These hearings examined the operation of IP and technology markets in different industries: how and why companies buy, sell and license patents; how patents support innovation and technology transfer; what aspects of the patent system create difficulties when seeking freedom to operate; and how the potential of patent litigation affects the operation of IP markets.

Moderators from the FTC included:

Suzanne Michel, Assistant Director for Policy and Coordination, FTC
Bill Adkinson, Attorney, Office of the General Counsel, Policy Studies
Bill Cohen, Deputy General Counsel for Policy Studies
Erika L. Meyers, Attorney, Office of Policy & Coordination, Bureau of Competition, FTC
Joel Schrag, Bureau of Economics, FTC

May 5, 2009

PANEL 1: THE IP MARKETPLACE IN THE LIFE SCIENCES INDUSTRIES
8:30-10:15

mp3
transcript

Earl (Eb) Bright, General Counsel and VP, Intellectual Property, Exploramed
Dianna L. DeVore, Partner, Virtual Law Partners LLP
Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Robert and Barbara Luciano Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
Carol Mimura, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Intellectual Property & Industry Research Alliances (IPIRA)University of California, Berkeley
Suzanne M. Shema, Senior VP and General Counsel, ZymoGenetics, Inc.
Stuart L. Watt, Associate General Counsel and Chief Patent Counsel, Amgen, Inc.

BREAK
10:15-10:30

PANEL 2: THE IP MARKETPLACE IN THE IT INDUSTRY
10:30-12:30

mp3
transcript

John A. Amster, Co-CEO, RPX Corp.
Timothy Crean, Chief Intellectual Property Officer, SAP AG
Ron Epstein, CEO, IPotential, LLC
Horacio Gutierrez, Corporate VP & Deputy General Counsel, Intellectual Property & Licensing Group, Microsoft Corp.
Richard (Chip) J. Lutton Jr., Chief Patent Counsel, Apple Computer, Inc.
Alex Sousa, Counsel, Innovalight, Inc.
E. Earle Thompson, Chief Intellectual Property Counsel, SanDisk Corp.
Lee VanPelt, VanPelt, Yi & James, LLP

LUNCH BREAK
12:30-2:00

PANEL 3: MARKETS FOR IP AND TECHNOLOGY: ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVES
2:00-4:30, break 3:15-3:30

mp3 part 1
mp3 part 2
transcript

Panelists examined how patents facilitate technology transfer, whether markets for technology and IP operate efficiently and transparently, and what can be done to improve their operation.

Henry Chesbrough, Adjunct Professor, Haas School of Business, U.C. Berkeley; Executive Director, Center for Open Innovation ppt
Bronwyn Hall, Professor of Economics, U.C. Berkeley; Professor of Technology and the Economy, University of Maastricht ppt
Robert P. Merges, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Professor of Law and Technology, U.C. Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law; Director, Berkeley Center for Law & Technology ppt
Marshall Phelps, Corporate Vice President for IP Policy and Strategy, Microsoft Corporation
Rosemarie Ziedonis, Assistant Professor of Strategy, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, University of Michigan ppt


May 5, 2009

PANEL 4: THE NOTICE FUNCTION OF PATENTS
9:00-12:00, break 10:30-10:45

mp3 part 1
mp3 part 2
transcript

Experts from academia and the bar addressed the extent to which the patent system adequately fulfills its notice function -- for example, ensuring that firms seeking to develop or license innovative technologies can obtain clear and timely information regarding the existence and scope of relevant patents and patent applications. Specifically, panelists considered how various patent law doctrines and patent examination procedures affect notice, including (1) legal standards such as rules of claim construction and standards governing indefiniteness, written description, and enablement, and (2) examination practices and procedures, including notice available from information supplied by applicants and examiners, the use of continuing applications, and the publication of applications. Panelists also discussed the extent to which the sheer number of potentially relevant patents and patent applications hinders effective notice and considered whether any adjustments to the patent system are warranted.

Dan L. Burk, Chancellor's Professor of Law, University of California Irvine School of Law
Daralyn J. Durie, Partner, Durie Tangri Page Lemley Roberts & Kent LLP
Michelle Lee, Head of Patents and Patent Strategy, Google, Inc.
John T. McNelis, Partner, Fenwick and West
Peter S. Menell, Professor of Law, Boalt Hall and Director, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology
Vern Norviel, Partner, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
Lee Petherbridge, Associate Professor of Law, Loyola Law School, Los Angeles
Kevin G. Rivette, Chair, PTO Patent Public Advisory Committee
Jason Schultz, Acting Director, Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic

LUNCH BREAK
12:00-1:30

PANEL 5: PATENT REMEDIES
1:30-4:30, break 3:00-3:15

mp3 part 1
mp3 part 2
transcript

This panel discussed trends in damage awards, the current standards governing patent damages, and their impact on patent value and innovation. It examined various approaches to damages calculation and the evidence used in assessing damages, particularly in the context of reasonable royalty determinations. This panel also explored permanent injunctions in patent cases in the wake of the Supreme Court's eBay decision and the impact of recent changes to the doctrine of willful infringement.

Yar R. Chaikovsky, Partner, Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
Mary E. Doyle, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Palm, Inc.
Richard J. Gilbert, Professor of Economics, University of California, Berkeley
Mark A. Lemley, William H. Neukom Professor of Law, Stanford Law School
Vince O'Brien, Managing Partner, OSKR, LLC
William C. Rooklidge, Partner, Howrey LLP
John W. Schlicher, Attorney, Lafayette, California
P. Martin Simpson, Jr., Managing Counsel Business and Land Use, Office of General Counsel, University of California