The difference between Biosimilarity and Generic drugs is an important, but easily misunderstood difference. Biosimilar drugs are generally from human or animal microorganisms that are biologics. The Biosimilar drugs or products are not generics of branded or patented drugs. The … Continue reading
In Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz, 135 S.Ct. 831 (2015), the Supreme Court stated that any factual underpinnings that a judge relies upon in interpreting the claims of a patent is subject to a clearly erroneous standard. Thus, not all aspects of … Continue reading
How do you draft a good Master Technology Service Agreement? What do you consider? What is reasonable? What is foreseeable? What is too remote? How do you respond to an Evidence Preservation Letter? What is your clients’ doom and gloom fears? These are all things that all technology and information technology consultants and teams have to consider and make good decisions on. Without having a good team of professionals that can identify the areas of risk for the clients, the method and means of exploiting known or identified vulnerabilities, and creating a prompt data security protection protocol you may end up losing out from a change in ISPs or IT vendors.
Having good change management procedures is vital to the success of your clients and to protect them from many would be competitors looking to acquire your clients’ knowledge, trade secrets and intellectual property. A good first step for protecting your clients is using good provisions in your Master Technology Service Agreements that all vendors have to comply with to ensure that the proper procedures are followed to ensure that key personnel, key clients, key vulnerabilities, key consultants and key terms and caveats are negotiated and drafted to protect against reasonably anticipated problems.
The Master TSA allows for a method of interjecting vital controls that can be adapted to the needs of the clients–sometimes all that is needed is a wise and seasoned Chief Technology Officer (“CTO”). Other times–key schedules and predefined procedures to follow for implement changes in information technology services or hardware. Sometimes good limitations on damages, warranties and representations and third party indemnification provisions are required to ensure that your clients are protected from potential errors in the change management procedures.
Finally, having good enforcement and corrective actions predefined and provided for in the Master TSA will save you a lot of headaches down the line–including delays based on the need for board or shareholder’s approval, manager or member’s approval, or similar delays that may be required in following corporate formalities. Sometimes a rigid adherence to corporate formalities can allow a problem to become bigger over time and based on delays–it is generally advisable to deal with these types of data security problems sooner rather than later.
For more go to: http://www.bipeblawg.com, http://www.vrplawgroup.com, http://www.eebrunchclub.com
Posted in Angel Investment Updates, Commercial Agreements, Copyright Updates, Corporate Counseling, Cyberlaw Upddates, Employment Law Publication, Employment Law Updates, Entertainment Law Updates, General Business, General Litigation, IP Publications, Last Week's Update, Mergers and Acquisitions, Patent Law Publications, Patent Law Updates, This Weeks Update, Trademark Law Updates, Trial Updates
Tagged CFCA, Chicago Attorney, Chicago Copyright Attorney, Chicago Copyright Lawyer, Chicago Cyberattorney, Chicago Cyberlawyer, Chicago IP Attorneys, Chicago IP Counsels, chicago IP lawyers, Chicago IT Attorney, Chicago IT Attorneys, Chicago IT Counsel, Chicago IT Counsels, Chicago IT lawyer, Chicago IT Lawyers, Chicago Lawyer, chicago patent attorney, Chicago Patent Counsel, chicago patent lawyer, Chicago Technology Service Agreements, Chicago Trademark Attorney, Chicago Trademark Counsel, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Data Security, Hacking, IT Agreements, IT Litigation, Master Service Agreements, Technology Agreements, Technology Attorneys, Technology Counsel, Technology Law Firms, Technology Lawyer, technology lawyers
Third Installment of the Fall 2014 Competition Thank You to the Panelists! Paul Durbin of Miller and Canfield, Lt. Governor Sheila Simon running for Comptroller of Illinois, Ron Kirschner founder of Heartland Angels, Tom Kastner Woodbridge International and GP Ventures, William Bennett of Level Office and Vihar R. Patel Founder of EEBC-It’s Just Brunch Club! and Managing Attorney for VRP Law Group.
This was a special privilege and honor to have the collective experience, guidance and wisdom of all the panelists to be a great opportunity for the sharing and exchanging of ideas and knowledge for the benefit of Chicago Entrepreneurs and the StartUp Community!
For more go to: http://www.eebrunchclub.com or http://www.vrplawgroup.com Fall2014EEBC_Thank You_Announced_Press Release_102314
Posted in Angel Investment Updates, Commercial Agreements, Copyright Updates, Corporate Counseling, Cyberlaw Upddates, Employment Law Updates, Entertainment Law Updates, General Business, General Litigation, IP Publications, Last Week's Update, Mergers and Acquisitions, Patent Law Publications, Patent Law Updates, This Weeks Update, Trademark Law Updates, Trial Updates
Tagged 1871, Angel investors, Chicago Entrepreneurs Attorney, Chicago Entrepreneurs Counsel, Chicago entrepreneurs lawyer, Chicago Investors, Chicago Lawyers, Chicago Startup Chicago, CIPLIT, DePaul University, EEBC, EEBC Competition, EEBC Quarterly Start Up Competition, EEBC Start Up Business Plan Competition, EEBC-It's Just Brunch, Entrepreneurs, Entrepreneurs Attorney, Entrepreneurs Counsel, Entrepreneurs Lawyer, Executive Summaries, Executives, Incubators, Industrial Corridor of Near West Chicago, Lawyers, Panelists, PPM, Private Placement Memorandums, SBA Development Centers
There are variety of challenges and obstacles to assisting clients in making sure that they are able to transfer distribution channels, facilities, and operations overseas. Clients need to understand the layout of the land, the local customs and regulations on … Continue reading
We recommend a new book that has been published relating to a Beginner’s Series of Guides for Entrepreneurs relating to acquisition of angel, capital, funds, seed or VC funding for undertaking new efforts to try out and test out the … Continue reading
There are a variety challenges that must be overcome before a fair, good and just system can be created. It is subject to human frailty,emotions, misperceptions, miscommunications, lack of cohesiveness, and lack of full disclosure or access to a complete … Continue reading
The America Invents Act or the AIA changed our patent filing system from a First to Invent to a First to File system. However, it also introduced derivation proceedings into the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or Patent Office process. This may still allow many First to Invent Applicants to establish superior patent rights by demostrating that that First to File Applicant derived his, her or its invention from the Second Applicant.
This concept is similar and analogous to a copyright holder’s right to derivative works. However, it is unclear what the scope of these patent derivation proceedings will be. In addition, will an applicant be able to create a presumption of derivation by showing reasonable access to his or her invention and substantial similarity? How will this impact the policy of permitting improvement patents that are not anticipated and nonobvious?
Can all improvements to a patented invention be challenged in derivation proceedings? What impact will this have on granting pioneering inventions greater protection? Will Courts still allow a broader or greater scope of protection in interpreting the claims of a pioneering patent? Will the Patent Office also in effect give broader or greater rights to a pioneering inventor in derivation proceedings?
We will just have to wait and see how the Patent Office and Courts interpret the changes brought about by the AIA. If you have any concerns or questions, then please contact us at http://www.vrplaw.com
Posted in Copyright Updates, Cyberlaw Upddates, General Business, Importation of Infringing Goods, IP Publications, Patent Law Publications, Patent Law Updates, This Weeks Update
Tagged AIA, America Invents Act, anticipation of patents, copyrights to derivative works, derivation proceedings, first to file versus first to invent, first to file vs. first to invent, improvement patents, improvements on patents, nonobviousness requirement, patent applications, patent law, patent rights, pioneering inventors, pioneering patent applications, pioneering patents