The Chubb Group of Insurance Companies has published a new Intellectual Property, Privacy and Communications Risk Management Handbook, "designed to assist companies of any size in evaluating and managing their risk, focusing on copyrighted content, trademarks, trade secrets, patents, privacy and defamation."
According to the Chubb press release announcing the book:
"Intellectual property is no longer just a concern for the large, multinational companies," says Reed. "Today, any company can become the accused in an intellectual property lawsuit. Small- to mid-size firms that find themselves embroiled in lawsuits with larger, more financially strong adversaries may be especially disadvantaged. The best defense is a good offense. That?s why establishing a strong risk management program is critical for all companies in today?s market. Chubb?s new handbook can help management better understand the strategic implications of intellectual property and privacy to the overall business enterprise."
Among the steps management and risk managers can take:
Identify the dynamics of the company's particular market. What are the litigation trends in the industry and what is the potential impact on the company?
Determine the company?s risk quotient. How much legal, regulatory and operational risk can the company manage?
Mitigate the risk. Look for better ways to recognize and manage the company?s intellectual property exposures. Know the strengths and weaknesses of the competition's intellectual property assets. Educate and train employees, vendors and contractors on proper procedures for handling intellectual property.
Check the company's insurance protection. Don?t assume that its insurance program automatically protects against intellectual property, privacy and communications risk. Insurance may be scattered among errors & omissions, general liability and directors & officers policies and may only offer limited protection.
Identify the dynamics of the company's particular market. What are the litigation trends in the industry and what is the potential impact on the company?
Determine the company?s risk quotient. How much legal, regulatory and operational risk can the company manage?
Mitigate the risk. Look for better ways to recognize and manage the company?s intellectual property exposures. Know the strengths and weaknesses of the competition's intellectual property assets. Educate and train employees, vendors and contractors on proper procedures for handling intellectual property.
Check the company's insurance protection. Don?t assume that its insurance program automatically protects against intellectual property, privacy and communications risk. Insurance may be scattered among errors & omissions, general liability and directors & officers policies and may only offer limited protection.
In order to obtain a copy of the handbook, you must contact one of Chubb's agents or brokers through their Find An Agent site.
With respect to the "best defense is good offense" point -- this is eerily similar to a recent article in Eweek describing Microsoft's recent patenting activities relating to its next OS codenamed "Longhorn". According to the writer, Microsft's elevated patent activities for Longhorn indicate a desire to make interoperability with open source platforms a non-starter.
But is Microsoft's strategy so Machiavellian? According to the Chris Pratley, a Microsoft employee who blogs here, Microsoft's new patenting stragetgy is a necessary defensive move:
At Microsoft, we used to pay little attention to patents - we would just make new things, and that would be it. Then we started getting worried - other big competitors (much bigger than we were at the time) had been patenting their inventions for some years, and it made us vulnerable. One of these big companies could dig through their patent portfolio, find something close to what we had done, then sue us, and we would have to go through an elaborate defense and possibly lose. So Microsoft did what most big companies do, which is start to build what is called a "defensive" patent portfolio. So if a big company tried to sue us, we could find something in our portfolio they were afoul of, and counter-sue. In the cold war days, this strategy was called "mutual assured destruction", and since it was intolerable for all parties to engage, it resulted in a state called "detente", or "standoff". This is what you see today for the most part in lots of industries. [thanks to Patently Obvious for the pointer & link]
At Microsoft, we used to pay little attention to patents - we would just make new things, and that would be it. Then we started getting worried - other big competitors (much bigger than we were at the time) had been patenting their inventions for some years, and it made us vulnerable. One of these big companies could dig through their patent portfolio, find something close to what we had done, then sue us, and we would have to go through an elaborate defense and possibly lose. So Microsoft did what most big companies do, which is start to build what is called a "defensive" patent portfolio. So if a big company tried to sue us, we could find something in our portfolio they were afoul of, and counter-sue. In the cold war days, this strategy was called "mutual assured destruction", and since it was intolerable for all parties to engage, it resulted in a state called "detente", or "standoff". This is what you see today for the most part in lots of industries. [thanks to Patently Obvious for the pointer & link]
Rodney D. Ryder
No comments:
Post a Comment