|
|
🎯 IP Management Pulse #64
|
Your inbox-insider from Prof. Wurzer every two weeks
|
|
|
|
|
In corporate IP management, two developments are currently reshaping strategic decision-making: the growing integration of digital technologies into physical products and processes, and the increasing importance of intellectual property for scaling innovation.
|
|
Artificial intelligence is evolving from a tool for individual IP tasks into an operational layer for managing global patent portfolios, while industrial companies are bringing experienced engineers back into technical processes to preserve tacit knowledge and improve AI-supported quality systems. At the same time, the Unified Patent Court is becoming a permanent element of European portfolio and litigation strategy, and technology companies are acquiring patent portfolios to gain access to new capabilities, markets and licensing opportunities.
|
The themes covered in this issue are not selected editorially. They are derived from the Open Foresight Board (OFB) Trend Radar and from ongoing discussions within the Open Foresight Board, where in-house IP experts continuously exchange perspectives on emerging developments and their implications for corporate IP management.
|
The Open Foresight Board is part of the Open Foresight Program and brings together in-house IP experts to identify, discuss, and prioritise emerging developments in corporate IP management.
|
This issue presents selected signals that make these developments visible in practice — not as isolated news, but as indicators of broader shifts that require strategic attention. Our aim is to provide orientation by connecting current events with the underlying changes they represent. Here are the hot topics from 18th of June 2026 - 1st of July 2026:
|
|
|
|
NEWS
|
Know-how Management | AI in Operational IP Management | UPC Strategy | IP Awareness in Top Management
|
|
|
|
RESOURCES
|
OFB Fireside Chat: Use of AI for IP Issues
|
|
|
|
DEEP DIVES
|
What clients really expect from senior IP experts today | Predictive Quality Control in Adhesive and Coating Production | Models for AI robotics adoption
|
|
|
|
IP MANAGEMENT LEARNINGS
|
Project Cypress and the New IP Logic of Green Technology Funding
|
|
|
|
|
|
🤗 🍵 I wish you an exciting and informative read. I look forward to your comments and our exchange on LinkedIn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Know-how Management
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board show that artificial intelligence is making the systematic management of technical know-how more important rather than reducing the need for experienced experts.
|
For many industrial companies, critical knowledge is not fully contained in databases, manuals or design standards. It is held by experienced engineers who understand why earlier solutions failed, where technologies interact and which apparently minor details can create quality problems.
|
AI systems can help analyse information, detect patterns and support technical reviews. However, they depend on the knowledge used to train and guide them. When experienced employees leave before their tacit knowledge has been identified and transferred, companies risk losing both human expertise and the foundation required for effective AI applications.
|
Transferring Engineering Know-how at Ford
A current example can be seen at Ford. The company hired, promoted or brought back around 350 experienced technical specialists to help improve vehicle quality. These veteran engineers mentor younger employees, lead design reviews and contribute to the development of AI-assisted and automated quality tools. Ford acknowledged that AI alone was insufficient because its results depend on the quality of the knowledge and data used to train it.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, the Ford case illustrates that know-how management must connect human expertise, organisational processes and digital systems. The relevant question is no longer only how confidential technical information should be documented and protected, but how tacit knowledge can be identified, transferred and made usable for future employees and AI tools without losing the judgement on which it depends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
Why Traditional IP Advisory Models Fail in Industrial IoT on the digital IP lexicon 🧭dIPlex
|
|
|
|
|
|
AI in Operational IP Management
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board show that artificial intelligence is developing from a tool for individual IP tasks into an operational layer for managing complete IP portfolios.
|
For many international companies, IP information is distributed across subsidiaries, jurisdictions, external advisers and different management systems. This makes even basic portfolio questions time-consuming to answer. AI-supported platforms can help consolidate this information and make it accessible through a shared interface.
|
These systems combine IP records, portfolio data, dashboards and natural-language search. They can help teams identify rights, review territorial coverage, locate ownership information and prepare portfolio decisions more efficiently. Their value therefore lies not only in automating individual activities, but also in turning fragmented IP data into an operational resource.
|
A Central IP Hub
A current example can be seen at Prosus. Together with DLA Piper and Von Seidels, the company created a central hub containing almost 50,000 IP records across more than 300 jurisdictions. Instead of requesting information from different providers, its IP team can combine the globally fragmented data in one dashboard and query it using natural language.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, the Prosus case illustrates that AI in IP management begins with data structures and processes. The relevant question is no longer only which individual tasks can be automated, but how portfolio information from different companies, jurisdictions and advisers can be consolidated, governed and made available for operational decisions.
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
AI as a Value Driver for IP Law Firms: Key Insights from the Live Interview with Johannes Ernicke on the 📝IP business academy blog
|
|
|
|
|
|
UPC Strategy
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board show that the Unified Patent Court is developing from a new litigation option into a central element of European patent strategy.
|
For many companies, the UPC was initially treated as a jurisdiction to observe. After three years, however, more than 920 actions have reached the Court of First Instance, including over 530 infringement actions and nearly 100 applications for provisional measures. The court is therefore becoming relevant not only once litigation starts, but already when companies structure portfolios, assess risks and prepare enforcement decisions.
|
UPC strategy combines portfolio reviews, opt-out decisions, freedom-to-operate analysis, evidence gathering and forum selection. Because defendants may have only three months to respond to an infringement action and 30 days in provisional-measures proceedings, companies need to prepare before a claim is filed. The value of UPC strategy therefore increasingly lies in litigation readiness rather than reactive case management.
|
Three Years of the UPC
A current analysis by Bird & Bird shows that UPC proceedings are genuinely contested. Patent holders won 45% of the infringement actions assessed, while 64% of provisional-measures applications were granted. The firm also highlights that division selection can affect timing and that lack of urgency is the most common reason why provisional measures fail.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, the first three years of the UPC illustrate that European patent litigation strategy must be embedded in ongoing portfolio management. The relevant question is no longer only whether a patent should be enforced before the UPC, but whether portfolios, fallback positions, FTO analyses and internal response processes are ready before a dispute arises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
The Emerging Strategy Gap in the UPC Market on the digital IP lexicon 🧭dIPlex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IP Awareness in Top Management
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board show that intellectual property is increasingly becoming a management-level resource for corporate growth, technology access and market positioning.
|
For many companies, patents are still primarily discussed when new inventions are protected or legal risks emerge. Their strategic value becomes more visible when management connects existing IP assets with product development, acquisitions and entry into adjacent markets.
|
A patent portfolio can preserve valuable technical options even when the original business model fails. Acquiring such a portfolio may provide access to developed technologies, shorten development cycles and create opportunities for licensing or enforcement. The value therefore lies not only in the individual patents, but also in management’s ability to recognise how they support the company’s broader strategy.
|
Miso Robotics Acquires Zume’s Patent Portfolio
A current example can be seen at Miso Robotics. After Zume Pizza ceased operations, Miso acquired its technology and more than 300 patents relating to robotic food preparation, delivery systems, sustainable solutions and packaging. Miso expects the portfolio to support new features, expansion into adjacent products and a stronger position through licensing and enforcement.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, the acquisition illustrates why top management needs a clear understanding of the strategic options contained in IP portfolios. The relevant question is no longer only whether patents protect existing products, but how they can provide access to technologies, accelerate corporate development and create value beyond the business in which they were originally generated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
Partnering with Giants: How Caracol Uses IP Strategy to Stay in Control with KUKA on the digital IP lexicon 🧭dIPlex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the resources of the Open Foresight Program, in-house IP experts find structured insights and practitioner-driven analyses developed with and by the OFB members, highlighting emerging trends, strategic signals, and real-world implications for corporate IP management that can be translated into actionable guidance for their own organisations.
|
|
|
|
OFB Fireside Chat: Use of AI for IP Issues
|
|
|
|
AI is no longer an abstract future topic for IP management. Across industries, in-house IP teams are already asking a more practical question: how can AI help us deal with growing information volumes, support better decisions, and create measurable value for the business?
|
This is why we are preparing an upcoming Open Foresight Board Fireside Chat on the “Use of AI for IP Issues.” The topic emerged from our ongoing work with corporate IP professionals and from the signals identified in the Open Foresight Board Trend Radar. One message is becoming clear: the relevant question is no longer whether AI will be used in IP management, but where it can create real value beyond isolated efficiency gains.
|
The conversation will focus on the practical challenges behind AI adoption in IP: patent information overload, monitoring and FTO pre-screening, workflow design, human expert review, strategic IP communication, and the changing service role of IP departments. It will also address why tools alone are not enough, and why meaningful progress requires a combination of domain expertise, AI competence, process redesign, and a clearer understanding of what internal users actually need from the IP function.
|
OFB Fireside Chats are demand-led conversations. They start from topics that industry identifies as strategically relevant and turn them into focused exchanges with selected experts and practitioners.
|
Further OFB Fireside Chats are currently in preparation on:
• Know-how Management
• Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court
• IP Awareness in Top Management
• Data Protection and Privacy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visible Council - the IP Expert Branding Column
|
|
|
|
|
What clients really expect from senior IP experts today
|
|
By columnist Giulia Donato, Branding & Communication Consultant at people and brand strategies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior IP experts are increasingly expected to offer more than technical knowledge, legal precision and analytical depth. Clients value advisors who provide orientation, sound judgment and narrative coherence when facing uncertain commercial decisions. This means identifying what matters, connecting IP issues to business consequences, and explaining recommendations clearly across management, investors, R&D and business units. Communication is therefore part of the expert’s value, not an afterthought. For senior partners, the positioning challenge is to make this strategic contribution visible externally. Expertise remains essential, but differentiation increasingly depends on showing how that expertise helps clients navigate uncertainty and make better decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Favorite from the 📝IP Business Academy Blog
|
|
|
|
|
IP Decision Case: Predictive Quality Control in Adhesive and Coating Production
|
|
|
|
|
This IP decision case examines how manufacturers of adhesives, coatings and functional materials should protect predictive quality-control systems built on Industrial IoT. Their value lies not in one sensor or algorithm, but in combining chemistry, machine data, process parameters, operator knowledge and analytics. Management must choose between patents, trade secrets and contractual controls, or adopt a hybrid approach. The case highlights risks around disclosure, supplier access, cloud platforms, data governance and tacit knowledge loss. Its central lesson is that competitive advantage depends on controlling the architecture of industrial learning while keeping systems scalable, robust and operationally useful across production sites.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Favorite from the 🎧Podcast IP Management Voice
|
|
|
|
|
Models for AI robotics adoption
|
|
With David Audretsch, Distinguished Professor & Ameritech Chair of Economic Development at Indiana University Bloomington
|
|
|
|
|
This podcast episode examines how innovative SMEs adopt AI robotics through “make, buy or ally” strategies. Drawing on research covering more than 15,000 UK firms, it argues that internal R&D alone rarely drives adoption. Instead, external R&D acquisition, licensing and structured collaboration provide the strongest acceleration, while internal capabilities remain essential for evaluating and integrating outside technologies. Successful implementation also depends on operational and managerial skills, not only STEM expertise. For IP managers, the implication is clear: adoption requires coordinated licensing, freedom-to-operate analysis, ownership rules, background and foreground IP management, contractual safeguards, trade-secret protection and governance of knowledge spillovers across ecosystems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the 📑IP Management Letter series, IP experts find case-based narratives that show how strategic IP management works in real companies and industries, with practical insights they can directly apply to their own portfolios and client work.
|
|
|
|
|
Project Cypress and the New IP Logic of Green Technology Funding
|
|
|
|
Project Cypress shows that green technology funding and IP strategy must be designed together. Public support helps carbon-removal technologies cross the gap from research to industrial scale, while patents, trade secrets, data, contracts and operational know-how preserve value. Integrated planning enables startups to attract investment, manage disclosure and build their business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
