<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Active Links - Buying &#38; Selling IP, Intellectual Property &#38; Patents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.activelinks-ip.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.activelinks-ip.com</link>
	<description>The Fast Track From IP To Liquid Assets</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:44:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>ipFrontline.com: The Value of Valuing Patents</title>
		<link>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/ipfrontline-com-the-value-of-valuing-patents/</link>
		<comments>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/ipfrontline-com-the-value-of-valuing-patents/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:39:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>gideon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monetizing patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent valuation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[selling patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Valuaing patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.activelinks-ip.com/?p=261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Much has been written about valuing patents. Some call it an art. Others claim it is a science. Almost everyone expresses the difficulty in attempting to put a value on a patent. (At our valuation firm, we half cynically say that when one doesn’t know the value of a patent, they should revert to our [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Much has been written about valuing patents. Some call it an art. Others claim it is a science. Almost everyone expresses the difficulty in attempting to put a value on a patent. (At our valuation firm, we half cynically say that when one doesn’t know the value of a patent, they should revert to our default valuation method which is right 95% of the time. The default methodology simply holds that the value of a patent is zero.)</p>
<p>Despite the challenges involved with valuing IP, there are several important reasons why companies and tech transfer offices should make the effort. First, in some instances—such as post-acquisition, impairment, fresh start from bankruptcy, tracking intra-company transactions, and posting annual appreciation or depreciation in the value of venture capitalists’ stakes in their portfolio companies—accounting rules require such valuation appraisals.</p>
<p>Read the rest on <a title="Turning Patents into Cash: Three Ways to Monetize" href="http://www.cafezine.com/printtemplate.asp?id=24346" target="_blank">ipFrontline.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/ipfrontline-com-the-value-of-valuing-patents/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ipFrontline.com: Turning Patents into Cash: Three Ways to Monetize</title>
		<link>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/ipfrontline-com-turning-patents-into-cash-three-ways-to-monetize/</link>
		<comments>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/ipfrontline-com-turning-patents-into-cash-three-ways-to-monetize/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:15:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>gideon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[buying ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monetizing patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[selling ip]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.activelinks-ip.com/?p=253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Organizations that build strong patent portfolios can boost their chances of monetizing their patents if they follow a well-thought-out strategy, lawyers from the IP law firm Wolf, Greenfield &#38; Sacks, P.C. and industry experts told attendees at a Boston seminar.
Patents can be cash cows, said Randy Pritzker, co-chair of the firm’s electrical and computer technologies [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Organizations that build strong patent portfolios can boost their chances of monetizing their patents if they follow a well-thought-out strategy, lawyers from the IP law firm Wolf, Greenfield &amp; Sacks, P.C. and industry experts told attendees at a Boston seminar.</p>
<p>Patents can be cash cows, said Randy Pritzker, co-chair of the firm’s electrical and computer technologies practice group. IBM, which owns the most patents, has earned $10 billion from patent licensing deals, while Columbia University has reaped $134 million in royalties. Suing infringers can pay big too: Centocor won a $1.7 billion verdict in 2009, and Johnson &amp; Johnson received a $1.7 billion settlement for three cases this year&#8230;.</p>
<p>&#8230;When it comes time to monetizing the patents, there are three primary options: licensing, selling, and litigation/enforcement.</p>
<p>Read the rest on <a title="Turning Patents into Cash: Three Ways to Monetize" href="http://www.cafezine.com/printtemplate.asp?id=24346" target="_blank">ipFrontline.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/ipfrontline-com-turning-patents-into-cash-three-ways-to-monetize/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IPO.org: IPO SUBMITS FURTHER COMMENTS ON USPTO PATENT APPEALS RULES</title>
		<link>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/patent-appeal-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/patent-appeal-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 16:14:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>gideon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.activelinks-ip.com/001/?p=193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Friday IPO President DOUG NORMAN sent supplemental  comments to the USPTO on the rules for ex parte appeals in patent  cases.  The letter elaborated    on comments made by IPO during a public “roundtable” at the  USPTO on January 20, 2010, and in an earlier IPO letter to the USPTO [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>On Friday IPO President DOUG NORMAN sent supplemental  comments to the USPTO on the rules for ex parte appeals in patent  cases.  The <a href="http://www.ipo.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Board_Resolutions_and_Position_Statements&amp;CONTENTID=25270&amp;TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm">letter</a> elaborated    on comments made by IPO during a public “roundtable” at the  USPTO on January 20, 2010, and in an earlier IPO letter to the USPTO in  2007.  Last week’s letter focused primarily on the proposed  presumption of examiner correctness.  IPO questioned whether the  presumption of correctness is consistent with the statute and case  law.  The comments were prepared with assistance from the IPO  Committee on Patent Office Practice (U.S.).</p></blockquote>
<p>- <a title="IPO SUBMITS FURTHER COMMENTS ON USPTO PATENT APPEALS RULES " href="http://www.ipo.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=This_Weeks_Daily_News" target="_blank">IPO.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.activelinks-ip.com/patent-appeal-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

