SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Summer Interns

IP-Watch interns talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

Inside Views

Submit ideas to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch!

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Latest Comments
  • So simply put, we have the NABP saying that all ph... »
  • The original Brustle decision was widely criticise... »

  • For IPW Subscribers

    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >


    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >

    Patent Licensing Experts Share Lessons Learned In Making Deals

    Published on 16 May 2011 @ 3:30 pm

    By , Intellectual Property Watch

    NEW YORK – Experts at a recent conference on licensing revealed some of the behind the scenes thinking within industry on how to do great deals and keep from getting burned.

    The speakers were panellists at the 4-6 May Licensing Executives Society spring meeting (IPW, Patent Policy, 6 May 2011).

    Ruth Plager, president of ZenithBio, formerly with Enzon and Pfizer, was moderator, and said the key to any deal is in the data.

    Michael Yeomans, president of Partners in Pharma, formerly senior vice president for Bayer Global Business Development, said that from the “big pharma” view, it was “enlightening how little interest there would be in some products even with late stage data.” At Bayer, he insists that they look at all the data before making a decision.

    Jeff Jonker, chief business officer for Satori Pharmaceuticals, formerly at Gloucester and Genentech, said, “Unlike online dating, collaborating is no longer optional,” meaning buyers and sellers must work together. Industry generally does “a poor job of communicating with each other,” he said, adding that more transparency and being forthright about what you are seeking would help this process.

    With industry deal-making, “if there’s no second date after a first date, you never know why,” Jonker said. The marketplace would be more efficient if that information were shared.

    His company creates “data packages” where they give a copy to prospective buyers for comments to make sure there are no surprises, such as when they find they lack the funding to do what the other company is asking them to do.

    Carolyn Green, cofounder, president and COO of Logical Therapeutics, recommended double-checking the data, because the peer review process it goes through “doesn’t mean they actually reproduced the data.” She also suggested verifying data from universities very early on, and to hold back equity until it is validated. For instance, the results may have involved specific know-how from their laboratory, she said.

    Bradley Campbell, senior vice president, Amicus Therapeutics, who was formerly business director of Genzyme’s cardiovascular unit, said the area of rare diseases has become “more interesting,” and early interest is not a problem. What should be asked is what the vision is for bringing a product forward. “There are vast differences in views of drug development,” he said. Also, he said that in discussing licensing deals, there must be communication and trust. Furthermore, he suggested not to talk about data as missing, but rather as what is needed, he said.

    Participants also discussed the significant changes in the industry right now, especially with mergers and acquisitions, and noted these sometimes can leave workers without a job.

    Yeomans said he was brought to Germany to help with the integration of Bayer and Schering, and was told it should not be too difficult since they were both German companies. But it turned out there were still plenty of differences to work through.

    Green said that small companies should consider carefully what they invest in, as for instance they usually won’t get back investment in capital infrastructure. She said her small firm has gone “100 percent virtual,” shutting down its lab.

    Jonker also said that many mergers and acquisitions are on the basis of the lead product only. “Others in the pipeline are not getting attention,” so may not be worth the investment, he said. He also raised the need to consider strategies to gain tax benefits.

    In the end, Green said it is important to make sure the data is solid, and that the company has made a reasonable market forecast.

    It was also suggested that some areas, like rare diseases, might require an explanation of the philosophy as to why it is important. Some markets are more obvious than others.

    Finally, the panel said it is not advised to try to hide something that is not positive. As Jonker put it, “every product has warts, so call the warts out.”

    Deals can take months or years, so you can do more trials along the way, he said, noting that “cleaning up is part of doing development.” One of the panellists’ companies recently did a $230 million deal with GlaxoSmithKline.

    A speaker said that for dealing with the big firms, using any connections you may have can help as they may have hundreds or even thousands of projects to consider. Another speaker said that from the big company perspective, if they do not end up doing business with a smaller firm it is likely “not that your baby is ugly, there’s just a lot of babies.”

    William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch.

     


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

     

     
    Your IP address is 50.16.130.188