How accurate are IP Prism’s explanations of a patent?
There are two kinds of patent assessments that can made: strategic and tactical. Strategic patent assessments are about how to protect something against one’s competitors. Tactical assessments are about how to protect something against future adversaries. They both focus on different domains, and they use different scoring mechanisms.
But there are other factors as well:
The more complex and technical the claims, the more likely it is that they will require repetitive testing in order to establish coverage (i.e., less likely that an infringer would guess right). Pursuing an injunction against another party could get costly too, so companies often try to negotiate settlements first and find ways around this risk by dropping claims only after they know they won’t get sued anyway (or at least have time).
What are IP Prisms?
As we have previously reported, the patent ruling on Google’s Android has prompted a lot of people to remark. It was not appropriate for an open source project like Android to have patents. While there is no consensus around what the proper balance should be between patent protection and competition in the software industry. Many developers feel that as long as one or two of the major players openly acknowledge their patents (as Google did with its Android-based devices). Then it is reasonable for others to do so too.
IP Prism takes a unique approach to these issues: rather than trying to determine whether patents are necessary or not. It evaluates every patent against its own proprietary algorithm to determine whether they are likely to be useful. Then, if they are not useful, we remove them from our portfolio without any consideration of cost or other factors. This removes them from consideration for strategic pruning purposes – and those that remain can retain for strategic marketing purposes.
How accurate are IP Prisms’ explanations of a patent?
A patent is just a piece of paper. It may be useful in the short term, but it doesn’t help you at all if you don’t understand what it says (or how it works).
The main thrust of this post is to illustrate how IP Prisms’ AI-based patent scoring can help with strategic pruning. The goal is to make a simple metric from a patent and help you figure out which patents are the most valuable. The tool generates a score for each patent based on the following:
What the patent does
How effective it is at solving a problem
How well its claim language relates to that problem
The relative importance of its claims compared to other competing patents in the category
The relative importance of its claims compared to other patents in the field
How much money it has generated for its licensors (if any)
What are the benefits of using IP Prisms?
We’re a small company and one of our major clients is a large company, so we had to spend quite a bit of time with their lawyers to find the most efficient way to use IP Prism for their strategic portfolio pruning.
IpPrism was developed by the University of Michigan and is a technology that makes it easier for large companies to evaluate the value of different patents in relation to each other, so that they can focus on which ones are most valuable — and which ones can be canceled quickly if they become too expensive. In this case, we were using it to analyze patents from two different legal entities: Apple and Samsung (who are both giant in their own right).
However, there were some problems with IP Prism itself:
• There were significant differences between how Apple and Samsung used their patents . It turns out that even though these two companies have very similar strategies in how they implement software on phones. It isn’t obvious from its use what exactly is being sold by each company . This could make it harder for actually implementing these strategies at scale. It’s not clear from this data how much would-be customers are willing or even able to pay for certain features … something as simple as calendars would help make these things more obvious.
How can IP Prisms help with strategic pruning?
Part of the value of the IP Prism approach is that it facilitates strategic pruning. This means we can optimize our portfolio by removing patents from the most important areas. We use an algorithm based on our patent scoring system to do so. Like many approaches to this problem, it has some shortcomings. Example, there is no way to ensure that we are using a correct algorithm (and so likely a wrong one).
It also doesn’t provide any insight into the underlying assumptions that drive our decision process: how much weight does a particular patent apply? What are its chances of success? How do we decide what makes sense in terms of costs and benefits?
What’s more, there is no way to explain where such a decision comes from — what inputs did we consider when making it? In fact, none of these issues can be addressed at all: they simply must be left to the machine. The only way forward here is for someone to come up with software which takes them into this world and tells you what you need to know.
IP Prism, the company behind IP Primavera, a patent scoring algorithm designed to help founders assess their patent portfolios and make strategic decisions about which patents to license, has announced it has been acquired by Microsoft.
The acquisition will also see a new office opened in Redmond and Microsoft will retain IP Primavera’s leadership team.
Microsoft is using the acquisition to grow its patent business, primarily through acquisitions of companies that offer patent licensing products. In October 2016, Microsoft bought Fuse Technology Solutions for $1 billion.
For more click Here