Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 6: Ray Millien, a Renaissance Man of IP

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 6 HERE!

 


 

Raymond Millien likes to compare himself to Forrest Gump. 

As someone who pivoted from a programming job at GE Aerospace to a career in intellectual property law, bounced between inside and outside counsel roles within that space, and even briefly dabbled in public policy, he’s definitely a renaissance man. And he’s fallen into many of those jobs by accident.

He credits his adventurous and successful career — working as Chief IP Counsel for big-name companies like Volvo, founding his own IP boutique, and now serving as the CEO of Harness IP — to intellectual curiosity and openness. 

Appreciating every aspect of the game, Millien says, means you’ll play smarter.

“I never want to take one camp or the other because your client may be a patent troll today, it may be an operating company tomorrow. And all of them are necessary in the ecosystem,” he says.

On this episode of Clause 8, Millien sits down with us to tell all about what it means to have a “renaissance” career in IP law and what it takes to be an inside IP lawyer for major corporations. He even reveals some industry secrets about startup patents along the way.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 5: Professor Tim Hsieh Explains the Benefits of Judge Shopping

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 5 HERE!

 


Clause 8 - Professor Tim Hsieh

The 2017 TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Supreme Court decision led to a major shift in where patent litigation cases are filed in the United States. Before TC Heartland, a patent owner could bring a case in almost any district where an alleged infringer conducted business. Because of its predictable rules and streamlined procedures, the Eastern District of Texas became the most popular forum for such cases; nearly 40% of patent infringement actions were filed there in 2016.

When Professor Timothy Hsieh clerked in the Eastern District of Texas, he saw firsthand the benefits – for patent owners and defendants – of experienced judges handling patent cases. TC Heartland changed that by changing the rules regarding where companies can be sued for patent infringement. By 2017, only 15% of patent infringement cases were tried in the Eastern District of Texas. Instead, patent cases became concentrated in Delaware and California.

“If you’re not solving that forum shopping issue and you’re just changing the forum, then you might have a new problem that’s created […] wherever you shift the cases to,” Hsieh says.

But Hsieh’s key point is that forum shopping — or even judge shopping — is not a problem at all. In fact, it’s a good thing. “If anything, the defense are also getting a much fairer, much more balanced adjudication because you have someone who’s very knowledgeable about patent law,” Hsieh says.

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) seemed to recognize these benefits of district court judges who have relevant patent expertise and experience when he included the Patent Pilot Program in the Leahy-Smith American Invents Act. The program allowed federal district court judges in select districts to volunteer to handle patent cases. The goal was for certain judges to have increased expertise – and as a result – do a better job.

However, after the program expired and Judge Alan Albright started attracting patent cases to his Waco court room in the Western District of Texas, Leahy had a change of heart. In an unprecedented letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Leahy pressured Roberts to do what he could to stop Waco from being a go-to patent venue by suggesting there was something untoward about Albright’s interest in patent cases. The pressure campaign seems to have worked. In his end-of-year report, Roberts highlighted the issue and stressed “the role of district judges as generalists.”

Since Hsieh has become known as an expert on the subject of patent venues, I knew he was the perfect person to talk to about this recent controversy.

I also spoke with Professor Hsieh about whether how courts think about venue is outdated and his fascinating career trajectory of patent litigator turned patent examiner turned law school professor.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 4: Phil Warrick on Working with Senator Coons to Fix the Section 101 Mess

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 3 HERE!

 


Clause 8 - Warrick

Before Phil Warrick began working for Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), Capitol Hill wasn’t in his career plans.

But when an opportunity to work with Coons emerged, he decided to take the leap. For two years, he served as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) IP counsel detailee to Coons after Coons helped to restart the Senate’s IP Subcommittee, working on bipartisan initiatives like the IDEA Act and legislation to fix the Section 101 patent eligibility mess. Those efforts were a dramatic departure from Congress’s previous fixation on the “patent troll” narrative.

“And for me, as a detailee, it was just a great opportunity to learn more about all these issues that were at play with intellectual property, and having really interesting conversations with folks on and off the hill, who said, I understand why this is your perspective, why you might have this view as a patent litigator, but let me give you this view from a completely different perspective,” Warrick says. “And it really opened my eyes.”

After Coons friend and fellow Delawarean, Joe Biden, was elected as president, the innovation community was hopeful that Coons would use his top role on the Subcommittee to prioritize patent issues within the Biden administration and Congress.

However, Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) had other ideas, and took over as the top Democrat on the Subcommittee.  Since that time, the Subcommittee has moved in a very different, arguably anti-patent direction, and Leahy’s views have won out in seemingly every major administration decision related to patents.

But in yet another twist, Leahy has announced that he is retiring and won’t seek re-election in 2022.  So, Coons is likely to return to his role as the top Democrat on the IP Subcommittee. Warrick’s insights from working for Coons are critical for anyone who wants to impact patent policy in the future.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 3: Louis Carbonneau on Brokering Patents After the Patent Gold Rush

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 3 HERE!

 


 

 

The golden age for patent brokers has come and gone, but that doesn’t stop Louis Carbonneau.

“There are very, very few patent brokers nowadays,” Carbonneau says. “We’re just one of a handful left. And frankly, we get about four or five portfolios every single day that people want us to broker. We only say yes 1% or 2% of the time.”

As one of the world’s leading patent brokers, the CEO and Founder of Tangible IP has brokered over 4,500 patents and boasts close to 30 years in the intellectual property industry.

With experience as Microsoft’s former General Manager of International IP & Licensing, Carbonneau has sat on many sides of the intellectual property table. He shares his adventures in the industry and lessons learned with Eli Mazour, host of the Clause 8 podcast, including behind-the-scenes stories from his time at Microsoft, the common pitfalls of patent licensing, and why price isn’t always an essential part of the conversation when buying and selling intellectual property.

“Some people will not even want to acquire patents for free if they don’t like the patents because then they have to start paying for maintenance fees and prosecution fees. It’s like a free puppy. It’s only free for a few hours, and after that, you start paying,” Carbonneau explains.

Those that are interested in selling their patents need to understand what brokers — and buyers — are looking for in a deal.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 2: Ryan Abbott on Why Patent Law Should Recognize AI Inventors

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 2 HERE!

 


 

 

 

Good lawyers effectively deal with the present. Very few have what it takes to create the future. Professor Ryan Abbott is doing just that.

He leads the DABUS project: the first time ever an AI machine has been named as an inventor on a patent application. Most thought that the project was an interesting academic exercise that was unlikely to go anywhere. Some – uncharitably – dismissed it as “a publicity stunt.”

Yet, the DABUS project did get a patent in South Africa. And, an Australian judge ruled that AI machine can be recognized as an inventor. Even more significantly, the DABUS project successfully raised awareness about the issue of AI inventorship among policy makers all over the world.

But what does it mean for an AI system to be named as an inventor in the real world?

In this episode, Abbott makes his case for the skeptics: Identifying AI as the inventor on patents is morally and commercially important. He also explains how to judge whether the human pushing the buttons is as much an inventor as the AI they’re programming.

On this episode, Eli and Prof. Abbott talk about the Artificial Inventor Project, whether everything will be “obvious” in the future, and Prof. Abbott’s fascinating new book “The Reasonable Robot: Artificial Intelligence and the Law.”

 

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Harrity Demos Patent Automation Software at IP Summit

SALT LAKE CITY (February 2020) Shawn Lillemo, Harrity’s Software Product Manager and IP attorney, was featured as a panelist and presenter at the 2020 Utah IP Summit last Friday. Shawn led the discussion on the use of automation to improve speed and quality in patent application drafting. The presentation included a demo of one of the Harrity Tools, an in-house automation software developed by Shawn and his team and currently used by Harrity attorneys to reduce errors and time spent on applications.

“The right automation tools can provide application drafters with extra time that can be spent fleshing out additional details of the invention, exploring alternative embodiments, and telling a good story about how the invention solves a technical problem,” stated Shawn on the significance of automation in the patent & legal fields.

In the short time since its launch, the use of Harrity Tools has substantially improved the efficiency of Harrity’s drafting attorneys and has led to a notable increase in the amount of applications drafted and obtained by the firm. To learn more about application drafting automation and other Harrity Tools, visit https://harrityllp.com/services/patent-automation/.