|
|
🎯 IP Management Pulse #57
|
Your inbox-insider from Prof. Wurzer every two weeks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here are the hot topics from 12th March 2026 - 25th March 2026
|
|
|
|
NEWS
|
Indian generics producers vs western drug makers | Global music streaming boom under pressure from AI artists | What the hunt for Banksy's identity tells us about trademarks | State laws against bad-faith patent assertion in the USA
|
|
|
|
RESOURCES
|
The Online Marketing Strategy Configurator | How to use the IPBA Connect Platform as an IP expert
|
|
|
|
DEEP DIVES
|
Architect, not firefighter: how making your thinking visible changes when clients call you | Innovation as a Second or Third Mover: Why Patents Matter for Timing Decisions | Trade Secrets: Why Documentation Determines Whether You Have a Case at All
|
|
|
|
IP MANAGEMENT LEARNINGS
|
Dyson Haircare: When Design Becomes the Language of Technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
🤗 🍵 I wish you an exciting and informative read. I look forward to your comments and our exchange on LinkedIn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indian generics producers vs western drug makers
India is one of the first countries in which the patents for the popular weight loss medications Wegovy and Ozempic expire. This opens the door for the various Indian generics manufacturers to offer generic versions of those drugs in their huge domestic market at a cheap price. The consequences could be double-edged. On the one side diabetes medication will become available to less affluent social groups, on the other side large-scale use for weight loss may lead to improper self-medication. The same can be said about the patent aspects. While granting a temporary exclusivity for drug developers is necessary to incentivise investments into innovation, an end date to this exclusivity is equally vital to enable competition.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, this highlights that pharmaceutical patents are not only protection mechanisms, but timing instruments within a broader market system. The expiry is not a failure of protection — it is a designed transition from exclusivity to competition. This requires a dual perspective. Originators must plan early for the loss of exclusivity through lifecycle management, follow-on patents, and differentiated products. Generic manufacturers, in contrast, need precise freedom-to-operate analysis and rapid entry strategies aligned with regulatory timelines. Effective IP strategy therefore lies in orchestrating the transition — managing not only how long protection lasts, but what happens the moment it ends.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
IP Protection in the Life Sciences on the digital IP lexicon 🧭dIPlex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global music streaming boom under pressure from AI artists
The global music industry reaches new revenue records and grows especially in the streaming sector. While the biggest music markets are still the USA, Europe and East Asia, especially the Latin American market is growing in relevance. But also a new technology trend is influencing the music market: AI. The music industry is now increasingly pushing forward to develop licensing models to fairly remunerate human artists for the use of their work in the context of AI development and training. This is crucial to balance AI progress with artist’s rights.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, this highlights a fundamental shift from protecting finished works to governing how content is used within ecosystems. In the age of AI, the key question is no longer only who owns a song, but who is allowed to use it for training and under which conditions. This requires new licensing frameworks that operate at scale, covering datasets, model training, and downstream outputs. At the same time, rights holders must ensure attribution and remuneration mechanisms remain enforceable despite massive content volumes. IP strategy therefore evolves from static protection toward dynamic ecosystem management — defining the rules of participation in AI-driven creative markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
External Licensing in the 🔎IP Management Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
What the hunt for Banksy's identity tells us about trademarks
Recently, it hit the news that the person creating famous artworks under the moniker “Banksy” got identified. Banksy is mostly known for his political graffiti art, whose nature may be the reason for his chosen anonymity. Nevertheless, this anonymity also creates some IP trouble for him. While remaining anonymous he cannot rely on an artists most powerful right: copyright. Instead, he tried to make use of trademark laws, e.g. to protect the “flower bomber” artwork. The failure to actually use the trademark within five years, leading to its loss, shows the challenges of this approach.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, this case highlights that IP rights are not interchangeable — they depend on the underlying logic of ownership and use. Copyright protects creative expression automatically, but requires a legally identifiable author to enforce it. Trademarks, by contrast, require genuine commercial use tied to a clear origin. Banksy’s situation exposes the limits of trying to substitute one IP regime for another. Anonymity may serve artistic and strategic purposes, but it conflicts with the legal realities of copyright enforcement. IP strategy therefore must align with identity and use. Without this alignment, even globally recognized works can become difficult to protect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
Trademark in the 🔎IP Management Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State laws against bad-faith patent assertion in the USA
The current Micron v. Longhorn case in the USA shines a light on the developments regarding the protection of manufacturers againts bad-faith patent assertion. This type of assertion typically originates from non-practicing entities, who are by many seen as patent trolls. The challenge to prevent this behaviour lies in the complexity of creating laws, which enable the enforcement of patent rights, while blocking bad-faith actors. The aforementioned case in the US state of Idaho may serve as an example of state law, which managed to achieve this task.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
For IP experts, this highlights that patent enforcement is no longer judged solely on legal validity, but also on the manner in which rights are asserted. The rise of state-level bad-faith statutes introduces an additional layer of scrutiny focused on conduct. This means that enforcement strategies must be carefully designed. IP strategy therefore extends beyond securing and enforcing rights to managing how those rights are exercised — because credibility increasingly determines enforceability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
Conflict Resolution & Mediation on the digital IP lexicon 🧭dIPlex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the 🌱Resource Hub, IP experts find ready-to-use playbooks, templates and tools to enhance positioning, visibility and client conversion. This section highlights selected resources and shows how they fit into modern, strategic IP practice.
|
|
|
|
IP experts discuss the Online Marketing Strategy Configurator
|
|
|
“I had the opportunity to consult with Prof. Wurzer, who provided a valuable external assessment of my social media presence through his online marketing strategy configurator. His deep understanding of the intellectual property profession, combined with sharp insights into business goals, made his advice particularly relevant and actionable. Prof. Wurzer offered keen observations on the type of content that should be published to align with strategic objectives, ensuring a more effective and targeted approach to online engagement. Our meeting was especially helpful in structuring my LinkedIn strategy, allowing me to refine my presence and leverage the platform more effectively for professional visibility. I highly recommend Prof. Wurzer to any patent attorneys or IP professionals looking to enhance their social media strategy with expert guidance tailored to their industry.”
|
|
Marek Bury is a Polish and European (EQE 2013) patent attorney specialising in electronics and ICT. He graduated from the Faculty of Electronics and Information Technology at the Warsaw University of Technology in 2004 with an M.Sc. Eng. degree and was awarded a doctorate (with honours) in Technical Sciences with a specialisation in Telecommunications.
|
|
|
|
|
The Online Marketing Strategy Configurator
|
|
|
|
The Online Marketing Strategy Configurator is a digital tool designed for IP experts to develop a structured online marketing strategy. It helps define target audiences, positioning, content themes, and channels while aligning activities with the client journey. The result is a tailored roadmap that improves visibility, consistency, and measurable business development outcomes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BEST PRACTISE: How to use the IPBA Connect Platform as an IP expert
|
|
|
“As a subject matter expert for patent information in the steel industry, I could present my knowledge to a vast community of relevant in-house patent professionals. This was possible by the use of established and valued social media channels and blogs. And finally, being a subject matter expert helped me to create new business contacts in the steel industry.”
|
Sascha Kamhuber
As a mechanical engineer, Sascha Kamhuber is working in the patent field since 2006 as CEO of infoapps GmbH. His focus was always to make patent information available, not only for the patent experts, but especially for engineers and researchers in companies. Therefore, he is designing patent tools, which have a high degree of intuitive operability. Also, his solutions are focusing on the needs of specific industries, such as the steel industry.
|
|
|
|
|
Through a focused content campaign, Sascha Kamhuber was positioned as an expert in using patent intelligence to drive innovation in the steel industry. The case shows how to communicate easy to use patent infomation as a strategic decision support tool, explaining how patent analytics can inform R&D, reduce IP risks and enable measurable competitive advantage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visible Council - the IP Expert Branding Column
|
|
|
|
|
Architect, not firefighter: how making your thinking visible changes when clients call you
|
|
By columnist Giulia Donato, Branding & Communication Consultant at people and brand strategies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most companies assume that registering IP means protection. In reality, rights do not prevent infringement — they only enable action. The air up case shows this clearly: despite patents and trademarks, the company lost millions to counterfeits because enforcement was not prepared at the necessary speed and scale. This reflects a broader pattern. Companies involve IP experts too late, when damage has already occurred. Experts then solve problems retrospectively instead of shaping outcomes in advance. The real leverage lies earlier. When IP experts communicate risks, decision points, and limitations proactively, they move from reactive problem-solvers to strategic advisors — getting involved before problems become irreversible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Favorites from the 📝IP Business Academy Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Innovation as a Second or Third Mover: Why Patents Matter for Timing Decisions
|
|
|
|
|
The article challenges the idea that first movers always win. Instead, it shows how second or third movers can benefit from waiting, learning from early market developments, and entering with more refined solutions. Patents play a key role in this strategy. While first movers use them to secure early positions, later entrants rely on freedom-to-operate analysis to navigate existing patent landscapes and avoid infringement. Patent information becomes a strategic tool, revealing trends and opportunities. Ultimately, success in innovation is not just about speed, but about timing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Favorite from the 🎧Podcast IP Management Voice
|
|
|
|
|
Trade Secrets: Why Documentation Determines Whether You Have a Case at All
|
|
|
|
|
|
This podcast episode highlights a key reality about trade secrets: they only exist if companies can prove they actively protected them. Confidential information alone is not enough. Without documented measures such as access controls, NDAs, and internal policies, courts may not recognize information as a trade secret at all. This makes documentation the central element of protection. In litigation, the decisive question is not what was taken, but whether the company can demonstrate consistent efforts to keep it secret. Trade secret protection is therefore not passive, but a management task that requires clear processes, documentation, and accountability to ensure enforceability when it matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Dyson Haircare: When Design Becomes the Language of Technology
|
|
|
|
Dyson shows how design can express technology directly. Their product forms communicate function, making innovation visible and understandable to users. This shifts IP strategy beyond patents toward protecting design as a carrier of technical value. When design reflects performance, it strengthens differentiation and makes innovation harder to replicate in competitive markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
