President Bush signed the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2007, or PRO-IP Act, into law on Monday, October 13th.
The U.S. Chamber reports on the signing at its Global IP Summit. For more, click here.
TLG can help protect your intellectual property assets. For more, call us at 208.939.4472 or email us at info@technologylawgroup.com.
10.15.2008
10.08.2008
U.S. Chamber Backs PRO-IP Act
United States Chamber of Commerce president, Thomas Donahue, writes about the importance of innovation in our nation's economic development.
He also rightly includes the protection and enforceability of intellectual property rights as a foundational requirement for that innovation-driven development.
Click here for the full article posted on the U.S. Chamber's Web site.
The article contains a brief note about Congress' recent passage of the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act (PRO-IP Act).
The House of Representatives passed its version of the PRO-IP Act in May 2008. (Click here for H.R. 4279)
The Senate passed its version of the bill on September 26, 2008. (Click here for a news report.)The Chamber sees this bill as a positive way to protect American-owned intellectual property rights and to elevate this protection in the Administration. Although the Senate bill is narrower than the House version, some regard PRO-IP Act as controversial, including for provisions that may require the Department of Justice to enforce privately-held copyright registrations.
The online Chamber article offers a comment function. Add your voice there.
He also rightly includes the protection and enforceability of intellectual property rights as a foundational requirement for that innovation-driven development.
Click here for the full article posted on the U.S. Chamber's Web site.
The article contains a brief note about Congress' recent passage of the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act (PRO-IP Act).
The House of Representatives passed its version of the PRO-IP Act in May 2008. (Click here for H.R. 4279)
The Senate passed its version of the bill on September 26, 2008. (Click here for a news report.)The Chamber sees this bill as a positive way to protect American-owned intellectual property rights and to elevate this protection in the Administration. Although the Senate bill is narrower than the House version, some regard PRO-IP Act as controversial, including for provisions that may require the Department of Justice to enforce privately-held copyright registrations.
The online Chamber article offers a comment function. Add your voice there.
9.21.2008
Legislative Agenda for Idaho's Tech Community
Log on to our discussion under the Eagle-Star Technology Corridor (ESTECH) group on LinkedIn.
Representatives Mike Moyle and Raul Labrador and Senate candidate Chuck Winder recently met with technology business leaders and enthusiasts at the invitation of the Eagle Chamber of Commerce.
The group discussed the Chamber's legislative agenda in detail. (ESTECH Group Members - See my Sept. 11 email.)
Representative Moyle issued a call for the technology community to come forth with legislative agenda of its own.
I would expand that call to include actions that Governor Otter and the Department of Commerce and other executive branch agencies could undertake to support our success.
Norris Krueger has also begun a white paper on Google Docs: https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dd39r2qq_70dsfnxjfx&hl=en.
For more on our legislative and policy development efforts, please contact us at info@technologylawgroup.com or 208.939.4472.
Representatives Mike Moyle and Raul Labrador and Senate candidate Chuck Winder recently met with technology business leaders and enthusiasts at the invitation of the Eagle Chamber of Commerce.
The group discussed the Chamber's legislative agenda in detail. (ESTECH Group Members - See my Sept. 11 email.)
Representative Moyle issued a call for the technology community to come forth with legislative agenda of its own.
I would expand that call to include actions that Governor Otter and the Department of Commerce and other executive branch agencies could undertake to support our success.
Norris Krueger has also begun a white paper on Google Docs: https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=dd39r2qq_70dsfnxjfx&hl=en.
For more on our legislative and policy development efforts, please contact us at info@technologylawgroup.com or 208.939.4472.
8.27.2008
Online Piracy and Payment Providers
In our recent client projects and in discussions on LinkedIn, we have examined the comparative strengths and weaknesses of online payment providers. Our particular emphasis has been on the detection and prevention of software piracy and fraud.
PayPal, Google Checkout, and Authorize.net are three commonly used online payment processing systems.
Fraudulent transactions are often a problem with online sale and distribution of software and online content. For example, the fraudulent operators may phish PayPal accounts, placed orders using those phished accounts, obtained license keys to the software, and downloaded the software, likely for illegal resale. In some instances, the purchases were geotracked to eastern Europe, in others to various locations here in the United States.
There are a number of technological and legal approaches to dealing with online piracy, including cross-border piracy. There are services that help detect and combat fraud and phishing, such as those offered by Kount and MarkMonitor.
For more information, please contact us at info@technologylawgroup.com or 208.939.4472.
PayPal, Google Checkout, and Authorize.net are three commonly used online payment processing systems.
Fraudulent transactions are often a problem with online sale and distribution of software and online content. For example, the fraudulent operators may phish PayPal accounts, placed orders using those phished accounts, obtained license keys to the software, and downloaded the software, likely for illegal resale. In some instances, the purchases were geotracked to eastern Europe, in others to various locations here in the United States.
There are a number of technological and legal approaches to dealing with online piracy, including cross-border piracy. There are services that help detect and combat fraud and phishing, such as those offered by Kount and MarkMonitor.
For more information, please contact us at info@technologylawgroup.com or 208.939.4472.
8.10.2008
Women & Entrepreneurship: Have We Unlocked the Secret to Success?
I am an accidental entrepreneur. That happy accident came in the form of contract work as intellectual property attorney for a global technology company. I was well-prepared in education and experience and downright lucky to be at the right place at the right time in front of the right people.
I started Technology Law Group in a spare bedroom with that single, excellent opportunity. Now in our sixth year, I reflect upon what a rewarding, challenging, and inspiring journey entrepreneurship is.
Entrepreneurship in the legal profession is unusual. The profession has time-honored ways of doing things. Over centuries, men have created these ways of approaching client projects and organizing and running law firms. Men similarly predominate in science, in technology, in banking. The list goes on.
Women are recent entrants into the external workforce. America’s need for productive capacity during World War II brought women out of the home and reshaped them and their self-perceptions as economically and otherwise powerful. Who can forget Rosy the Riveter, that symbol of vibrant, feminine strength?
Women entrepreneurs are an even more recent phenomenon, and I often reflect on what it means to effectively lead and compete as a woman in two male-predominant professions, technology and the law.
Without question, some men are extraordinarily supportive of my endeavors as a woman entrepreneur. Likewise, I deeply value my mentors who are women. Still, entrepreneurship is a tough business.
When I received an invitation to write an article for the University of Pepperdine Law School’s Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship, and the Law, I jumped at the chance.
It is an opportunity to critically examine how women entrepreneurs operate, what special challenges we face, and how we effectively compete. Would the answers be different than for men? Do women run businesses differently than men? Do women have unique strengths that enable them to succeed when men would not to the same degree? And, why are there so few women like me out there, leading businesses, convincing political leaders and funding sources to support the innovation community, competing and winning?
To answer these questions, I harnessed the power of online social networking and posted them on LinkedIn. LinkedIn, a social networking site used by more than 24 million professionals worldwide, is a powerful business tool.
Answers to my LinkedIn questions came from across the United States, from India, South Africa, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Denmark. Commentators include single entrepreneurial moms like me, professors, investors, media professionals, change management experts, and others.
Most say that women entrepreneurs operate at a disadvantage as compared to men. They say women have to work harder, smarter, and more creatively to succeed.
The principle reason, they say, is because women’s entrepreneurial success is directly tied to power, a woman’s willingness to embrace and leverage her power as a business innovator. Women are more than willing to take the calculated risks that all entrepreneurs take. They make the tough and necessary choices to integrate the hard work of entrepreneurship with the hard work of parenting and running a household. Women have the smarts, guts, and ambition to succeed as entrepreneurs.
Yet, women are a small minority of entrepreneurs. Why?
Some say that our social history with its rigidly-defined gender roles and lack of acceptance of women in the work force is the reason. They say investors, prospective customers, and other people critical to business success hold tightly to these historical perspectives without ever considering the resulting biases in their decisions to do (or not to do) business with women entrepreneurs.
Women flexing their power as business leaders are often viewed disparagingly, as masculine, and therefore unacceptable as women. Men using power are viewed as . . . well . . . powerful, and we respect and admire them for it. When will we likewise respect and admire powerful entrepreneurial women?
Some say that women themselves harbor a flawed notion that it is somehow wrong to have and exercise power, that women haven’t given themselves permission to be powerful. Because women are often ambivalent about their power, they are ineffective at using it. The failure to use power fully and effectively means the failure to achieve entrepreneurial success. This is true for all entrepreneurs and particularly for women.
As I continue work on the Pepperdine article, I gain insight into how I and other entrepreneurs work, how we leverage our power to introduce an innovative pricing model or otherwise add value to our services, how we best help our clients achieve their goals. It is a personal and community inquiry of critical importance to all entrepreneurs, to all who serve and do business with them, and to all who aspire to become them.
I am completing the article now. If you would like to receive a copy of the final piece, please drop me a note at eloza@technologylawgroup.com.
I started Technology Law Group in a spare bedroom with that single, excellent opportunity. Now in our sixth year, I reflect upon what a rewarding, challenging, and inspiring journey entrepreneurship is.
Entrepreneurship in the legal profession is unusual. The profession has time-honored ways of doing things. Over centuries, men have created these ways of approaching client projects and organizing and running law firms. Men similarly predominate in science, in technology, in banking. The list goes on.
Women are recent entrants into the external workforce. America’s need for productive capacity during World War II brought women out of the home and reshaped them and their self-perceptions as economically and otherwise powerful. Who can forget Rosy the Riveter, that symbol of vibrant, feminine strength?
Women entrepreneurs are an even more recent phenomenon, and I often reflect on what it means to effectively lead and compete as a woman in two male-predominant professions, technology and the law.
Without question, some men are extraordinarily supportive of my endeavors as a woman entrepreneur. Likewise, I deeply value my mentors who are women. Still, entrepreneurship is a tough business.
When I received an invitation to write an article for the University of Pepperdine Law School’s Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship, and the Law, I jumped at the chance.
It is an opportunity to critically examine how women entrepreneurs operate, what special challenges we face, and how we effectively compete. Would the answers be different than for men? Do women run businesses differently than men? Do women have unique strengths that enable them to succeed when men would not to the same degree? And, why are there so few women like me out there, leading businesses, convincing political leaders and funding sources to support the innovation community, competing and winning?
To answer these questions, I harnessed the power of online social networking and posted them on LinkedIn. LinkedIn, a social networking site used by more than 24 million professionals worldwide, is a powerful business tool.
Answers to my LinkedIn questions came from across the United States, from India, South Africa, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Denmark. Commentators include single entrepreneurial moms like me, professors, investors, media professionals, change management experts, and others.
Most say that women entrepreneurs operate at a disadvantage as compared to men. They say women have to work harder, smarter, and more creatively to succeed.
The principle reason, they say, is because women’s entrepreneurial success is directly tied to power, a woman’s willingness to embrace and leverage her power as a business innovator. Women are more than willing to take the calculated risks that all entrepreneurs take. They make the tough and necessary choices to integrate the hard work of entrepreneurship with the hard work of parenting and running a household. Women have the smarts, guts, and ambition to succeed as entrepreneurs.
Yet, women are a small minority of entrepreneurs. Why?
Some say that our social history with its rigidly-defined gender roles and lack of acceptance of women in the work force is the reason. They say investors, prospective customers, and other people critical to business success hold tightly to these historical perspectives without ever considering the resulting biases in their decisions to do (or not to do) business with women entrepreneurs.
Women flexing their power as business leaders are often viewed disparagingly, as masculine, and therefore unacceptable as women. Men using power are viewed as . . . well . . . powerful, and we respect and admire them for it. When will we likewise respect and admire powerful entrepreneurial women?
Some say that women themselves harbor a flawed notion that it is somehow wrong to have and exercise power, that women haven’t given themselves permission to be powerful. Because women are often ambivalent about their power, they are ineffective at using it. The failure to use power fully and effectively means the failure to achieve entrepreneurial success. This is true for all entrepreneurs and particularly for women.
As I continue work on the Pepperdine article, I gain insight into how I and other entrepreneurs work, how we leverage our power to introduce an innovative pricing model or otherwise add value to our services, how we best help our clients achieve their goals. It is a personal and community inquiry of critical importance to all entrepreneurs, to all who serve and do business with them, and to all who aspire to become them.
I am completing the article now. If you would like to receive a copy of the final piece, please drop me a note at eloza@technologylawgroup.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
