|
|
🎯 IP Management Pulse #59
|
Your inbox-insider from Prof. Wurzer every two weeks
|
|
|
|
|
|
In corporate IP management, two types of developments are currently shaping strategic decision-making: increasing systemic uncertainty on the one hand, and long-term technological shifts on the other.
|
On the one hand, frameworks such as the Unified Patent Court (UPC) are redefining how and where patent rights can be enforced — creating new opportunities, but also exposing companies to concentrated risks across multiple markets. On the other hand, emerging fields such as quantum technologies require companies to position their intellectual property long before markets, standards, and business models are fully established.
|
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 9th April 2026 - 22nd April 2026:
|
|
|
|
NEWS
|
Quantum companies go public with the help of their IP portfolios | Risks of losing international patent protection at the UPC | Open source software as the basis for smart cars | The role of public funding for green tech projects
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEEP DIVES
|
Why the market is moving upstream, but many IP experts are not | The Beginning of an Iconic Brand: Innovation, Legacy, and Enduring Value | Integrating IP and Data Management
|
|
|
|
IP MANAGEMENT LEARNINGS
|
The Green Patent Paradox: How Dynamic IP Models Accelerate Green Technology Adoption
|
|
|
|
|
|
🤗 🍵 I wish you an exciting and informative read. I look forward to your comments and our exchange on LinkedIn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantum Computing
|
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board reveal two distinct perspectives on the role of quantum technologies in corporate IP management:
|
For many companies, quantum computing is still perceived as a high-potential but distant field. While its strategic relevance is widely acknowledged, limited technological maturity and unclear timelines mean that, for now, it does not yet trigger immediate IP action.
|
At the same time, companies that are already actively engaging with quantum technologies take a markedly different view. In these discussions, the focus shifts towards early patent positioning, defining protectable subject matter, and aligning IP strategies with future markets long before standards and commercial applications are established.
|
Quantum companies go public with the help of their IP portfolios
A few days before World Quantum Day, the Swiss quantum technology company Terra Quantum AG made a big step towards becoming a publically listed company. It plans to do so via a $3.25 billion merger with Mountain Lake Acquisition Corp. II. This shows that the development of quantum technologies and the creation of associated patent portfolios still generates an enormous value, while everyone is looking at AI.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
This merger illustrates a new role for IP management: ensuring that patent portfolios in early-stage fields are positioned as future-relevant assets with clear economic significance. The challenge is no longer whether a technology is in the spotlight, but whether its IP is structured to reflect its long-term revenue potential. IP experts therefore become a bridge between technological development and market perception, translating innovation into valuable assets even before broad market attention fully materialises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
The Quantum IP Gap in Germany on the 📝IP Business Academy Blog
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unitary Patent and UPC
|
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board highlight two contrasting perspectives on the impact of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) on European patent strategy.
|
On the one hand, the UPC is seen as a powerful enforcement tool that enables patent holders to assert their rights more efficiently across multiple jurisdictions. For companies with strong portfolios, this creates new opportunities to centralise litigation and strengthen their competitive position.
|
On the other hand, the same centralisation introduces significant risks. Companies increasingly recognise that a single adverse decision can affect patent protection across several markets at once, shifting attention towards revocation exposure, forum selection, and the robustness of individual patents under concentrated legal scrutiny.
|
The following case illustrates how these risks materialise in practice.
|
Risks of losing international patent protection at the UPC
|
One recent decision at the UPC in Milan highlights the far-reaching implications of this development for international patent holders. The case concerned a patent for medical technology in the field of oxygen therapy, which competitor Fisher & Paykel challenged, among other things, on the grounds of lacking novelty. The court followed this argument in its decision, although the case is not yet finally concluded.
|
This example shows how the UPC can turn individual validity challenges into decisions with cross-border impact, raising the stakes for patent holders operating in multiple jurisdictions.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
This development reinforces a shift in priorities for international IP management. The challenge is no longer limited to building strategically positioned portfolios, but extends to ensuring that key patents are robust enough to withstand centralised validity attacks.
|
In this context, IP experts increasingly act as a control layer for portfolio resilience, translating technical strength into rights that remain defensible under intensified legal scrutiny. As a result, IP management moves beyond portfolio expansion towards a more selective and quality-driven approach, where the survivability of critical patents becomes a central concern.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
Unified Patent Court (UPC) in the 🔎IP Management Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
Open Innovation & Open Source Software
|
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board highlight a growing tension in the automotive industry between the increasing adoption of open source software and the need to maintain control over key technological assets.
|
On the one hand, open source and platform-based approaches are seen as a necessary response to the rising complexity of software-defined vehicles. They enable faster development, reduce fragmentation, and provide a scalable foundation for integrating software across different vehicle functions.
|
On the other hand, companies are becoming increasingly aware of the risks associated with this shift. These include dependency on dominant platform providers, challenges in managing licensing obligations, and the potential loss of control over strategically relevant system components.
|
The following signal illustrates how this shift towards platform-based software architectures is currently unfolding in practice.
|
Open source software as the basis for smart cars
|
One of the most visible examples of this development is the growing role of open source-based platform solutions in the automotive industry. Large technology companies such as Google are actively driving this shift by offering integrated software ecosystems.
|
A prominent example is the Android-based solution integrated into newer Renault models, which addresses the long-standing challenge that automotive software has traditionally been developed in isolated modules for specific functions. By contrast, platform-based approaches aim to provide a more unified and maintainable software architecture for the entire vehicle.
|
At the same time, this shift highlights that the adoption of open source software introduces new layers of complexity from an IP perspective.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
This development reinforces a shift in the role of IP management within increasingly interconnected software ecosystems. The challenge is no longer primarily about protecting proprietary code, but about ensuring that the use of open source as a shared foundation does not erode control over strategically relevant technologies.
|
In this context, IP experts take on a governance role, defining which components remain proprietary, how licensing obligations are managed, and where openness can be leveraged without compromising long-term differentiation.
|
As a result, IP management moves beyond restricting access towards actively structuring openness — ensuring that collaboration, platform integration, and external dependencies are aligned with the company’s strategic control over its technological core.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Background information on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
The Role of Software Patents in Autonomous Driving on the digital IP lexicon 🧭dIPlex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Green Tech and Sustainability
|
Discussions within the Open Foresight Board highlight a structural dependency of green technologies on policy frameworks and public funding environments.
|
On the one hand, companies and research institutions continue to advance sustainable technologies, supported by strong innovation capabilities and growing patent activity. In this perspective, IP plays a key role in protecting technological advances and enabling collaboration and scaling.
|
On the other hand, it is increasingly recognised that the commercial success of many green technologies is not determined by technical maturity alone. Instead, market adoption often depends on regulatory frameworks, infrastructure development, and — in many cases — the availability and continuity of public funding.
|
The following signal illustrates how these dependencies directly affect the path from innovation to market.
|
The role of public funding for green tech projects
|
One current example of this dynamic can be observed in a large-scale carbon capture project in Louisiana, which is currently facing uncertainty due to pending public funding from the U.S. Department of Energy that had been promised under a previous administration.
|
This case highlights that, particularly in emerging green markets, the speed and feasibility of market adoption are closely tied to political priorities and funding decisions — not only to technological readiness.
|
What IP experts can learn from it
|
This development reinforces a shift in how IP management must operate in policy-driven markets. The challenge is no longer limited to protecting technological innovation, but extends to ensuring that patent portfolios and business models are aligned with regulatory frameworks and funding structures.
|
In this context, IP experts increasingly act as a strategic interface between technology, business, and policy environments. Their role is to position intellectual property in a way that not only reflects market demand, but also fits the logic of public funding and infrastructure development.
|
As a result, IP management moves beyond protecting inventions in isolation towards embedding them in ecosystems where financing, regulatory support, and real-world deployment can actually be realised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources on the IPBA Connect platform
|
|
|
|
Green Technologies and Patents 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Trend Radar of the Open Foresight Program is a structured foresight tool that identifies and visualizes emerging developments shaping corporate IP management. It is created as a result of a study among in-house IP experts, where researchers systematically collect feedback, weight its relevance, and synthesize it into key trend areas.
|
Its purpose is not prediction, but orientation: helping organizations understand complex changes, prioritize what matters, and align IP strategies with evolving technological, geopolitical, and business environments. By translating diverse insights into a clear framework, the Trend Radar enables more informed, forward-looking decision-making in corporate IP management.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visible Council - the IP Expert Branding Column
|
|
|
|
|
Why the market is moving upstream, but many IP experts are not
|
|
By columnist Giulia Donato, Branding & Communication Consultant at people and brand strategies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article argues that the IP market is shifting “upstream,” meaning intellectual property is increasingly integrated into business strategy, decision-making, and valuation rather than applied only after issues arise. However, many IP experts remain positioned as downstream advisors, brought in only once a problem is defined. This is not due to lack of expertise, but due to how they present their value. Three key issues are identified: overly narrow positioning, language that starts too late in the client journey, and failure to make decision impact visible. To remain relevant, IP experts must articulate how their expertise improves decisions early, positioning themselves as strategic contributors rather than reactive specialists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Favorite from the 📝IP Business Academy Blog
|
|
|
|
|
The Beginning of an Iconic Brand: Innovation, Legacy, and Enduring Value
|
|
|
|
|
The article explains how Mercedes-Benz evolved from a technical invention into an iconic global brand by combining innovation, intellectual property, and strategic brand building. Early patents by pioneers like Karl Benz and Gottlieb Daimler created the technological foundation, while trademarks, storytelling, and customer engagement transformed these innovations into lasting brand equity. Key moments show how branding decisions and IP protection reinforced each other. The case illustrates that long-term value arises not from technology alone, but from aligning patents, trademarks, and brand strategy to create enduring market recognition and financial value.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Favorite from the 🎧Podcast IP Management Voice
|
|
|
|
|
Integrating IP and Data Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
This episode explains how the growing importance of data is transforming intellectual property management by requiring a more integrated approach. It presents a hybrid model that combines IP and data management into a unified system, improving governance, decision-making, and value extraction from intangible assets. The discussion outlines the data lifecycle in business and its close links to traditional IP processes. A key concept is the M3 methodology — matching, merging, and managing — to operationalize this integration. Ultimately, organizations must adopt proactive, data-driven IP strategies, supported by structured governance and cultural change, to stay competitive in the digital economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
The Green Patent Paradox: How Dynamic IP Models Accelerate Green Technology Adoption
|
|
|
|
The article challenges the “green patent paradox,” showing that patents do not necessarily hinder technology adoption but evolve over time. Early-stage innovations rely on strong protection to incentivize R&D, while later stages increasingly use licensing and semi-open models to accelerate diffusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
