IBM owns maximum US patents in 2010

IBM Corp. topped the list of U.S. patent winners in 2010 for the 18th year in a row, IBM inventors were granted 5,896 patents during the year 2010, followed by Samsung Electronics Co., with 4,551 patents.

List of top 10 Companies with maximum 
U.S. patents awarded in the year 2010:

1. IBM Corp. (5,896)
2. Samsung Electronics Co. (4,551)
3. Microsoft Corp. (3,094)
4. Canon Inc. (2,552)
5. Panasonic Corp. (2,482)
6. Toshiba Corp. (2,246)
7. Sony Corp. (2,150)
8. Intel Corp. (1,653)
9. LG Electronics (1,490)
10. Hewlett-Packard Co. (1,480)

IBM's patents were generated in 2010 by more than 7,000 inventors in 46 states and 29countries working under an annual budget of about $6 billion.

Among the patents IBM won in 2010 were those for:
- A method for gathering, analyzing and processing patient information from multiple data sources to provide more effective diagnoses of medical conditions
- A system for predicting traffic conditions based on information exchanged over short-range wireless communications
- A technique that analyzes data from sensors in computer hard drives to enable faster emergency response in the event of earthquakes and other disasters
- Technology that lets computer chips to communicate using pulses of light instead of electrical signals, which could help computers work faster.

http://www.statesman.com/business/ibm-holds-on-to-title-for-winning-patents-1176826.html

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9KLLGRO2.htm

Patent Box Regime: A concrete effort to commercialize IP in UK

Daily we hear about the knowledge based economy and long lectures are delivered on importance of commercializing IP. But now, the time has come to take some steps to actualize the concept of IP derived profits. Many countries of European Union have implemented what is called as “Patent Box” System. Under the new regime 50% of revenues arising from the letting of the right to use certain qualifying intellectual property (IP) rights are tax exempt.
Qualifying IP rights comprise exclusively of certain technological IP: patents, secret formulae or processes, designs or models, plans, or information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience.
Royalties from any other source (e.g., trademarks, copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work including cinematograph films, image rights, software, lease of industrial commercial or scientific equipment, etc.) are expressly excluded from this incentive.

It must be noted that the 50% exemption applies on gross income, so costs incurred in the development of the qualifying IP rights are fully deductible from the general taxable income at the regular rate (30% for 2008).
This has been applied in Belgium, Switzerland Spain and will be effective in UK in year 2013. But the effects are visible already. Europe’s largest drug manufacturer –GSK plans to increase its investment in Britain following a government decision to slash corporation tax for patent-derived income. The tax break scheme should also benefit Britain's biotechnology industry, which has struggled to find adequate funding during the credit crunch.
Though UK is not expecting quick results but they are nevertheless positive about the outcomes.

Source: The New York Times Dec 10, 2009‎

Patents and Climate Change

Proposals from China and India for the Copenhagen climate change conference that patent protection should be weakened for green inventions have generated significant concerns in universities, colleges and research centres.

Pro-intellectual property activists argue that a patent for their invention could mean the difference between a marketable, successful product and an interesting idea. Intellectual property rights or IPR and patent protection laws are coveted since they protect an innovator's right to their hard work.

But developing country governments have noted that licences to reproduce a product can be expensive. China and India, along with 77 other developing countries, have set out a proposal for discussion at Copenhagen to liberalise global intellectual property rights for new innovations designed to reduce carbon emissions.

The suggestion to amend patents laws has jarred some critics, who argue that green innovation and job creation could be significantly stifled if the proposal were passed.

This is not the first time a request for 'compulsory licensing' has been proposed by emerging countries. The Word Trade Organisation has authorised compulsory licensing so that generic medicines can be produced in countries facing a health emergency locally at a fraction of the cost.

John Vaughn, Executive Vice-president for the Association of American Universities, said he hoped the same compromises made for medicine could be applied to the climate crisis: "If the proposal is just to say intellectual property rights and patents don't apply for certain technologies, that would be a problem. Universities should find ways to amend [IPR] in certain cases."

Vaughn said he hoped wealthy nations would try to work in partnership with poorer countries to find ways to change the current circumstances surrounding green technology patents and ultimately increase developing countries' access to emissions-reducing innovations.

"That's a promising way to go," he said.

In October, the Geneva and Washington-based Coalition for Innovation, Employment and Development released a study warning that weakening intellectual property rights in carbon clean technology could dampen innovation in Europe especially, and lose European jobs.

According to the coalition, "Intellectual property rights are necessary for EU firms to undertake investment in research and development of clean technology. As with any investment, if the risk on returns increases, a firm will tend to invest less. This could seriously increase compliance in reaching [green house gas] reduction targets and reduce the opportunities for job creation in the EU."

Instead of compulsory licensing, the coalition suggests developed countries transfer financial funds to poorer nations that are strictly intended for the purchase of technology that is required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Source: University World News