Top Articles
#1 in Business Subscribe Email Print

You are here: Home > Legal > Cyber Law > E-Commerce Patent Blackmail --- You May Be Next!

Tags

  • combination
  • which
  • engine
  • developing combination
  • developing combination

  • Links

  • Life Is What You Make It
  • Bones, Fossilized and Otherwise
  • Better Than We Thought: Sacramento in March
  • Top Articles - E-Commerce Patent Blackmail --- You May Be Next!

    Over the last eight years, the promise of the Internet has been to level the playing field between small businesses and major corporations.

    With a website, a small business cou
    According to USFDA, a combination product is one composed of any combination of a drug and device; biological product and device; drug and biological product
    ld now sell their products in the global market place without the overhead of additional offices. To reap the benefits of e-commerce, one only needed a website to attract and
    ; or drug, device, and biological product and fixed dose combination would include two or more combinations of drug.

    Examples of combination products may in
    ell to customers, and one needed a method to collect payments from their newly acquired customers.

    Since the Internet is really just a network of computers, it made perfect sen
    lude drug-coated devices, drugs packaged with delivery devices in medical kits, and drugs and devices packaged separately but intended to be used together.

    e to merge electronic transfer of funds into the website to simplify the purchasing process for the customer.

    To date, the only real impediment to doing business online has bee
    here is enormous increase in the number of combination products entering the market in the recent years. Combination products have proven advantages but fixe
    the safety of the consumer's financial data. In March of 2002, this all changed.

    Enter the U.S. Trademark and Patents Office. Over the last few years, the USTPO has shown extr
    d dose combinations are still in the process of convincing regulatory authority on their advantages over the single ingredient formulations.

    Combination pro
    eme ignorance of new Internet technologies. The USPTO has approved some of the most ludicrous patents to be presented to them.

    In 1997, AltaVista was granted a number of patent
    ucts have become life saving products for the pharmaceutical companies who doesn’t have many innovative molecules in their product pipeline and have been inc
    on search engine technologies, even though search engine technology had been in use as early as 1989.

    In 1999, Amazon was given a patent for "one-click purchasing."

    In 2001,
    easingly used in the product life cycle management. Even the companies having product patents are trying to extend their product life cycle through the combi
    cAfee was granted patents for "Auto-Downloading of Software / Software as a Service (SaaS)", both of which had been in use by others since before the creation of the global In
    nation products and maximize the revenues. But the companies involved in this practice are overlooking that they are burdening the patients both economically
    ernet.

    In 2002, PanIP (Pangea Intellectual Properties L.L.C) of San Diego, California entered the fray. They were granted two patents: US Patent No 5,576,951 and US Patent No.
    and physically. They need to rightly judge the benefits of the combination products and they have to even look at the risks involved when combining the produ
    6,289,319. The first patent covers the "use of graphical and textual information on a video screen for the purposes of making a sale." The second covers "accepting information
    ts. Some of the combination products were well accepted by physicians while others suffered. Companies involved in development of combination products are fi
    to conduct automatic financial transactions via a telephone line & video screen."

    Most Patent experts do not take these "junk patents" seriously knowing full well that they w
    ding difficulty in defining their combination products and facing various challenges from selecting a combination to marketing it.

    Following aspects would a
    ll be overturned by the courts and other processes set up to police the system. However, John D. Trudel, the Founder and Managing Director of The Trudel Group, pointed out tha
    dd to the challenges in developing combination products:

    Which markets to tap where the combination products can do fairly well?
    Which combination prod
    "this nonsense raises the cost of business, since it takes years and costs $1 million or so to break these junk patents."

    Herein lies the difference in PanIP's strategy. Big c
    cts are meaningful and rational?
    Which therapeutic categories to select?
    Which Combinations can address unmet needs of the patients?
    Do combin
    orporations who have deep pockets settle most "junk patents" in court. Amazon took their initial challenge to their primary competitor, BarnesandNoble.com. B&N had the resourc
    tions increase the patient compliance?
    What would be the developing cost?
    How to tackle the risks encountered during combination product developmen
    s to fight this "junk patent", so they fought.

    PanIP has instead directed their attacks at small companies who simply do not have the resources to fight! In fact, PanIP has c
    t?

    As combination products don't fit into the traditional categories of drugs, medical devices, or biological products, the USFDA is in the process of devel
    rrently sued 50 small businesses with no end in sight.

    Timothy Beere, the owner of DeBrand Fine Chocolates, had to make a choice when he found himself in the crosshairs of PanIP.
    ping new procedures for reviewing their safety, efficacy and quality.

    Professional from academic institutions, pharmaceutical industries, health care indust
    Tim said, "I had to make a decision. Pay them the $5000 they were asking for something I didn't think they had a right to, or Fight Back!" He went on to say, "It was clear tha
    y and representatives from various regulatory agencies are working out to design the regulatory requirements for manufacture and sale of combination products
    t PanIP's strategy counted on the notion that few, if any, of the businesses would be willing fight back. I was!"

    Tim proceeded to contact the other companies that have been
    .

    As there is an increasing trend of the combination products companies manufacturing such products should be able to tackle the problems involved in the de
    ued by PanIP to build a consensus to stand up and fight. Many have joined together in the fight starting the PanIP Group Defense Fund, Inc.

    In building his website (elopment. They need to be wiser in analyzing the market trends and the regulatory requirements.

    Companies that provide selfless information through particip
    new" href="http://www.youmaybenext.com">http://www.youmaybenext.com), Tim said, "I knew if I could get this on the radar screen, people would be as disgusted by it as I was.


    tion in industry events and feedback to regulatory authorities would be able to face the challenges and will be successful in developing combination products

    HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
    <a href="http://www.toparticles.org.ua/article/129552/toparticles-ECommerce-Patent-Blackmail--You-May-Be-Next.html">E-Commerce Patent Blackmail --- You May Be Next!</a>

    BB link (for phorums):
    [url=http://www.toparticles.org.ua/article/129552/toparticles-ECommerce-Patent-Blackmail--You-May-Be-Next.html]E-Commerce Patent Blackmail --- You May Be Next![/url]

    Related Articles:

    How to Take Your Competitor's Customers

    7 Tips to Real Estate Agents' Success

    SEO Tips And Pointers You May Not Know

    Bookmark it: del.icio.us digg.com reddit.com netvouz.com google.com yahoo.com technorati.com furl.net bloglines.com socialdust.com ma.gnolia.com newsvine.com slashdot.org simpy.com shadows.com blinklist.com