Yannick Biron

When multiple organizations, universities, or startups come together for joint R&D, the question always arises: Who owns the resulting IP? 🤝 The key lies in clear agreements on: 1️⃣ Ownership Rights – Joint or split based on contribution. 2️⃣ Licensing Models – Exclusive or non-exclusive. 3️⃣ Commercialization Strategy – Royalty sharing, milestone payments, or equity-based returns. 4️⃣ Future Improvements – How derivative innovations will be managed. 🤝Consider a university-industry collaboration where the university develops the core algorithm and the company integrates it into a market-ready product. 1️⃣ The university retains patent ownership, 2️⃣ The industry partner gains commercialization rights under an exclusive license, 3️⃣ Revenues are shared as royalties, fueling both further research and market growth. 🤝 Google & NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration partnered on developing advanced quantum computing through D-Wave Systems. 1️⃣ NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration contributed its expertise in solving optimization problems, 2️⃣ Google worked on algorithms and machine learning integration, 3️⃣ Both parties agreed on shared IP ownership but exclusive commercialization pathways for certain applications. 🤝This meant: 💙 NASA could use the innovation for space and defense research, 💙Google could commercialize it in cloud and AI platforms. 💙Both gained value without blocking each other’s growth. 🤝With the right IP sharing framework, joint R&D is not just about invention it's about balancing rights, rewards, and responsibilities. #IPR #JointR&D #InnovationStrategy #TechnologyTransfer #Patents #Commercialization

223

58 commentaires

The Subway Illusion of IP🤔 1️⃣ Some still see IP as the man pretending to stop a subway — dramatic, but irrelevant to how the business moves. Yet in reality, IP defines how far, how fast, and on whose tracks that business can go. 📌 Take Dyson: patents protected not just inventions, but a market monopoly that turned engineering into brand equity. 📌 Take Kindle: IP on design, interface, and content ecosystems created lock-in and recurring revenue. 📌 Take Apple: strategic control of design and interface IP built differentiation so strong that users became loyal for life. 2️⃣ Different roles — same principle: IP transforms ideas into business control. 🗺️ That’s why IP professionals must not only manage rights, but also communicate how those rights shape markets and value. 📢 How do you make your IP’s contribution visible inside your organization❓ And what’s your favorite example of IP creating real business power❓

342

63 commentaires

Most legal AI evaluation stops at: "Did it give the right answer?" It’s a low bar, even for legal. - You can get the right clause ✔️ - In the wrong format ❌ - With the wrong tone ❌ - No trace of how it got there ❌ In legal work, accuracy alone doesn't build trust. Consistency, explainability, format, style, compliance are together what actually matters when someone drops this into a client deliverable. The tools already exist. Platforms like Latitude let you define your own tests: - Did the output follow the firm's writing style? - Was it clear and structured? - Would a lawyer actually use it without rewriting the thing? I’ve written a practical piece on how legal teams should be building evaluation libraries that mirror the standards we apply to people. Not just correct, but compliant, trusted, and actually usable. Post here: https://lnkd.in/eBUzjF7J #legaltech #evaluations #genai #promptengineering

49

24 commentaires

Your Opinions Are Your Personal Data – Here’s What the CJEU Just Made Crystal Clear A recent landmark ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in Case C-413/23 P has put a spotlight on something many probably didn’t think about: personal opinions are personal data. Yes, really. ¤ Why This Matters The Court made it absolutely clear: any personal opinion or viewpoint you express is automatically linked to you, which means it counts as personal data. You don’t need to look at the content, the purpose, or the effect of that opinion — if it comes from you, it’s personal data. ¤ In practice, that means: # Your opinions must be kept safe. # Only the people who need to see them should have access (access control matters). # They can only be used for the purposes they were collected for. # All the usual data protection rules apply, just like they do for names, emails, or any other personal information. ¤ This Isn’t Just a One-Off # The Irish Data Protection Commission has said that recorded opinions linked to an individual are personal data. # The UK ICO has stated that opinions and inferences about a person count as personal data if the individual can be identified. # Legal commentators have also flagged that opinions aren’t just “nice-to-know” information — they fall squarely under privacy protection laws. Now the CJEU has put it beyond doubt, making it a clear-cut rule: opinions = personal data. ¤ The Bigger Picture Here’s the takeaway: data privacy is alive and evolving. Almost ten years into GDPR, we still need landmark rulings like this to clarify the basics. Personal data isn’t just names, IDs, or email addresses — it’s also what people think, feel, and express. ¤ What You Need to Do For organizations, this means practical, hands-on steps: # Treat personal opinions as highly sensitive data. # Make sure they are stored securely and access is restricted. # Use them only for the intended purpose. # Apply all the usual privacy and compliance measures as if it were any other personal data. Bottom line: If someone shares an opinion, it’s not just information — it’s their personal data. Handle it carefully, respect it, protect it. This is the living reality of privacy law in 2025.

92

7 commentaires

Holiday season… but counterfeits don’t pause. Every summer reminds me: counterfeits are everywhere — and the latest EU Commission and EUIPO data shows just how serious the problem is: 🔹 2023 → EU authorities seized 152 million fake items worth €3.4 billion ⬆️ sharp rise vs 2022. 🥫 2024 (Europol & Interpol operation) → 22,000 tonnes of fake food + 850,000 litres of fake drinks 🚫 all worth €91 million. ☣️ Many contained dangerous substances: methanol, mercury, pesticides. 🌍 Counterfeiting at global scale • In 2021, fake goods trade = USD 467 billion ➡️ 2.3% of global imports • In the EU, value = USD 117 billion ➡️ 4.7% of all EU imports 👧👦 Even more worrying: One in three Europeans (31 %) finds it acceptable to buy counterfeit products if the price of the genuine product is too high. Among younger consumers aged 15-24, this figure jumps to 50 %. ⚡️⚡️That’s why it is so important to educate young people and show them the impact of counterfeits on the economy and everyday life — only then can we reduce this practice. 👉 If it feels too cheap to be true, it probably is. And the hidden cost is paid by all of us. #IP #counterfeited #fakes #ZMLegal

39

3 commentaires