aggressive IP Strategies
Stewart Witzeman
Paul Germeraad
John Tao
Eastman Chemical
Intellectual Assets
Air Products
Overview: ROR Subcommittee 05-3
Aggressive IP Strategies

Objective/Scope



To study in detail aggressive IP filing behavior in a way that identifies
and then interviews leading companies so that their integrated business,
R&D and IP strategies are shared with the committee
Dates Start- 2/2005
Key Deliverable(s)
Planned Finish 5/2006

A ROR sub-committee compilation on company strategies and methods
associated with Aggressive IP Behavior
 Round Table Meetings to collect and understand “best”-practices
 A SIS on Aggressive IP Behavior
 An article in RTM on Aggressive IP Behavior

Value Proposition

To improve revenue and profits by developing new products and services
protected from competitive market share erosion or licensing payments
ROR 05-3
May 2005 Meeting
Example Of An Proactive IP Strategy
ROR 05-3
May 2005 Meeting
Picture Of An Industry Segment
ROR 05-3
May 2005 Meeting
Major Findings, Discussion Points, or WIP
ROR Subcommittee 05-3 Aggressive IP Strategies

Most recent work products (Today’s Work)
 Plan and process by which to conduct work


Added Round-Table concept
Work-In-Process items:
 Round-Tables






Brainstormed companies, selected selection committee
“Blue Slip” – IP/Company “Companies we should consider”
Brainstormed Round-Table “Questions to Panel Members”
“Blue Slip” – IP/Questions “Questions we should consider”
Selected committee to select and refine Questions
Selected title of Round-Table sessions:

“Competitive IP strategies for 21st Century”
ROR 05-3
May 2005 Meeting
Major Findings, Discussion Points, or WIP
ROR Subcommittee 05-3 Aggressive IP Strategies

Discussion Points
 Companies:
“Blue Slip” – IP/Company “Companies we should consider”
 IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Lucent, Dow, DuPont, GE, P&G, Philip Morris, STM, Phillips,
Samsung, Toyota, 3M, Boeing, Genentech, Pfizer, GSK, Rambus, Cisco, Nanogram,
Touchstone, Ceramitec, MIT, Baylor, Alcoa
“Blue Slip” – IP/Questions “Questions we should consider”
 Questions:
 Why do you have an aggressive IP strategy?



How are you implementing an aggressive IP strategy?








Was aggressive IP strategy a grand design or a result of just working in a rich area?
Did you stumble into this aggressive IP strategy or was it deliberate?
Who is involved?
What is the structure you use to carry the aggressive IP strategy out?
How does aggressive IP strategy change the way you do business?
Correlation between patent strategy and country
What is the filing strategy? E.g. Use of computer generated claims, small groups, etc.
What is impact of “Trolls”
What are the options for fighting an aggressive IP company?
What is the value of the aggressive IP strategy?


How much did an aggressive IP strategy help?
How does aggressive IP strategy link to limited R&D resources and resource allocation
decisions?
ROR 05-3
May 2005 Meeting
Forward Plan
ROR Subcommittee 05-3 Aggressive IP Strategies

Next Deliverables

Summer Round Tables
Relevant to IRI members
 Five on each panel, cross-section by:



Industry, global, Univ./Company, big/small
Plan for two roundtables

Learn from these if we need more
 SIS sessions
 RTM article

What do you need from the ROR Committee?
 Blue Slips
 Join if you are interested
ROR 05-3
May 2005 Meeting