@T: ALWAYS THE TWAIN

Firstly, 360-2020′s patent claims cover over 30 unique and proprietary features. Secondly, I was recently involved with some friends’ scoping of a social network as well as at various IP conferences as part of my analysis about how to deal with one aspect of Project ART. There seem to be three schools of thought on IP:

(1.) There’s no point filing anything.

(2.) Let’s just build it with no project plan, no contractual responsibilities between the founder(s) and maybe look at filing something after the product launches.

(3.) File everything NOW.

It really boils down to the founder(s) preferences and how much they’re prepared to spend to file IP and enforce it. It also varies according to whether the founder(s) believe their product is unique, the market opportunity is sizable, whether they want to use the IP as leverage to attract investors, the likelihood of the patent being enforceable and how much they could earn from licensing their product. For example, there is little point IP filing a typewriter in this day and age when people are migrating towards touch mobile devices where they don’t have to change the ink ribbons or to buy paper or swap the carriage. Equally, there are valid reasons to IP file any pharmaceutical which can cure cancer, aging or diabetes. The different applicability and the sizes of the markets means that the IP considerations are different.

There is no black+white, hard+fast, do-this-and-you-will-become-billionaires rule about IP or about Internet entrepreneurialism. As with Life itself everything is in shades of gray or rainbows and some things simply happen out of coincidence rather than deliberate planning.

Still, I read with interest that Facebook has had patents granted for its newsfeed and user affinity towards applications:

*  http://gigaom.com/2010/02/25/facebook-granted-news-feed-patent/

* http://www.allfacebook.com/2010/02/facebook-awarded-patent-for-measuring-use-affinity-toward-applications/

*  http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_granted_patent_on_the_news_feed_-_this_co.php

I know that some of my friends don’t believe in IP so the Facebook patent may give them some pause for thought, and maybe they’ll realize that when I say that it should be considered I do so in the interests of protecting them from themselves.

Serious investors are unlikely to be interested or to get involved if what to do about IP has not even been considered.

That’s what’s happening out there.

After quite a bit of focus from me, 360-2020^TM now has certificates to state that it is “patent-pending” and is logged with the UK Intellectual Property Office. The next stage will involve filing it with the US Patent Office, the Chinese Patent Office and WIPO.

Why go through the somewhat laborious and costly processes involved? For three simple reasons:

(1.) Business protection.

(2.) To facilitate the licensing process.

(3.) It’s cool if you work hard enough and innovate enough to earn a patent.

So what exactly is 360-2020^TM? Well, it’s an analytical system that’s been distilling and organically synergizing in my head throughout my career (i.e., since the age of about 17). During this time I’ve seen marketers appropriate the 360^O from mathematics without them realizing that there’s little point in examining anything from a 360^O perspective if you’re not also 20/20 in terms of your accuracy of vision — and I have a maths degree and wear glasses, so this has been a source of constant amusement.

Ergo 360-2020^TM.

I showed my good friend GC my brand logo (trademark registered with UKIPO) and he thinks it’s brilliant. Now, since he has very discerning classical as well as scientific tastes, this reassures me. He even suggested that I sell it and that any large company in the Science & Engineering sector would love to have it.

Hmmn…….except that the 360-2020^TM brand is going to be (hopefully) as recognizable as the Google / Apple / Twitter logos over the next few years and it’s definitely for the Internet and digital media sectors.

As for the patent application for the system itself, well the initial examiner raised some pointers about what is and is not patentable. According to the rules, business methods (otherwise known as business models), mathematical proofs and computer languages are not patentable. I explained that 360-2020 is an original hybrid between these systems:

* Google Search

* MBTI/Belbin

* Bloomberg

Since all of these systems are patentable and since 360-2020′s algorithms are not in the form of Fermat’s Last Theorem or Black-Scholes and there are no references in the patent application about whether it’s going to operate a PPC/PPM/PPA model of revenue generation or its planned strategic alliance or route-to-market etc. (aka business methodology), then it should definitely qualify as “patent-pending”.

So…..UK IPO agreed and sent the certificates. Yippee!

Anyone who produces any type of monetizable work (business models, software designs, music, art, film scripts, etc.) should read the Intellectual Property guidelines provided by the Copyright Office of their respective countries as well as the Trademarks and Patents Offices. Here are some link examples:

· http://www.copyright.gov/

· http://www.ipo.gov.uk/copy.htm

· http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en

· http://www.uspto.gov/

· http://www.ctmo.gov.cn/

· http://www.inpi.fr/

· http://www.patentoffice.nic.in/

Also worth keeping an eye on are these sites:

* http://www.hg.org/intell.html

* http://www.ip-watch.org/

* http://www.eff.org/

At times, it may seem as if copyright and IP don’t apply on the Internet with people downloading and sharing music / video / content files so freely but in reality INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT AND IP LAWS DO APPLY.

For the individual who’s producing original work it’s imperative they’re suitably informed of their rights and how their work is being commercially exploited (sometimes without a single US$ going to them).

Today, the French government voted in the lower house for a law that seeks to protect artists’ interests on the Internet more:

* http://www.france24.com/fr/20090513-projet-loi-hadopi-senat-adoption-assemblee-nationale-christine-albanel-UMP-PS-artistes

* http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2009/05/13/le-projet-de-loi-hadopi-definitivement-adopte_1192419_651865.html

* http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/technology/internet/13net.html

With Project ART we’re trying to create an innovative corporate structure, which will allow our art assets to appreciate in value within an art fund as well as via digital merchandizing mechanisms and for member-users to participate in the monetization of those digital assets, all complying with international asset management and IP laws. No other company yet provides the platform we’re aiming for so this will be fairly ground-breaking and needs the involvement of sound legal advice.

Whilst casting around for prospective law firms, I found myself on the Mishcon de Reya website:

Mishcon de Reya is the commercial law firm well-known for representing the likes of Princess Diana of Wales and Heather Mills. No, I’m not about to get a divorce; I would need to be married first for this to happen! They have an established Intellectual Property practice which is the area of law we want to get information on and were ranked #65 in the Times Top 100 UK companies in 2008 which is a good sign.

The site also caught my eye because it made me think, “We must be in the era of red-orange branding for sites. There’s Wolfram Alpha, True Knowledge and also Mishcon de Reya!” Previous years have seen these “in” colors, btw:

· silver wash (Apple, NYT)

· royal blue (most banks, Paypal, Plaxo)

· sky-blue + orange blush (Tripit, Skydeck, SearchMe, slideshare)

· apple green + aqua (Kosmix, the Conservative Party, twitter, hulu, Digg, delicious, Skype)

Hmmmn……..maybe digital success is contingent on color choice………………