Categories
Innovation

VIDEO: Dr. Irwin M. Jacobs Delivers Keynote Address at CPIP 2018 Fall Conference

On October 11-12, 2018, CPIP hosted its Sixth Annual Fall Conference, IP for the Next Generation of Technology, at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, in Arlington, Virginia. Our conference addressed how IP rights and institutions can foster and support the next leap forward in technology that is about to break out into consumer products and services.

Dr. Irwin M. Jacobs with CPIP Founder Adam Mossoff
Dr. Irwin M. Jacobs with CPIP Founder Adam Mossoff

Without doubt, the highlight of our conference was the keynote address by Dr. Irwin M. Jacobs—the inventor of the digital transmission technology for cell phones that gave birth to the smartphone revolution and the founder of Qualcomm. Dr. Jacobs has been a luminary in the telecommunications industry for many years, and he delighted conference attendees with endearing stories and wonderful insights from his inventive and commercial activities over the years.

We hope you will enjoy Dr. Jacobs’ keynote address as much as we do!

The video is available here, and it is embedded below:

Categories
Innovate4Health

Innovate4Health: Eye Exams On-the-Go with PEEK

This post is one of a series in the #Innovate4Health policy research initiative.

Innovate4HealthHundreds of millions of people worldwide have vision problems that could be fixed or relieved if only they were diagnosed early enough. Unfortunately, current eye screening equipment is expensive, bulky, and requires specialists to operate it. As a result, the vast majority of patients in the developing world have limited or no access to eye screening services and often suffer unnecessarily from eye problems.

Innovative new applications for smartphones promise to take eye exams out of the doctor’s office and bring them to the people who need them most. Several promising solutions have emerged. Not only are they mobile, but they are also affordable and non-specialists can operate them.

These solutions could benefit vast numbers of people. According to data from the World Health Organization, 285 million people worldwide are visually impaired. Of this group, 39 million are blind and 246 million have low vision. About 90% of visually-impaired people live in low-income countries, where there is an acute shortage of practicing ophthalmologists. Yet, 80% of all visual disorders could be treated or even prevented if diagnosed at the outset.

When it comes to eye disorders, early diagnostics is the key. In fact, four out of five cases of visual impairment can be prevented or cured if timely detected. But in developing countries, there is a huge disparity between population size and the number of eye care providers. In Kenya, for example, there are only 86 ophthalmologists to cover a population of over 40 million people. Many of those who need eye care live in rural, distant areas and are often unable to get to clinics or hospitals to seek help until after it is too late. As a result, millions of people in low-income countries are losing their vision.

PEEK kit laid outOne promising example of these new mobile diagnostic applications for eye care is the Portable Eye Examination Kit, or PEEK. PEEK is essentially an eye clinic that fits in a pocket. It combines both a traditional ophthalmoscope and a retinal camera in a smartphone, enabling affordable, fast, and easy eye examinations in the remotest of communities. PEEK consists of an app and a clip-on camera adapter that slides over a smartphone. Designed to be operated by community workers with minimum to no training, PEEK brings a low-cost and simple-to-use eye screening technology to the most underserved places of the world.

PEEK was born from Dr. Andrew Bastawrous’ frustrating experience trying to bring eye care to rural Kenyans. Bastawrous, a British eye surgeon, experienced a logistical nightmare attempting to transport the bulky, costly, and fragile eye equipment to remote areas of Kenya in 2007. Back then, Bastawrous was a PhD student at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, working on a study of eye diseases that involved setting up 100 clinics in rural Kenya. One of the biggest problems facing Bastawrous was that the villages he visited often had no electricity or road access, making it very difficult to transport and use medical equipment.

However, Bastawrous observed that these remote villages did have cellular phone coverage. From that observation came the idea of a smartphone-based ophthalmic tool. To make this idea a reality, Bastawrous teamed up with software developer Stewart Jordan, biomedical engineer Mario Giardini, and ophthalmologist Iain Livingstone to found PEEK Vision. Since 2011, the PEEK team has relied on its expertise in international eye health, biomedical engineering, and ophthalmic research to develop smartphone-based visual assessment tools.

phone showing PEEK app imageHow does PEEK work? An app and a clip-on adapter use the smartphone’s built-in camera and flash to perform various eye exams within seconds. From basic testing for visual acuity, color and contrast sensitivity, and cataracts to scanning the retina, PEEK examination tools can help identify patients who need cataract surgery and detect early signs of diabetes, malaria, and other diseases. The PEEK clip-on adaptor itself can be made with a 3D printer and works with common smartphone models such as iPhone, Samsung, HTC, and Sony.

PEEK also enables efficient remote screening and treatment. A healthcare worker using PEEK can scan over 1,000 people per week. With minimal training, even non-healthcare workers can operate PEEK. Workers in the field can send information to eye care specialists, as PEEK makes high-quality images for further diagnosis and treatment readily available. PEEK also records patient contact information and GPS data, which it then emails to the treating physician.

The developers of PEEK have used IP rights to coordinate the development and deployment of this technology. They applied for a U.S. patent and have already obtained a U.S. trademark registration. PEEK tools are still in the process of being approved by the U.K. Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

PEEK is working with NGOs and private donors to deploy the technology. It received funding from the Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust in 2013 towards testing the technology in different communities around the world. In 2014, the company started a crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo to seek additional funds. Donors had an option either to purchase a PEEK kit for themselves or to donate it to a clinic in need.

PEEK is a great example of how innovation can address global healthcare challenges. It is a low-cost and easy-to-use invention that builds on widely-available, popular technology. It has a tremendous potential to improve millions of lives.

*Images courtesy of Peek Vision Ltd

March 13, 2017, update from PEEK Vision: “Peek is a growing team and is working with many partners to achieve its mission to create tools and knowledge that radically increases access to eye care worldwide. In 2016 Peek Vision Ltd was set up as a company and any profits go to its owner, the Peek Vision Foundation.”

#Innovate4Health is a joint research project by the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property (CPIP) and the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF). This project highlights how intellectual property-driven innovation can address global health challenges. If you have questions, comments, or a suggestion for a story we should highlight, we’d love to hear from you. Please contact Devlin Hartline at jhartli2@gmu.edu.

Categories
Antitrust Commercialization DOJ High Tech Industry Innovation Inventors Patent Law Patent Licensing Uncategorized

Busting Smartphone Patent Licensing Myths

closeup of a circuit boardCPIP has released a new policy brief, Busting Smartphone Patent Licensing Myths, by Keith Mallinson, Founder of WiseHarbor. Mr. Mallinson is an expert with 25 years of experience in the wired and wireless telecommunications, media, and entertainment markets.

Mr. Mallinson discusses several common myths concerning smartphone patent licensing and argues that antitrust interventions and SSO policy changes based on these myths may have the unintended consequence of pushing patent owners away from open and collaborative patent licensing. He concludes that depriving patentees of licensing income based on these myths will remove incentives to invest and take risks in developing new technologies.

We’ve included the Executive Summary below. To read the full policy brief, please click here.

Busting Smartphone Patent Licensing Myths

By Keith Mallinson

Executive Summary

Smartphones are an outstanding success for hundreds of handset manufacturers and mobile operators, with rapid and broad adoption by billions of consumers worldwide. Major innovations for these—including standard-essential technologies developed at great expense and risk primarily by a small number of companies—have been shared openly and extensively through standard-setting organizations and commitments to license essential patents on “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms.”

Despite this success, manufacturers seeking to severely reduce what they must pay for the technologies that make their products possible have widely promoted several falsehoods about licensing in the cellular industry. Unsubstantiated by facts, these myths are being used to justify interventions in intellectual property (IP) markets by antitrust authorities, as well as changes to patent policies in standard-setting organizations. This paper identifies and dispels some of the most egregious and widespread myths about smartphone patent licensing:

Myth 1: Licensing royalties should be based on the smallest saleable patent practicing unit (SSPPU) implementing the patented technology, and not on the handset. The SSPPU concept is completely inapplicable in the real world of licensing negotiations involving portfolios that may have thousands of patents reading on various components, combinations of components, entire devices, and networks. In the cellular industry, negotiated license agreements almost invariably calculate royalties as a percentage of handset sales prices. The SSPPU concept is inapplicable because it would not only be impractical given the size and scope of those portfolios, but it would not reflect properly the utility and value that high-speed cellular connectivity brings to bear on all features in cellular handsets.

Myth 2: Licensing fees are an unfair tax on the wireless industry. License fees relate to the creation—not arbitrary subtraction—of value in the cellular industry. They are payments for use of essential patented technologies, developed at significant cost by others, when an implementer chooses to produce products made possible by those technologies. The revenue generated by those license fees encourages innovation, and is directly related to the use of the patented technologies.

Myth 3: Licensing fees and cross-licensing diminish licensee profits and impede them from investing in their own research and development (R&D). Profits among manufacturers are determined by competition among them, including differences in pricing power and costs. Core-technology royalty fees, which are charged on a non-discriminatory basis and are payable by all implementers, are not the cause of low profitability by some manufacturers while others are very profitable. Cross-licensing is widespread: It provides in-kind consideration, which reduces patent-licensing costs and incentivizes R&D.

Myth 4: Fixed royalty rates ignore the decreasing value of portfolio licenses as patents expire. Portfolio licensing is the norm because it is convenient and cost efficient for licensor and licensee alike. All parties know the composition of the portfolio will change as some patents expire and new patents are added. Indeed, this myth is particularly fanciful given that the number of new patents issued greatly exceeds the number that expires for the major patentees. In fact, each succeeding generation of cellular technology has represented and will continue to represent a far greater investment in the development of IP than the prior generation.

Myth 5: Royalty charges should be capped so they do not exceed figures such as 10% of the handset price or even well under $1 per device. There is no basis for arbitrary royalty caps. It is not unusual for the value of IP to predominate as a proportion of total selling prices, in books, CDs, DVDs, or computer programs. Market forces—not arbitrary benchmarks wished for or demanded by vested interests and which do not reflect costs, business risks, or values involved—should also be left to determine how costs and financial rewards are allocated in the cellular industry with smartphones.