The onset of the holiday season hasn’t stopped C4IP’s hard work! Here’s what our Coalition accomplished during the month of November: On November 17, ConsumerAffairs featured C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen in an article addressing the threats of fraud and counterfeit items ahead of the holidays. “Frank Cullen, C4IP Executive Director, Former Vice President of
Innovation requires IP. Without a strong patent system, innovation does not happen at scale. Virtually every invention of impact is patented, as exemplified by these historical examples from the month of November: 1923: On November 20, Garrett Morgan was granted a patent for a three-position traffic signal, a significant advancement over previous signals. Morgan’s innovation
Claim: During the October 3 Senate IP Subcommittee hearing on the SHOP SAFE Act, Matthew Schruers of the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) claimed that by charging platforms — rather than brands — with the responsibility of vetting counterfeit items and sellers, the bill would harm small businesses. Correction: While it is true that the SHOP SAFE Act would place
C4IP is recognizing Edwin Armstrong, whose invention of the frequency modulation (FM) radio system revolutionized modern communication. Edwin H. Armstrong was born in New York City in 1890. He was fascinated from a young age by mechanical devices and decided to become an inventor at the age of 14 after learning about Guglielmo Marconi, the inventor of
Paul Michel, former Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, published an opinion piece over the weekend in IAM detailing the dire need for reform at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) as well as in the area of patent eligibility. Michel’s piece exposes the inconsistencies between the PTAB’s
Last week, C4IP Co-Chairs and former USPTO Directors Andrei Iancu and David Kappos published an opinion piece in Fortune about the U.S. International Trade Commission’s recent order prohibiting imports of some Apple Watch products. The ITC issued the ban after finding that Apple infringed on blood-oxygen-monitoring technology invented by Masimo. Iancu and Kappos explain how
Over the weekend, Karen Kerrigan, president of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, published an opinion piece in the Duluth News Tribune emphasizing the contributions that small business owners and entrepreneurs make to innovation and promoting the passage of legislation that would empower them. Kerrigan recounts the inspiring stories of several historical entrepreneurs who patented
Yesterday, Andrei Iancu — C4IP co-chair and former USPTO director and undersecretary of Commerce for intellectual property — published an opinion piece in The Hill explaining why the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act and PREVAIL Act are key to protecting U.S. national security. Iancu reveals how reforming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) through the
C4IP accomplished a lot during the month of October! Here’s a roundup of what our Coalition has been up to over the past month. On October 25, C4IP sent a letter to Commerce Secretary Raimondo and HHS Secretary Becerra to express concern regarding the interagency working group reviewing the march-in provision of the Bayh-Dole Act.
Innovation requires IP. Without a strong patent system in place, innovation does not happen at scale. Virtually every invention of impact is patented, as exemplified by these historical examples from the month of October: 1950: On October 3, William Shockley, John Bardeen, and Walter Brattain received a patent for the first transistor, an essential electronic
As Halloween approaches, C4IP is recognizing some of the inventions that have changed the way we celebrate this spooky holiday! The numerous patents registered for Halloween novelties — such as jack-o’-lanterns and costumes — reveal that creativity and IP rights underlie this holiday’s most important traditions. Carving frightening faces into vegetables isn’t an American practice
Claim: In a letter published August 8, Public Citizen, along with several other advocacy organizations, claimed that reforming the PTAB would hamper innovation and disproportionately hurt small inventors. Correction: As C4IP recently addressed, the opposite is true — proposed reforms aim to address flaws in existing PTAB procedures to more appropriately balance equities between innovators and those who want to
