The session covered real-world examples, including Ather Energy’s success in using IP to control its ecosystem and build brand value, and introduced five key questions every business should be able to answer to demonstrate IP readiness to investors and partners. From securing ownership and aligning IP with product development to managing risk and unlocking economic value, this webinar was packed with insights to help you rethink the role of IP in your organization.

Whether you’re a startup preparing for funding or a growing company scaling internationally, building a strong IP foundation is critical. The shift from “IP as a legal formality” to “IP as a value driver” can help you gain investor trust, improve your market positioning, and ensure long-term business success in a competitive environment.

Missed the session? You can now watch the full webinar on demand and access the exclusive IP Strategy Guide by filling out the form below.

The post IP Business Fundamentals to Drive Growth and Value appeared first on IamIP.

The truth is most companies only scratch the surface when it comes to customer input. They gather feedback, but they don’t create a space where customers can truly influence the future of the product. 

We learned this the hard way at IamIP. And surprisingly, the biggest shift in how we listen to customers wasn’t something we came up with ourselves, it came directly from them. 

How the IamIP Community Came to Life

Back in 2017, a few of our early customers approached us with an idea: they wanted to create a customer-only group where they could meet, exchange insights, and discuss the future of IP. 

The catch? We weren’t invited. 

At first, that felt strange. A customer community… without us? We had always valued customer feedback, but this was something entirely different. It wasn’t just about gathering input, it was about letting customers take the lead. 

And looking back, that was one of the best things that ever happened to us.

The Problem with Traditional Feedback

Like most companies, we started out with the usual ways of gathering customer insights:

• Surveys 
• One-on-one interviews 
• Product roadmap discussions 

But there was always something missing.

• Customers weren’t always honest. When you ask someone face-to-face what they think, they’re less likely to give you the hard truth, especially if they like you. 

• Conversations felt awkward. Sitting across from a customer and asking, “What do you want us to build next?” rarely led to groundbreaking insights. 

• Feedback was all over the place. One company needed one thing; another company wanted something completely different. How were we supposed to know what really mattered to the industry as a whole? 

We even tried hosting user conferences, thinking that bringing customers together in one place might spark better discussions. But even then, the insights felt fragmented. 

That’s when our customers took matters into their own hands. 

What Makes the IamIP Community Different?

What started as a small group in 2017 has now grown into a tight-knit community of 60+ IP professionals. They meet four times a year to discuss industry trends, challenges, and where they see things heading. 

And then, once a year, they share their collective insights with us.

This isn’t just another way to collect feedback. It’s a complete shift in how we think about customer relationships. Instead of one-off requests or wish lists, we get a collective industry perspective that helps shape our entire strategy.

And because we’re not in the room during their meetings, the discussions are completely unfiltered. They challenge each other’s ideas, debate what really matters, and align on the biggest priorities, without worrying about hurting our feelings.

Why This Works Better Than Traditional Feedback

Most companies rely on direct customer interviews, surveys, or quarterly check-ins. These are useful, but they have limitations:

• Customers tend to hold back. No one wants to be the person who tells a company, “Hey, your product isn’t solving my problem.” 

• Insights are scattered. What one customer wants might not be what the industry actually needs. 

• The focus is short-term. Traditional feedback is often reactive, it’s about fixing today’s problems rather than looking ahead. 

A customer-led community solves these problems naturally. 

When you put a group of industry experts in a room, they don’t just share their opinions, they challenge them. They push each other to think bigger. And what emerges isn’t just a list of feature requests, it’s a strategic view of where the industry is going. 

Real Business Impact

Since forming the IamIP Community, we’ve seen massive shifts in how we operate. Here’s what’s changed:

Higher Customer Retention 

When customers see that their insights actually shape the product, they stick around. The IamIP Community has been a key factor in increasing long-term customer loyalty. 

Smarter Product Decisions 

Instead of reacting to individual feature requests, we now prioritize what the industry as a whole actually needs. 

Stronger Customer Acquisition 

When potential customers ask for references, we don’t just send them a case study—we introduce them to IamIP Community members. This not only provides credibility but also shows them that their voice will be heard if they join us. 

Staying Ahead of Industry Trends 

Back in 2019, before most companies were even thinking about AI in IP management, our customer community was already talking about it. Their early discussions pushed us to start exploring AI-powered solutions long before they became an industry trend. 

The Big Lesson: Let Customers Lead

If there’s one thing we’ve learned, it’s this: customers don’t just want a voice, they want a seat at the table. And sometimes, the best thing a company can do is step back and let them have the conversation on their own.

Too many companies make the mistake of assuming they know what’s best for their customers. But the reality is, your customers are the ones on the front lines of your industry. They see the challenges. They know what’s coming next. And if you give them the space to collaborate, they’ll provide insights that are far more valuable than anything you could get from a survey.

At IamIP, we can’t imagine running our business without our customer-led community. And while we’d love to be a fly on the wall in their meetings, we know the reason it works is because we’re not in the room.

For any business looking to build truly customer-centric products, here’s the key takeaway: 

Don’t just ask customers what they want. Give them a place to shape the future. 

That’s how you stay ahead, not just for a year, but for the long run.

insights by: Dimitris Giannoccaro

The post The IamIP Community: Letting Customers Take the Lead appeared first on IamIP.

The world of intellectual property (IP) is constantly evolving, and 2024 was no exception. The latest data from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) shows a rise in global patent, trademark, and design filings, which is an encouraging sign that businesses and innovators are investing in protecting their ideas. 

After a few years of uncertainty in some sectors, this growth highlights a renewed focus on innovation, branding, and design protection. But what do these trends mean for businesses?  

Let’s break down the key insights and why they matter: 

Patent Trends: Digital Communication Surpasses Other Fields

Patents remain a cornerstone of innovation, and in 2024, WIPO’s Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) saw a slight but steady 0.5% increase in filings, reaching 273,900 applications. This growth may seem modest, but it signifies that companies and researchers continue to push the boundaries of technology despite economic fluctuations.

Who’s Leading the Way?

China continues to dominate global patent filings, with 70,160 applications.

Meanwhile, the U.S. (54,087), Japan (48,397), South Korea (23,851), and Germany (16,721) round out the top five. However, not all countries experienced growth. While China and South Korea made gains, the U.S., Japan, and Germany saw declines, signaling potential shifts in research and development priorities.

Top Innovators & Industries

Tech giants continue to shape the global innovation landscape. Huawei Technologies led the way with 6,600 patent applications, followed closely by Samsung Electronics (4,640) and Qualcomm (3,848). Apple and Google also climbed the rankings, reflecting their increasing investment in cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and next-generation semiconductors. 

One major shift in 2024 was in top patent categories. For the first time in years, digital communication patents (10.5%) overtook computer technology (9.7%) as the leading field. This suggests a growing focus on telecommunications infrastructure, 5G/6G advancements, and Internet of Things (IoT) innovations.

Other fast-growing sectors include:

• Electrical machinery (+7.9%) – A rising demand for energy-efficient solutions and automation technologies is driving innovation. 

• Medical technology (+6.5%) – With ongoing advancements in healthcare, new patents for medical devices, diagnostics, and treatments continue to shape the industry. 

• Artificial intelligence & automation – While not listed as a top category, AI-related patent filings are rapidly increasing, indicating a future boom in machine learning applications. 

For businesses, this data underscores the growing importance of protecting digital innovations and staying ahead in emerging technology markets. Those involved in AI, telecom, and energy efficiency should pay close attention to these trends.

Trademarks: A Comeback After Two Years of Decline

After two consecutive years of declining trademark activity, 2024 saw a 1.2% increase in filings under WIPO’s Madrid System, reaching 65,000 applications. This marks a turning point for brand protection, as businesses recognize the value of securing their brand identities in a global marketplace. 

Where Are Trademarks Growing the Fastest? 

The U.S. remains the top filer with 11,270 applications, but the most notable growth came from:

• South Korea (+12.1%) – Driven by the expansion of Korean entertainment, beauty, and tech brands. 

• China (+6.3%) – A reflection of Chinese brands pushing for greater international presence. 

• Switzerland (+6.1%) – Fueled by the luxury goods and pharmaceutical sectors. 

Brands Investing in Protection

Leading companies are doubling down on trademark protection, signaling strong competition in key industries. Notably:

• L’Oréal (France, 244 filings) – The beauty giant continues to safeguard its vast portfolio of product lines. 

• Novartis (Switzerland, 193 filings) – The pharmaceutical leader is securing its position in a rapidly evolving healthcare market. 

• Euro Games Technology (Bulgaria, 141 filings) – The gaming industry’s expansion is reflected in increased trademark activity. 

• Shiseido (Japan, 124 filings) – The beauty and cosmetics brand is aggressively expanding into international markets. 

Trademark trends indicate that businesses across industries, from cosmetics to gaming to pharmaceuticals, are prioritizing brand protection. Companies looking to expand internationally should ensure their trademarks are secured in key markets to avoid potential legal disputes.

Industrial Design Filings Hit a Record High

Industrial design protection surged in 2024, with filings under WIPO’s Hague System increasing by 6.8% to a record-breaking 27,161 designs. This growth underscores the rising importance of design as a competitive differentiator in industries such as consumer electronics, automotive, and luxury goods.

Which Countries Are Filing the Most?

• China (4,870 designs, +29.6%) – The country’s commitment to industrial design innovation is evident. 

• Germany (4,218 designs) – Maintaining a strong tradition in engineering and automotive design. 

• United States (3,034 designs, +13.3%) – Reflecting growing investments in product aesthetics and user experience. 

• Italy (2,249 designs, +23.8%) – A major hub for fashion, luxury goods, and automotive design. 

Corporate Leaders in Design Protection

Companies leading in industrial design filings include:

• Procter & Gamble (641 designs) – Surpassing Samsung Electronics in total filings. 

• Porsche AG (506 designs) – Reinforcing Germany’s dominance in automotive design. 

• Ferrari SPA (442 designs) – Highlighting the luxury car brand’s commitment to aesthetic excellence. 

• Huawei Technologies (431 designs) – Demonstrating how tech firms are prioritizing design protection. 

These trends indicate that businesses recognize the power of product design in influencing consumer decisions. With record-breaking growth, securing industrial design rights has become more critical than ever. 

Intellectual Property Disputes Are Increasing

With more companies filing for IP protection, legal disputes are also on the rise. WIPO’s Arbitration and Mediation Center handled 25% more cases in 2024, underscoring the importance of proactive IP management. 

• Patent disputes are escalating, particularly in the AI and semiconductor sectors. 

• Trademark conflicts continue to rise, often due to global brand expansion and name similarities. 

• Design infringement cases are increasing as businesses compete to differentiate themselves through aesthetics. 

Companies should be vigilant in monitoring their IP portfolios, enforcing rights when necessary, and staying ahead of potential conflicts to avoid costly legal battles. 

What These Trends Mean for Businesses

1. Prioritize Patents & Innovation 

The growth in digital communication patents signals a shift toward next-generation technology. Businesses should protect their innovations early to secure a strong market position. 

2. Secure Global Trademarks 

With trademark activity rebounding, companies expanding internationally should register their brands in key markets to avoid future conflicts. 

3. Invest in Design Protection 

If your business relies on product design for competitive advantage, the record-breaking growth in design patents should be a wake-up call to protect your unique designs before competitors do. 

4. Be Prepared for Legal Challenges 

With IP disputes rising, businesses need to monitor their IP portfolio, enforce rights when necessary, and stay ahead of potential conflicts. 

Looking Ahead: The Future of IP Protection

2024’s IP trends make one thing clear: intellectual property is more important than ever in an increasingly competitive and digital world. Whether you’re a startup or an industry leader, protecting your innovations, brands, and designs should be a top business priority. 

As we move through 2025, companies that take a proactive approach to IP protection will be best positioned for growth and global success. 

Is your IP strategy ready for the future?  

Now is the time to review your patents, trademarks, and designs to ensure your business stays ahead of the competition. 

Source: WIPO.org – Use of WIPO’s Global IP Registries for Patents, Trademarks, and Designs Grew in 2024, March 17, 2025. 

The post WIPO’s 2024 IP Report: What It Means for Your Business  appeared first on IamIP.

This blog brings together our shared expertise to examine the challenges of collaborative R&D and their impact on the patent landscape.

Innovation thrives on collaboration. In today’s interconnected world, companies, universities, and research institutions frequently join forces to drive technological advancements. One critical element that underpins the success of collaborative research and development is patents. Patents protect intellectual property and also shape the partnership dynamic, providing fair value and commercial viability for collaborative innovations. 

Why patents matter in collaborative R&D

Collaboration often brings together diverse expertise, funding, and resources, making it a powerful driver of innovation. However, without a clear framework for intellectual property management, the very success of these partnerships can lead to conflicts.

Here’s how patents support and streamline collaborative R&D: 

1. Defining ownership and rights

Patents help establish clear ownership of innovations, preventing disputes among collaborators. In joint research projects, defining background, foreground, and post ground IP is crucial:

• Background IP: Pre-existing knowledge or patents brought into the collaboration. 

• Foreground IP: New inventions arising directly from the partnership. 

• Postground IP: Innovations developed after the project but building on its results. 

A well-structured agreement ensures that all parties understand their rights, preventing conflicts and allowing for the smooth commercialization of new technologies.

2. Encouraging open knowledge sharing

While patents provide exclusivity, they also promote transparency by requiring detailed public disclosure of inventions. This helps research partners exchange knowledge confidently, knowing that their contributions are legally protected. Such openness accelerates the pace of innovation while maintaining legal safeguards for all parties involved.

3. Facilitating technology transfer and commercialization

Patents enable the transfer of technology from research institutions to industry, ensuring that groundbreaking discoveries reach the market. Universities, for example, often patent their innovations before licensing them to businesses for commercialization. This process bridges the gap between theoretical research and practical applications, fostering a cycle of continuous innovation.

Challenges and recent developments

Despite their advantages, patents in collaborative R&D require careful navigation. Recent insights shed light on key considerations and trends shaping the landscape in 2025 and beyond.

1. Managing patent ownership in international partnerships

Global R&D collaborations are on the rise, but differences in patent laws across jurisdictions create complexities. Recent research highlights that U.S.-China collaborations have a distinct impact on patent quality, benefiting Chinese patents more than U.S. ones. While Chinese patents see quality improvements through international partnerships, U.S. patents tend to experience a decline in quality when collaborating with China. Additionally, U.S. government-funded research has, in some cases, resulted in patents awarded to China-based entities, raising concerns about IP sovereignty and regulatory alignment. 

2. The impact of emerging technologies on patentability 

Innovations in AI, biotechnology, and quantum computing introduce new patent challenges, especially in collaborative R&D where multiple entities contribute to a single invention. AI-assisted innovations, for instance, raise legal questions about inventorship and ownership, as current laws in the U.S. and EU remain unclear on whether AI-generated inventions are patentable. Beyond AI, biotech and quantum patents often involve overlapping contributions, complicating ownership rights and licensing in partnerships. Given rapid innovation cycles, patents alone may not suffice—companies must balance trade secrets and copyrights to protect shared IP while ensuring fair attribution.

3. Patent maintenance in collaborative R&D

Patent fees and renewals can be a financial burden, especially for startups and research institutions. In many cases, collaborators must decide whether to jointly maintain patents or transfer ownership to a more financially stable entity. Strategic patent maintenance is critical to ensuring that valuable IP remains protected while minimizing unnecessary costs. Platforms like PatentRenewal.com help companies efficiently manage their patent portfolios while reducing hidden costs and administrative burdens. 

Strategies for businesses to maximize patent value 

To make the most of patents in joint research initiatives, businesses and research institutions should adopt proactive strategies:

• Implement clear IP agreements: Establish patent ownership, licensing terms, and revenue-sharing models at the outset of any collaboration. 

• Use patent monitoring tools: Staying updated on competitors’ patents, expirations, and industry trends can provide a competitive edge.  

• Prepare for post-patent scenarios: When key patents expire, industries often see waves of innovation. Companies should anticipate these shifts and position themselves to capitalize on expired patents for new product development. 

Conclusion

Patents are indispensable in collaborative R&D, ensuring that innovation is both protected and shared in a structured manner. As global partnerships and emerging technologies reshape the innovation landscape, businesses must stay agile, informed, and strategic in their patent management approaches. By leveraging patent intelligence tools and adopting strong IP policies, organizations can turn patents into powerful assets for long-term success in collaborative research.

The post The Role of Patents in Collaborative Research and Development appeared first on IamIP.

In this article we explore 10 discoveries that happened accidentally and the surprising ways they came to be. 

Post-it Notes: The Sticky Success Story 

Patent No. US 3,691,140: 

It all began when 3M scientist Spencer Silver was trying to create a super-strong adhesive. Instead, he accidentally invented a weak, pressure-sensitive adhesive that didn’t stick well—except when applied lightly. Initially dismissed as a failed experiment, Silver’s “mistake” was later transformed into the iconic Post-it Note after his colleague Art Fry needed something to keep bookmarks in his hymn book from falling out. A simple solution led to one of the world’s most ubiquitous office supplies. 

Takeaway: Sometimes, a “failure” is just an undiscovered gem in disguise. 

X-Rays: An Accidental Peek Into the Body 

Patent No. US 1,061,936: 

In 1895, German physicist Wilhelm Roentgen was conducting experiments with cathode rays when he noticed a fluorescent glow coming from a nearby fluorescent screen, even though it wasn’t in direct line of sight. Upon further investigation, he realized that he had discovered a new type of radiation, which he named X-rays. Roentgen’s accidental discovery became the foundation of modern medical imaging, revolutionizing diagnostics in the medical field. 

Takeaway: Sometimes, scientific curiosity and an unexpected result can change the way we see the world—literally! 

Coca-Cola: A Secret Formula That Stuck 

Patent No. US 798,395: 

In 1886, Dr. John Pemberton, a pharmacist in Atlanta, was trying to create a remedy for headaches and exhaustion. He accidentally created a syrup that, when mixed with carbonated water, became the world-famous beverage known as Coca-Cola. While the formula was originally intended to be medicinal, it quickly became a popular soft drink, creating one of the most recognizable brands in the world. 

Takeaway: What starts as a medicinal concoction might end up as a global refreshment.

The Microwave Oven: A Hot Discovery 

Patent No. US 2,457,091: 

In the 1940s, engineer Percy Spencer was working on radar technology when he noticed that a candy bar in his pocket had melted. Curious, he tested the theory by placing popcorn kernels near a magnetron (a component of radar equipment) and watched them pop. This serendipitous moment led to the development of the microwave oven—a kitchen device that would revolutionize cooking worldwide. 

Takeaway: A melted candy bar and a little curiosity sparked a culinary revolution!  

Safety Glass: A Shattered Discovery 

Patent No. US 1,612,228: 

In 1903, French chemist Édouard Bénédictus accidentally dropped a glass flask that had been coated with a plastic film. Instead of shattering into pieces, the glass cracked but remained in one piece. This accident led to the invention of laminated safety glass, which is now used in car windshields, skylights, and more to prevent dangerous glass shattering. 

Takeaway: Sometimes, a breakage can lead to a breakthrough that keeps you safer! 

The Pacemaker: A Heart-Stopping Accident 

Patent No. US 2,992,561: 

In 1956, engineer Wilson Greatbatch was attempting to build a heart rhythm recording device when he accidentally used the wrong resistor. This caused the circuit to emit electrical pulses, which mimicked the function of a heart’s natural rhythm. Greatbatch’s “mistake” led to the creation of the implantable pacemaker, a life-saving device that has kept millions of people’s hearts beating for decades. 

Takeaway: One tiny mistake in an electrical circuit can turn into a lifesaver! 

Superglue: An Adhesive Revolution 

Patent No. US 2,768,109: 

In 1942, chemist Harry Coover was working on creating clear plastic for gun sights during World War II. However, he accidentally created a sticky substance that bonded almost instantly and couldn’t be removed. Initially discarded as a failed product, it was later repurposed as Superglue, becoming an essential adhesive in countless industries and everyday life. 

Takeaway: What may seem like a nuisance (sticking to everything!) can sometimes become the most useful invention. 

Potato Chips: A Crunchy Invention 

Patent No. US 3,071,137: 

In 1853, a chef named George Crum was frustrated by a customer’s complaint about his fried potatoes being too thick. In an attempt to annoy the customer, Crum sliced the potatoes paper-thin, fried them until they were crispy, and seasoned them heavily with salt. The result? A new snack sensation: the potato chip. What started as a “punishment” for picky customers quickly became a snack that changed the culinary world. 

Takeaway: A little bit of frustration can lead to a whole lot of flavor. 

Insulin: A Life-Saving Hormone 

Patent No. US 1,626,609: 

In the early 1920s, researchers Frederick Banting and Charles Best were working on an experiment involving dog pancreas extracts to understand how to treat diabetes. When their experiment didn’t go as planned, and they ended up accidentally isolating insulin in a way they hadn’t intended, they realized it had the potential to regulate blood sugar in diabetics. This accidental breakthrough led to the discovery of insulin therapy, saving millions of lives since. 

Takeaway: Sometimes, mistakes in the lab lead to miracles for millions. 

The Chocolate Chip Cookie: A Sweet Mistake 

Patent No. US 2,280,477: 

Ruth Wakefield, the inventor of the chocolate chip cookie, was making chocolate cookies in 1930 when she ran out of baker’s chocolate. She decided to chop up a bar of semi-sweet chocolate and add it to her dough, expecting it to melt and blend into the batter. Instead, the pieces of chocolate remained intact, giving birth to the chocolate chip cookie. Ruth patented her creation, and it quickly became a favorite snack worldwide. 

Takeaway: Sometimes, running out of ingredients can lead to something even better! 

Conclusion: 

From lifesaving medical breakthroughs to everyday conveniences, these accidental inventions prove that unexpected discoveries can change the world. Whether it’s a failed experiment, a simple mistake, or pure curiosity, these stories remind us that innovation often comes from the most surprising places. So next time something doesn’t go as planned, remember: you might just be on the verge of the next great invention! 

The post Accidental Inventions: Mistakes That Changed the World  appeared first on IamIP.

Key Takeaways from the Webinar

One of the most memorable takeaways from Magnus was:

“You can’t bake a cake with only butter!”

Just as a good recipe requires different ingredients, strong IP management requires a mix of competencies, processes, and engagement across different levels of an organization.

If you missed the live session or want to revisit the insights shared, you can now access the webinar recording by filling out the form below:

The post Capability Building in IP Management appeared first on IamIP.

AI can be a useful and powerful tool, but its adoption should be planned and strategic. The crucial question is this: Are we implementing AI to make real progress, or simply to follow the trend? 

In this blog, we’ll cover the most common risk factors of the AI adoption, the difficulties of aligning expectations with reality and the strategic ways in which businesses should approach AI to make sure they get tangible results that will benefit them in the long run.  

The AI Adoption Frenzy

No one can deny the hype around AI and its implementation. Companies don’t want to stay behind as they see more and more of their competitors investing in AI-based tools. The fear of missing out (FOMO) plays a significant role in how companies approach AI adoption. As a result, there is a rush to implement AI features as soon as possible, sometimes without a clear strategy or use case.  

The problem is that there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to AI. Every team, business model and industry are different which means that they need a different strategy for implementing AI. Simply adding AI into a workflow without understanding how it fits into the broader company strategy probably won’t end up having the desired results and will cause frustration.  

In the patent industry for example, AI is often introduced as a way to accelerate searches, automate processes, analyze large databases and improve decision-making. If businesses, however, implement AI tools without considering how their teams will use the tools and the results they’ll get from them, then they risk investing in technology that doesn’t meet their real needs.  

The Gap Between Expectations and Reality

A common error made when adopting AI is setting unrealistic standards. Businesses expect that AI will work flawlessly from day one, taking the place of human expertise and immediately solving complicated issues.  AI is not magic, though. It needs to be trained, which means it requires time to learn, fine-tune and integrate into current processes. 

Some key areas where expectations and reality often diverge include:

1. AI as a Human Replacement vs. AI as a Support Tool 

Many companies believe that AI will soon replace human expertise by automating every aspect of a workflow. In reality, AI works best when it’s combined with human knowledge. For example, in the patent industry, AI can quickly scan and categorize patent documents from a large dataset, but human interpretation is still crucial to understand the strategic implications of the findings.  

2. Instant Accuracy vs Continuous Learning  

AI models don’t instantly start at 100% accuracy. They need to be continuously trained and improved with user input. If organizations anticipate AI to deliver flawless results from the get-go, then they will most likely be disappointed when initial iterations fall short of their expectations.  

3. Effortless Integration vs. Organizational Change 

AI adoption often needs a change in the way a team works and, in their dynamics, and goes beyond just a simple software upgrade. For AI to deliver the best possible results, new processes, training, and adjustments are required. Companies who don’t that that a need for change management is important, may struggle to see a return on investment.

The Risks of Implementing AI Without Strategy

Rushing into AI implementation without a clear plan can create a number of problems: 

Misalignment with Business Goals: AI solutions should have a clear purpose. If a company adopts AI only because it’s popular, they may end up spending money on tools that won’t solve their current problems. 

Wasted Resources: AI implementation requires time, money, and effort. Without a strategy and a well-thought-out plan, businesses risk investing in technology that doesn’t provide value. 

Resistance from Teams: If employees think that AI will replace them, or if they don’t understand its purpose, they might oppose its implementation. A lack of proper training and communication can also lead to them not utilizing the tool in a correct and effective way.   

To avoid these pitfalls, businesses need to focus on why they are adopting AI and how it will provide tangible benefits. 

A Smarter Approach to AI Adoption

Rather than rushing into AI adoption, organizations should take a structured and intentional approach: 

1. Define the Problem AI Needs to Solve 

Instead of implementing AI for the sake of innovation, businesses should start by identifying specific pain points. Is the goal to improve efficiency? Reduce manual errors? Gain deeper insights from data? AI should address a concrete need, not just serve as a buzzword. 

2. Start Small and Scale Gradually 

AI implementation doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing approach. Companies can begin with a pilot project, test its effectiveness, gather feedback, and refine the process before scaling up. This minimizes risk and ensures AI solutions align with real-world business needs. 

3. Invest in Training and Change Management 

AI is most effective when teams know how to use it. Businesses should provide training, set realistic expectations, and involve employees in the adoption process. AI should be seen as a tool that enhances human work rather than replacing it. 

4. Measure Success Beyond the Hype 

AI adoption should be evaluated based on meaningful outcomes, such as improved decision-making, time savings, or increased accuracy. Companies should establish key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure AI’s impact and adjust strategies accordingly. 

Conclusion: AI Should Be a Tool, Not Just a Trend 

AI has the potential to transform industries, but its success depends on thoughtful implementation. Companies that rush into AI adoption without clear objectives or realistic expectations often find themselves frustrated with the results.

Instead of chasing the AI trend, organizations should focus on strategic adoption—using AI to solve real problems, support human expertise, and drive meaningful progress. 

The key takeaway? AI should be a tool that adds value, not just a checkbox on a digital transformation roadmap. Businesses that approach AI with purpose will see lasting benefits, while those who follow the hype risk disappointment. 

insights by: Dimitris Giannoccaro 

The post AI Adoption in Patents – Hype vs Reality  appeared first on IamIP.

Some of these legal wars spanned decades, while others quickly reshaped entire markets. Here are six famous patent disputes that left lasting impacts on business landscapes: 

1. Kodak vs. Polaroid (1976-1986) – Instant Cameras, Instant Lawsuit 

Once upon a time, if you wanted to capture a moment instantly, Polaroid was the go-to brand. Founded by Edwin Land, Polaroid dominated the instant photography market for decades, especially after introducing its game-changing SX-70 camera in 1972. But in 1976, Kodak decided to enter the instant photography game. 

What Went Down?

Kodak launched its own EK-4 and EK-6 instant cameras, prompting Polaroid to file a patent infringement lawsuit, claiming that Kodak had copied 12 of its patents, including its innovative film development process. After nearly a decade of legal battles, a judge ruled in favor of Polaroid in 1985. A year later Kodak pulled their instant cameras from the market. 

In 1991, Kodak was ordered to pay a whopping $925 million in damages—one of the largest settlements of its time. 

Who Won and What Changed? 

Polaroid won the case, but the rise of digital photography quickly made instant film obsolete. While Kodak’s financial losses were a factor in its eventual bankruptcy in 2012, the company’s failure to adapt to digital technology was a much bigger contributor. Despite its legal victory, Polaroid also went bankrupt in 2001, struggling to compete in the digital era. 

This battle serves as a cautionary tale: winning a lawsuit doesn’t always guarantee long-term success. 

2. Amazon vs. Barnes & Noble (1997-2002) – The 1-Click Courtroom Battle

In the early days of e-commerce, Amazon was already setting the pace, introducing its 1-Click ordering system in 1999. This feature allowed customers to buy products with a single click, saving them from re-entering payment and shipping details every time they made a purchase. Barnes & Noble, seeing the potential of streamlined checkout, launched a similar feature called Express Lane. 

What Went Down? 

Amazon sued Barnes & Noble in 1999, claiming that the Express Lane feature violated Amazon’s 1-Click patent. A temporary injunction was granted, forcing Barnes & Noble to modify the feature, and after intense legal battles, the companies reached a settlement in 2002 under undisclosed terms. 

Why Does It Matter?

This lawsuit sparked a larger debate over business method patents and whether something as simple as a checkout process could be patented. Critics argued that Amazon’s patent stifled competition, while supporters saw it as a vital tool to protect innovation. Years later, CEO Jeff Bezos himself called for patent reform, advocating for shorter lifespans and stricter patent standards. 

Despite the controversy, Amazon’s 1-Click system remained a significant part of its business model, even being licensed to Apple for iTunes purchases. While the case didn’t directly lead to Amazon’s dominance, it shows how small innovations in e-commerce can have an outsized impact. 

3. Mattel vs. MGA Entertainment (2005-2013) – The Doll War

For decades, Barbie was the queen of the toy world. But in 2001, MGA Entertainment introduced Bratz, a line of dolls with a fashionable, edgy aesthetic. The result? Bratz became a serious competitor, cutting into Barbie’s dominance and shaking up the doll market. 

What Went Down? 

Mattel claimed that Carter Bryant, a designer who had worked for Mattel, created Bratz while still under contract with Mattel—meaning the brand legally belonged to Mattel. Mattel sued MGA in 2005, arguing that Bryant had violated his employment contract by developing Bratz concepts before leaving the company. 

In 2008, a jury ruled in Mattel’s favor, awarding it $100 million and forcing MGA to halt production of Bratz dolls. But in 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court reversed the ruling, finding that the original decision was flawed, and that MGA had significantly developed Bratz into its own brand. 

Who Won and What Changed? 

After years of legal battles, a retrial in 2011 ruled in MGA’s favor, with the jury concluding that Mattel engaged in corporate misconduct, including allegedly stealing MGA’s trade secrets. In 2013 MGA was awarded $170 million in damages, However, ownership of Bratz remained a highly contested issue, and the legal battle had already weakened both companies. 

The case highlighted the importance of intellectual property rights and employee contracts, reinforcing how difficult it can be for companies to claim ownership over employee-created ideas. 

This legal war proved that in business, a strong brand and innovation can survive even the fiercest courtroom battles. 

4. Apple vs. Samsung (2011-2018) – The Smartphone Patent Showdown 

This patent battle came to define the smartphone era. Apple accused Samsung of copying the design and features of the iPhone, including its rounded rectangular shape, home screen grid, tap-to-zoom functionality, and bounce-back scrolling effect. 

What Went Down? 

Apple filed a lawsuit in 2011, triggering over 50 legal battles worldwide. A U.S. jury ruled in Apple’s favor in 2012, awarding it $1.05 billion in damages, though this was later reduced to $930 million after appeals. Samsung fought back and in 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that damages should be based on individual components, further extending the legal battles. 

By 2018, Apple and Samsung settled out of court, officially ending the dispute. While the settlement terms remain undisclosed, Samsung had already paid Apple $539 million in a prior ruling. 

Why Does It Matter? 

This case reshaped how design patents are evaluated in the tech industry, setting a precedent for future lawsuits. Despite the lengthy legal battle, Apple and Samsung remained fierce rivals, each continuing to dominate the smartphone market. 

The biggest takeaway: Winning a lawsuit doesn’t stop competition—great products do. 

5. Converse vs. Steve Madden (2020) – A Sneaker Sole Dispute 

Fashion brands frequently battle over design patents. In May 2020, Converse took legal action against Steve Madden, alleging that Madden’s “Madden Girl Winnona Flatform High-Top” and “Shark” sneakers infringed upon Converse’s design patents for its Run Star Hike sneaker. 

What Went Down? 

Converse sent several cease-and-desist letters to Steve Madden before filing a lawsuit. The legal dispute centered on the tread pattern of the shoe, which Converse argued was protected by its design patents. Steve Madden sought to dismiss part of the complaint, arguing differences in design. However, in August 2021, the court denied Madden’s motion to dismiss, allowing the case to move forward. 

The case was eventually settled out of court, with Converse dismissing all claims. 

What Changed? 

This lawsuit underscores Converse’s commitment to protecting its designs, as evidenced by its extensive portfolio of over 230 active design patents globally. It also highlights Steve Madden’s history of legal challenges related to design similarities with other brands, including disputes with Dr. Martens and Nike.  

In the fashion industry, maintaining a robust patent portfolio serves as a crucial tool for brands to safeguard their creative designs and market position. 

6. The mRNA Vaccine Patent War (2022–Present)

The development of COVID-19 vaccines wasn’t just a medical breakthrough—it also sparked major patent disputes among pharmaceutical giants. 

What Went Down? 

CureVac vs. BioNTech:  

In 2022, CureVac, a German biotech company, sued BioNTech, claiming that its mRNA technology used in the Comirnaty vaccine infringed on CureVac’s patents.  

In late 2023, the German Federal Patent Court ruled in favor of BioNTech, invalidating CureVac’s specific patent. However, CureVac continues to dispute the decision. 

Moderna vs. Pfizer & BioNTech:

Moderna sued Pfizer and BioNTech in 2022, alleging they infringed on its mRNA technology used in the Comirnaty vaccine. Moderna claims that Pfizer and BioNTech copied its patented mRNA technology, which had been developed and patented years before the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Pfizer & BioNTech denied the allegations, arguing that many of the techniques Moderna claimed were already publicly known or developed independently. 

In 2024, the High Court in the UK ruled that Pfizer and BioNTech had infringed one of Moderna’s patents, although the companies have been granted permission to appeal. 

The lawsuits are ongoing across multiple jurisdictions, including U.S. and European courts. 

Why Does It Matter? 

These disputes underscore the tension between protecting intellectual property and ensuring public health access. The outcome of these lawsuits could have wide-ranging effects on how patents are enforced in future global health crises, influencing the availability and affordability of life-saving vaccines.

Final Thoughts

Patent disputes are more than just legal battles—they can change industries, fuel innovation, and sometimes even alter the course of history. These landmark cases remind us that in business, intellectual property is often as valuable as the products themselves—and a single lawsuit can have a ripple effect across entire industries.  

The post Corporate Clashes: Patent Battles Behind Everyday Products  appeared first on IamIP.

Here’s an in-depth guide to understanding what the intention to grant phase is, why it matters, and how to leverage it effectively. 

What Is the Intention to Grant Phase? 

Before a patent is officially granted, the patent office invites public feedback.  This means anyone—including competitors, industry experts, and legal professionals—can review the patent and, if necessary, raise objections. 

This phase is the final checkpoint before a patent becomes legally binding, making it a critical window of opportunity for businesses to challenge problematic patents. 

How Does It Work?

Once a patent enters the intention to grant phase, companies have nine months to file an objection. If no objections are raised during this time, the patent will be officially granted. 

Why Should You Monitor the Intention to Grant Phase?

Keeping a close eye on this stage of the patent process can help your business in several ways: 

• Prevent Competitor Domination: If a competitor is about to patent a technology that overlaps with your own, you may be able to challenge it or limit their scope. 

• Strengthen Your Freedom to Operate: By identifying potential conflicts early, you can ensure that you retain the ability to develop and market your products without unnecessary legal restrictions. 

• Block Weak or Redundant Patents: If a pending patent is based on existing prior art, you can present evidence to the patent office, potentially preventing it from being granted. 

The Cost of Ignoring This Phase

Many companies fail to act during this critical period, often realizing too late that a competitor’s patent restricts their innovation. 

• Legal Costs: Companies that don’t monitor this phase often end up in court trying to invalidate a granted patent—a process that can cost anywhere from $500,000 to $5 million per case. 

• Market Access Restrictions: If a patent gets granted uncontested, competitors can block access to key markets, preventing rivals from launching similar technologies. 

• Product Delays: A granted patent can put a hold on new product development, forcing companies to spend years in costly negotiations or licensing talks. 

How to Monitor the Intention to Grant Phase Effectively

To avoid legal and financial risks, businesses should have a structured approach to tracking patents in this phase. 

Step 1: Set Up Alerts for Key Competitors 

Use patent monitoring tools to track when competitors’ patents enter the intention to grant phase. Setting up alerts ensures you never miss an opportunity to review and challenge a patent. 

Step 2: Analyze Competitor Patent Strategies 

Regularly assess what competitors are patenting. Are they filing for technology similar to yours? If so, it might be worth preparing an objection. 

Step 3: Review with Legal & R&D Teams 

IP monitoring is not just for patent lawyers—R&D teams should also be involved in assessing whether a patent could block their innovation. 

Step 4: Prepare Your Opposition Strategy 

If a competitor’s patent poses a threat, start gathering prior art evidence early. This strengthens your case if you need to file an opposition. 

Step 5: Consider Strategic Timing 

If a pending patent doesn’t directly impact you but significantly affects a competitor, you can delay your opposition to gain a stronger bargaining position. 

Example: A competitor files a patent that slightly overlaps with your technology. If it also threatens another major player in your industry, waiting until negotiations could give you leverage. 

Using the Intention to Grant Phase as a Strategic Advantage

Beyond just preventing potential threats, companies can use this phase to gain an edge over competitors. Consider these tactics: 

• Delayed Opposition: If a pending patent doesn’t directly impact you but significantly affects a competitor, you can wait to raise objections until you’re in a strong bargaining position. 

• Leveraging Prior Art Selectively: If you have evidence that a patent application lacks novelty, you can choose when to reveal it—either during the intention to grant phase or later when it serves your interests in negotiations. 

By strategically timing your opposition, you can use the patent landscape to your advantage rather than reacting to it after the fact. 

Scaling Your Patent Monitoring Efforts

Patent monitoring isn’t just about individual applications—it’s about tracking trends over time. Here’s how to scale your efforts: 

• Global Impact Considerations: When a company files for a patent, they have 12 months to decide which markets to protect it in. If the original application is invalidated, it affects the patent’s chances in major markets like the U.S., Japan, and China. 

• Long-Term Data Storage: Some patent processes take up to 10 years before reaching the intention to grant phase. Maintaining records and tracking changes over time ensures you’re prepared to act when necessary. 

Example

In the pharmaceutical industry, patents are crucial for securing market exclusivity. If a company fails to challenge a competitor’s patent during the intention to grant phase, they risk losing billions in revenue. 

For example, if a major pharmaceutical company ignored a patent application for a new drug formulation and years later, they had to challenge the granted patent in multiple courts, it could delay their product launch by three years and cost them hundreds of millions in lost sales. 

Had they acted during the intention to grant phase, they could have opposed the patent directly with the patent office—avoiding costly legal battles. 

Takeaway: Timing Is Everything 

Patent monitoring is crucial at two key stages: 

1. When the patent is first published – This helps you anticipate potential threats. 

2. When the intention to grant phase begins – This is your last chance to act before a patent is granted. 

The nine-month window provided during the intention to grant phase is your best opportunity to shape the patent landscape. Use this time wisely. 

And remember don’t reveal all your cards too soon. If you’re holding a strategic advantage, consider when and how to play it to maximize your position in future negotiations. 

By proactively monitoring patents and understanding the nuances of the intention to grant phase, you can safeguard your intellectual property, prevent costly legal battles, and gain a significant competitive edge in your industry. 

insights by: Dimitris Giannoccaro 

The post The Intention to Grant Phase: A Strategic Opportunity in Patent Protection  appeared first on IamIP.

2024 Highlights: Innovation in Patent Management 

• AI Patent Summarizer – Designed to save time, this feature automatically generates concise and accurate summaries of patents, making it easier to review large volumes of data efficiently. 
• AI Patent Categorizer 2.0 – An improved version of our categorization tool, this update has an improved training procedure and performance with new confidence sorting. 
• Updated IamIP Accounts – With a new interface, bulk user handling, and full transparency on portfolio and monitoring access, account management is now more intuitive and efficient. 
• Performance and Security Improvements – Faster searches and actions are now possible thanks to a new search index and an optimized backend. 

2025 Sneak Peek: What’s Coming Next? 

• AI Tagger: Automatically assigns patents to relevant technologies, improving categorization and search. 
• AI Claim Clarifier: Simplifies complex patent claims, offering quicker and clearer insights into their scope. 
• New Email Templates: Updated interface for more efficient sharing of information. 
• Improved My Tasks Section: Advanced filtering and better organization to manage your patent-related activities more effectively. 

These innovations are set to upgrade how businesses manage their IP, making patent tracking, collaboration, and decision-making more seamless than ever. Want a first look at our upcoming features? Fill out the form below to access the full webinar and get all the details. 

The post Wrapping Up 2024 and Looking Ahead to 2025 appeared first on IamIP.