• Home
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise
    • Advertise On IP Watch
    • Editorial Calendar
  • Videos
  • Links
  • Help

Intellectual Property Watch

Original news and analysis on international IP policy

  • Copyright
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Opinions
  • People News
  • Venues
    • Bilateral/Regional Negotiations
    • ITU/ICANN
    • United Nations – other
    • WHO
    • WIPO
    • WTO/TRIPS
    • Africa
    • Asia/Pacific
    • Europe
    • Latin America/Caribbean
    • North America
  • Themes
    • Access to Knowledge/ Open Innovation & Science
    • Food Security/ Agriculture/ Genetic Resources
    • Finance
    • Health & IP
    • Human Rights
    • Internet Governance/ Digital Economy/ Cyberspace
    • Lobbying
    • Technical Cooperation/ Technology Transfer
  • Health Policy Watch

Counter-Measures – How Startups Can Fight Pirates Without Burning Cash

03/08/2018 by Guest contributor for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and are not associated with Intellectual Property Watch. IP-Watch expressly disclaims and refuses any responsibility or liability for the content, style or form of any posts made to this forum, which remain solely the responsibility of their authors.

By Michael A. Nicolas

It’s never been easier for innovative companies to raise the funding they need to spur growth, invest in research and development, and build a revenue pipeline. Typically, early funding rounds also include the relatively minor costs of protecting the company’s proprietary technology by securing patents.

But patents alone don’t stop pirates. Bad actors know that patents are worth little unless the patent owner is prepared to enforce them.

And that’s often a problem for growth companies trying to fund operations with finite cash. Litigation to prosecute patent violations is expensive and time consuming. It can take months or even years – during which sales are likely plummeting and margins compressing as a competitor seizes market share by selling knockoff products at cut-rate prices.

I’ve seen this scenario nearly break businesses – and not just startups. Even relatively established technology companies can be dragged under by piracy’s cross-currents.

I’ve worked with a number of growing companies that have had their intellectual property stolen at trade fairs, or by subcontractors during the manufacturing process.

In both scenarios, the costs associated with enforcing the company’s intellectual property rights could have been crippling to the company’s long-term growth strategy, draining funds necessary for critical operations and development initiatives.

Michael Phillips, a pioneer in voice recognition software, offers an instructive example. He thought his company was set to take off when his inventions were integrated into Apple’s voice-activated assistant Siri. Then another company contacted him and challenged his right to the patents. He won the lawsuit, but spent $3 million on the legal battle and ended up selling his company.

“We were on the brink of changing the world before we got stuck in this legal muck,” he told the New York Times.

The cost of IP litigation — often coming at the exact moment when startup funding is exhausted and before other revenue streams open — is almost never built into the startup business model, especially for growth-stage companies.

Entrepreneurs trying to pitch a lean investment opportunity can’t tack on a few million dollars for potential legal costs down the road. So they simply must plow ahead with development and, eventually, sales, knowing that pirates await.

When their intellectual property is stolen, traditional options are grim: they can sell assets to cover legal costs or gear up for a long legal fight and hope their product remains relevant when the dust settles.

This all may change after enough startups are stifled by patent litigation, but until investors agree to bake in these costs, there is another option. Litigation financing is often viewed as a narrow funding option used exclusively for lawsuits. But it can be applied more broadly.

If a company has a strong legal claim, and has armed itself with solid intellectual property protections, there is every incentive on the investor’s side to advance funds to pay for operations and propel the business forward while the legal process plays out.

While the primary focus of most litigation finance companies is to pay the attorneys’ fees and expenses associated with enforcing a company’s intellectual property rights, litigation finance can also provide a lifeline for startups to grow operations – hiring staff, expanding production or developing new products – as legal proceedings play out. It can act as bridge funding after startup capital runs out, but without many of the risks that come with typical startup investors. It is a non-recourse investment in the success of the company’s legal claims.

In most instances, the litigation finance company receives a percentage of the proceeds from a successful enforcement campaign.  However, if the campaign is unsuccessful, the company owes the financier nothing.  There is also flexibility to use financing for proceedings in the United States Patent and Trademark Office or the International Trade Commission, where perhaps injunctive, rather than monetary, relief is being pursued.  Indeed, the flexibility to take on patent thieves in various legal venues is immensely important in the global tech race.

Getting outflanked in Asia or Europe can cost a company millions in lost revenue and profit. Companies with sophisticated IP protection strategies will be prepared to wage a worldwide defense of their technology; obtaining global exclusion orders protecting their patents can be just as valuable as winning a multimillion dollar lawsuit in US courts. Savvy companies can now do both.

One of our clients employed precisely this strategy to block the importation of infringing products manufactured overseas, while at the same time obtaining valuable licenses from its foreign competitors.  We believe the strategy was extremely successful, and allowed our client to enforce its intellectual property rights while simultaneously scaling its business. Litigation that once looked like it might wipe them out turned into an opportunity to achieve the profitability they set out for in the first place.

Mike Nicolas

Michael A. Nicolas is a Co-Founder and Managing Director of Longford Capital, responsible for Longford’s portfolio management, including underwriting, investment selection, and overseeing the due diligence process. He has more than 15 years of experience representing a wide array of corporate clients involved in complex litigation throughout the United States.

 

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Related

Guest contributor may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

Creative Commons License"Counter-Measures – How Startups Can Fight Pirates Without Burning Cash" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Filed Under: Language, Themes, Venues, Contributors, Enforcement, English, Finance, North America, Regional Policy

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Vimeo
My Tweets

IPW News Briefs

Saudis Seek Alternative Energy Partners Through WIPO Green Program

Chinese IP Officials Complete Study Of UK, European IP Law

Perspectives on the US

In US, No Remedies For Growing IP Infringements

US IP Law – Big Developments On The Horizon In 2019

More perspectives on the US...

Supported Series: Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities

Civil Society And TRIPS Flexibilities Series – Translations Now Available

The Myth Of IP Incentives For All Nations – Q&A With Carlos Correa

Read the TRIPS flexibilities series...

Paid Content

Interview With Peter Vanderheyden, CEO Of Article One Partners

More paid content...

IP Delegates in Geneva

  • IP Delegates in Geneva
  • Guide to Geneva-based Public Health and IP Organisations

All Story Categories

Other Languages

  • Français
  • Español
  • 中文
  • اللغة العربية

Archives

  • Archives
  • Monthly Reporter

Staff Access

  • Writers

Sign up for free news alerts

This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. Our Cookies and Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2021 · Global Policy Reporting

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.