加载中...
推荐位 推荐位

作者包括宋嘉瑜(Mandy)的物联网专利诉讼中文文章

发布时间:2016.12.06 北京市查看:2714 评论:6

本帖最后由 siceng 于 2016-12-6 11:07 编辑

物联网行业或将迎来专利诉讼高发期,你准备好了吗?

来源:http://www.cnipr.com/yysw/zscqzlygl/201606/t20160620_197493.htm

发布时间:2016-06-20  来源:中国知识产权报

  原标题:物联网时代企业如何制定知识产权战略?

  物联网正在迅速崛起,并将连接起世界万物。有人可能会问:这有什么特别之处?过去几十年中,我们不就已经依靠互联网将事物连接起来了吗?事实上,这二者是有区别的,最重要的区别是互联设备背后的连接性和智能性的预期规模。

  分析师预计,物联网将发展成为一个数万亿美元的行业,截至2022年将会有380亿台智能设备与互联网连接。这意味着地球上的每个人将有超过5台互联设备。仅就中国制造业而言,据预测,在未来15年内,物联网对国内生产总值的贡献将达到1960亿美元。那么,在物联网时代,企业应如何制定知识产权战略?

  专利诉讼将会增多

  在全球范围内,各国都在争先恐后地在这一新的数字领域抢占先机。中国政府去年发布了《中国制造2025》,希望将生产流程与互联网整合起来以提升制造业的整体生产力。中国政府还推出了“互联网+”战略,希望将移动互联网、云计算、大数据、物联网等整合起来。

  在政府的大力支持下,中国的移动运营商,如中国移动、中国电信和中国联通,也加强了与国内外企业的合作以连接各种装置、车辆和设备。大型中国企业如华为、中兴通讯、阿里巴巴、腾讯、京东方和乐视等,甚至一些新兴的创业公司,都在物联网项目上投入巨资,以争夺物联网市场。

  随着物联网的快速发展,知识产权保护将日益重要,纠纷也将随之增多。很多人对近10年智能手机行业的专利战耳熟能详。伴随着物联网市场的崛起,相关专利纠纷只会越来越多。在朝着一个完全互联的世界发展的过程中,智能手机只不过是个人物联网设备的先锋。因此,虽然智能手机专利战的硝烟渐淡,但是潜在的更多的专利纠纷将会在更广泛的物联网产业地平线上呈现。除了智能手机之外,物联网行业还涵盖了许多其他领域,如智能家居、智能工厂、智能汽车、智能医疗、智能健身器材等。

  相较于传统的独立产品,物联网产品遭遇专利诉讼的风险更高,因为他们要求企业在终端节点、终端、连接层、数据中心、分析/应用程序和安全保护上整合许多不同的技术。雾网络(frog network)的终端节点,如传感器、终端设备、网关和位于装配线上的门户等,都会收集数据,并与云中的大数据服务器进行通信。服务器田(Server farms)会处理大数据,以智能地决定如何改善终端节点或更大物联网系统的性能,如工厂车间或分布在世界各地的智能工厂。因为物联网生态系统仅在各个组件可以相互通信的情况下才能运行,所以企业不可避免地需要在一定程度上整合标准化的技术,而标准化的技术通常会涉及大量专利。因此,即使一个小的物联网系统的组件都可能会涵盖数千件专利。

  制定战略以攻为守

  因为涉及到众多专利,要想在物联网领域进行专利清查和运用评估可能非常困难。因此,物联网企业应考虑以攻为守的战略,对自己的发明广泛及时地提交专利申请,以防御竞争对手的专利侵权诉讼。一个强大的专利组合是有力的谈判筹码,可以在业界形成一种强有力的威慑。通常如果其竞争对手拥有覆盖该企业产品的专利(有可能造成交叉许可的情形),企业不太可能对一个竞争对手发起专利侵权诉讼。

  具体来说,由于物联网技术日新月异,企业应尽早提交专利申请,以获得最早的优先权日期和最佳的权利范围覆盖。鉴于许多物联网创新的实现依赖于计算机或计算机网络,或以其他方式与之相关联,在Alice Corp.v. CLS Bank International案中作出里程碑式判决后,企业在撰写物联网领域的美国专利申请时,应十分注意该案提出的新的可专利主题要求。在Alice案中,美国最高法院裁定,“通过通用计算机来实现一个抽象想法不能将原本不可专利的抽象想法转变成一个可专利的发明”。另外,因为物联网技术的相互连接和数据共享通常需要多方共同完成一个完整的过程,所以在Akamai Techs.,Inc.v. Limelight Networks, Inc.案后(美国法院另一项判决),企业在撰写物联网的相关专利申请时,也应注意该案给出的新的共同侵权的标准。

  另外,智能手机大战告诉我们,从专利诉讼角度看,外观设计专利的威力和实用新型专利的威力一样大。通常物联网设备的内在功能可决定是否对消费者有价值,设备的表面特性,如智能汽车装饰设计,可以极大地影响品牌知名度和对消费者的吸引力。强大的外观设计专利可以保护企业免受竞争对手假冒“山寨”产品和售后更换或备件的侵害。

  值得一提的是,物联网企业虽然很难避免使用行业标准,但是他们可以通过积极参与标准制定来促进标准朝着对自己有利的方向发展。例如,谷歌及其合作伙伴最近一项称为“Thread”的新网络协议,创建了一个适用于连接的家用物联网设备的通信标准。在行业标准被采纳后,该标准的贡献者将会因为拥有标准涵盖的知识产权而受益。

  中国政府长期以来致力于支持建立物联网标准并在国际上推动中国制定的标准的发展。例如,2012年国际电信联盟通过了中国发起的首个通用物联网标准,2014年国际标准化组织(ISO)和国际电工委员会(IEC)批准了中国拟议的“物联网参考架构”国际标准。这些标准制定的举措为中国物联网企业整合知识产权资源并建立物联网技术的国际标准铺平了道路。

  随着物联网的飞速发展,行业专利战争的下一个浪潮也会很快到来。因此,物联网企业应该尽早制定适合自己的知识产权战略,以降低风险,提高在这个新兴市场中的竞争力。(作者:何健、宋嘉瑜)





分享

收藏

点赞

举报

评论列表

  • 第1楼
    作者包括宋嘉瑜(Mandy)的物联网专利诉讼英文文章,新发表的
    http://www.iot-today.com/main/articles/driving-iot-security-with-innovation-and-intellectual-property-development/
    Driving IoT Security with Innovation and Intellectual Property Development
    Nov 16, 2016 8:22 AM | by Editorial Staff | NO COMMENTS

    Kenie Ho, Carlos Rosario, and Mandy Song, Ph.D.

    On October 21, 2016, a massive and sustained Internet attack, specifically a distributed denial of service (DDOS) attack, caused network outages across large swaths of the United States and Europe. The attack launched with the help of hacked IoT devices, such as routers, video cameras, and digital video recorders.

    Earlier this year, hacked devices attacked the website KrebsonSecurity.com- ironically a blog covering cyber-security news and investigation. Hackers used the same malware strain in both attacks. These types of attacks will only increase as IoT grows.

    Businesses need to ensure adequate security throughout their entire IoT system. Existing technologies help do that in part, but the ultimate answer will probably involve new IoT-based solutions. Patents a traditional vehicle for driving innovation play a key role because they entice companies to invest in R&D for security.

    The Ubiquitous Security Problem
    Because IoT systems collect startlin*****unts of data on peoples behavior, identity, and networks, security becomes critical for IoT to be extensively adopted. People must feel comfortable that their information is safe before they truly accept the technology.

    At its core, IoT involves connecting and networking devices that until now have not necessarily been connected. This means that all of those devices, from your brand-new connected refrigerator to your connected vehicle, are creating new entry points to the network and presenting new security and privacy risks. Threats to these IoT assets abound, such as poor web-interface authentication and authorization methods, non-existent transport encryption security, inadequate security configurations, and poor physical controls.

    In IoT systems that rely on sensor measurements, any data or signal distortion can significantly affect the systems function. For example, connected smart vehicles using satellite navigation signals are vulnerable to spoofing. A hacker masquerading as a satellite could send false positioning signals causing an autonomous driving function to fail, or worse, an accident.

    For IoT systems involving financial transactions, like usage-based insurance or smart banking sometimes referred to as the Fin-ternet of Things data privacy and security is also a concern. The emergence of sensor devices and telematics in smart cars allow them to transmit information on driver behavior to insurance companies so that they can adjust premiums. This benefits insurers and low-risk drivers because their reduced premiums better represent their safe driving behavior. So too for homeowners insurance: smart homes may transmit data about how a household is managed. Insurers can then use the data to automatically adjust monthly premiums, based on traffic flow in the home and safe behavior, like locking doors when leaving homes or turning off ovens when not in use. Most consumers would consider information on their behavior at home or in their cars to be very personal and thus want it protected.

    On a broader scale, security for IoT devices tied to healthcare, such as medical devices, or part of the public infrastructure, such as power grids and water supplies, has evolved into public safety concerns. Imagine what would happen if a smart power grid became the target of a DDOS attack like the one launched in October.

    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has recently announced a plan to develop strategic principles for IoT to protect the nations infrastructure from cyber threats. Other government agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Department of Transportation have also been tackling the issue, but no one has yet divined a comprehensive answer.

    Patents to the Rescue
    Patenting in IoT security may provide the solution by motivating more R&D investments in the space. A patent is basically a temporary monopoly from the government, giving the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing an invention.

    Experts have traditionally viewed the patent system as a prime driver of innovation. The ability to monopolize the invented technology for a significant period of time creates incentives for businesses to invest in R&D and publicly disclose any resulting inventions. Theoretically, this allows a business to recoup its R&D costs and make a profit commercializing its patented invention. Otherwise, competitors can simply copy the invention, discouraging any investing in R&D.

    Some would argue that copyright provides a means for protecting software inventions, so why bother with patent protection. But copyrights protect only the creative expression or specific implementation of the invention in a computer program. It does not prevent a compe***** from taking the underlying invention or algorithm, and implementing it in a different way, such as in another programming language with different software architecture or even in the same programming language with just a different way of writing the code.

    Patents, on the other hand, can protect the heart of a security or software innovation. They can protect the underlying inventive idea or a specific implementation of the idea if the implementation itself is inventive.

    Obtaining security and software patents does have some challenges. Recent changes in the law have caused courts and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to find some computer-implemented inventions ineligible for patenting. Also, IoT systems are often distributed around the world with different entities owning different components of the system. This can create a divided infringement problem and make it harder to assert IoT patents against infringers.

    Despite these challenges, many companies are innovating in the IoT security space and pursuing patent protection. Large companies and startups lead this innovation effort, but academia and individual inventors also play an important role. According to a study by Cisco, companies hold 89% of the currently issued patents on IoT security. Universities hold 7%, individuals the remaining 4%. Among the company patent holders, LG, Ericsson, Qualcomm, and Intel appear to take the lead.

    The Cisco study also shows that privacy protection and threat defense enjoy many patent filings (about 62% combined), followed by security provisioning/monitoring, physical security, application security, trusted computing, security management, communication security, and cloud security. Encryption technologies are being heavily patented. In its IoT patent landscape analysis, LexInnovaa technology consulting companyfound that over 1200 patent applications on IoT-related encryption technologies have been filed worldwide in the last 5 years: 224 on error correction, 628 in data security, and 424 on data encryption.

    Conclusion
    Intellectual-property rights are driving IoT security innovations because they provide incentives for companies to create the most effective solutions. Obtaining valuable patents for key security technologies will eventually set companies apart in thecompetitive IoT space.

    About the Authors
    Kenie Ho is a thought leader on intellectual property (IP) issues for IoT. He heads the IoT working group of over 40 attorneys at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. He has litigated over 50 patents in U.S. courts on electrical and consumer-electronics technology.

    Mandy Song, Ph.D., is a patent attorney in Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLPs Washington D.C. office. She has nearly ten years experience prosecuting and litigating patents in the electrical and computer arts. She serves IoT clients in the smart vehicle, smart TV, portable electronics, and medical device areas.

    Carlos Rosario is an IP attorney at the electric vehicle company Faraday Future. His practice includes patent law, privacy law, and regulatory compliance. He has experience with IP litigation, patent prosecution, privacy compliance, and technology transactions. His fields of technical application include the internet of vehicles, automated driving systems, predictive analytics, and cybersecurity.

    For more information please visit www.finnegan.com.


    2016/12/06 10:54 [来自北京市]

    0 举报
  • 第2楼

    2016/12/06 11:04 [来自北京市]

    0 举报
  • 第3楼

    2016/12/06 11:07 [来自北京市]

    0 举报
  • 第4楼

    2016/12/06 23:28 [来自北京市]

    0 举报
  • 第5楼
    今年Mandy回国两次了,一次三月,一次七月。下次11月还有一次回国。你们要报名吗?
    你在哪里,是做什么的,可以私信告诉我

    2017/09/25 13:46 [来自北京市]

    0 举报
  • 第6楼
    2018年6月Mandy会回国见大家呢,不仅会去一线城市,也会去二三四线城市,想参加线下聚会的小伙伴请私信我告诉你的微信号和姓名、所在城市

    2018/05/28 08:56 [来自北京市]

    0 举报

快速回复