They say it takes a village to raise a child and that may well be true, but it takes a world to protect a trademark. From a consumer perspective, we talk a lot about protecting the supply chain of goods and services and how that is essential to the creation and supply of the products that you buy in store. Undoubtedly, this is critically important and failure to do so would have fast and visible consequences on the shelves of the stores we visit.  

Each part of that supply chain has its own vulnerabilities – from the businesses producing raw materials, shipment and delivery of those materials, the making of the actual products, packaging and safe storage of the products, delivery to warehouses and then on to stores or directly to end-customers.  

In early-stage businesses, there are hot discussions on the topic of ‘single points of failure’. These are the weaknesses in essential components of that supply chain that make that stage particularly vulnerable to failure. For example, sourcing your raw materials for your products from more than one supplier decreases the risk of a single supplier experiencing a debilitating issue which results in you not receiving the contracted materials.  

What is perhaps less well understood, is that the management of intellectual property (IP) rights has a supply chain too in any of the processes that that apply to a particular activity. An IP right (such as a trademark) will go through many hands to safely reach registration or renewal for example. If it is a trademark that is registered across multiple regions, the number of hands increases with every region. In order for the process to go smoothly and achieve the desired result, each player must play their part perfectly.  

Practice of the law in any field tends towards archaic language, burdensome workloads and drawn-out processes but in the practice of intellectual property law, the manual processes developed in-house by lawyers to ensure the security of your IP management is nothing short of spectacular.  

It is a testament to the absolute professionalism of the lawyers and IP agents at every step of the way that so few errors creep in and the vast majority of IP management activities are completed in a flawlessly efficient manner. 

 

But all of that comes at a price – for the IP owner, the lawyers and the IP agents.   

From the perspective of the lawyers and IP agents, this is an unscalable business model riddled with time consuming, manual tasks and opportunities to miss vital details or time-sensitive actions at every step. Communications and instructions from clients can be slow and prone to something ending up in a spam box that should not!  

This system doesn’t ultimately benefit the corporate client either. Heavily manual and time-consuming tasks eat up limited budgets and where the essential activities are taking place in systems to which the client doesn’t have access, it makes it that much harder for the corporate client to understand their portfolio and the value of the strategies that the lawyers advise. It can be like having a doctor constantly diagnose diseases that you never experience symptoms of. Which in turn means that client education becomes a burden that also falls on the shoulders of the lawyers.  

For any system with stages and dependencies on each other to work to maximum efficiency, or at all, there has to be a central point of co-ordination and communication for all of the stakeholders. You wouldn’t try to run a company in such a disjointed and fractured fashion. With few realistic alternatives however, professionals have nonetheless made it work.  

But they shouldn't have to. This core issue was the inspiration behind RightHub’s end-to-end IP management platform – a collaborative and shared space where all the stakeholders could come together to manage the IP supply chain flawlessly, effortlessly, and simply. To test the platform for yourself, you can request a trial [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design). 

Are you protecting your IP management 'supply chain.jpg

Are you protecting your IP management 'supply chain'?

We sat down with our CEO Toni Nijm to discuss his views on the current trends in IP and technology, and also asked him about his outlook for the future of the industry.


### Q: How do you see the IP industry moving forward?

TN: Well, definitely a lot of AI in that. 

I see IP in three parts. 

You've got the administrative part of it, which is how you file and renew and all these things that you have to do, still involving a lot of paper and a lot of emails. 

The second part is the creation of IP. So, in terms of the attorneys or the guys that are actually drafting applications and putting these things together that will heavily be impacted by AI. 

And then the third and final piece is really focused on the analytics, seeing trends and understanding where innovation is going and trying to extract relevant information from that. 

 
### Q:  What changes do you wish to see in the IP industry?

TN: First, and the most important thing, is not wasting money on things that are not value adding. 

If you look at the size of the industry, it'’s an enormous amount of money and time spent on things like literally shuffling paper, sending emails and entering data and the likes. If you manage to solve that problem, then that money will be freed to more R&D and more IP will be created. 

Second is to make IP a bit more accessible to the normal person. And that'’s where I also see AI playing a big, big role. A lot of small businesses I’ve talked to just don't even want to go to an attorney. They think they don't understand what they're talking about, it’s too expensive, etc. I think the cost is going to come down quite a lot for the drafting of applications and the filings. 

 
### Q: Do you see any challenges in the professional part of the IP industry in moving towards these changes?

TN: If you think about the law firm side, a lot of their clients want to pay less and less for the administrative work. This means margins are going to come down, which means a lot of people are going to be laid off and we’ve already seen this with a lot of firms. Like taxi companies in the past, I think we're going to start seeing a lot of ‘uberising’, in terms of Senior people leaving, finding easy technology to jump on board, and they take some customers with them. 

Mainly out of frustration, I think we're going to see some big firms being created, but also existing firms that are more proactive, creating different models to allow for these people to stay within the firm in a different way. So that's going to be really, really exciting to follow. 

 

### Q: In my experience, lawyers are very traditional people. But from what you say here, the challenges will be the pressure that comes from their clients, do you think the industry will have to be more open?

 TN: I definitely do. We see the younger generation coming up now, which is digitally native, I would say they, even before taking a job, they are looking at “how does this firm use technology”. 

There are a lot of law firms that are pushing to move more and more in that direction. I don't think there is a lot of convincing needed. 

 

### Q: How do you see the future of IP management?

TN: When I started my first IP management software company in 2004-2005, of course, there was no cloud, it was an access database or a simple database. You put in your records, and you get your reminders and basically that's it.  

I think that IP management needs to be redefined. I think we're going to see internal IP management with automation of workflows, and on the corporate side it’s going to be a lot more focused on invention, idea creation and extraction. 

 

### Q: You've touched a bit upon this as well, but can you elaborate a little more about how you see the future of data sharing in the IP industry?

TN: If you think about the finance space, the EU forced the banks to open up their systems, which created a huge number of multibillion dollar fintech companies. That makes the life of people consuming finance a lot easier. 

I would have hoped that the IPO's would do something like this.  

One of the big missions we are going after is to make sure that communicating, creating and enforcing IP across the globe is as simple as anything else you do on a daily basis, which requires a lot of work to hide the complexity in the infrastructure of all the requirements and all the things you have to do. 

 

### Q: How do you see the future of online payments in the IP industry?

TN: In most other industries this moved on to a different level. We are still sending invoices and paying a lot of FX (foreign exchange rates) on each one of those invoices which reduces the amount of money people and companies can invest in creating IP and then innovating.  

And then the final invoice to a client is still quite high because of the additional cost across every step in the chain. So, we will definitely see a lot of those online payment solutions coming into play. 

 

### Q: Thank you. I just have one last question, which is probably something that you haven't been asked about before in interviews, but what is your guilty pleasure?

TN: Oh boy. In my private life it is definitely chocolate. 

My problem is I get quite obsessive with a lot of things, I keep saying this to everyone. When I start digging into something I just go kind of like all ends, whatever that is. That could be learning about something new or try, you know, building a company or whatever. It just becomes an obsession. But now, I mean, there's not a lot. I don't really have a lot of time honestly for guilty pleasures. But yeah, I would say chocolate.

If you want to book a meeting with Toni to talk about our services, you can do so [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design).

Toni-Nijm.jpg

Meet our CEO, Toni Nijm

Hanns Hallesius is a Senior Advisor, Search, Interim & Management Consultant, who has worked as an attorney both in-house and in private practice. 

We sat down with him to talk about the industry, including his focus on creating overlap between IP knowledge and other business competences to enable smart, strategic choices, and the services he provides in strategy, operations, and leadership. 

 
### RH – Tell us a little about what you do Hanns. 

HH – What I focus on is about creating the overlap between in depth IP knowledge and other critical business competences so that people in various functions can understand one another and work together. I have seen far too many situations where someone with a strong IP understanding but maybe limited business understanding and someone with a limited IP understanding but a strong business understanding are discussing something that is business critical but they don't understand one another. When this happens you can't do anything that is strategically right. Things happen too much by chance. Only when you enable the two parties, IP and business to have a common understanding and a common language can you begin to make smart, intelligent and truly strategic choices.   

### RH – What makes you qualified for this? 

HH, - I have always been a generalist. When I was in private practice while my colleagues were studying for EQEs, I was in a management position doing an MBA. I have always sought roles where I could combine my generalist profile and IP knowledges to work for broader strategic purposes. 

I have also spent a number of years leading the global IP function of a Multi-National Company, where these challenges are a key part of the role. 

### RH – You serve what types of clients? 

HH – To put it short, IP specialists/attorneys aiming to understand business better and businesspeople looking to understand IP. The clients are typically companies, ranging from small to large and with or without an internal IP function. But I also serve IP law firms and other IP service providers as well as investors. 

I typically provide services in three areas:  strategy, operations, and leadership. The first is mainly about developing and implementing IP strategy. Operations are in principle about finding the right tools and processes for the organisation and to secure that they are managed efficiently. Leadership is all about people and organisation, as well as IP culture. This typically also includes IP training. 

### RH- Tell me more about the training, how do you deliver it? 

HH – In different ways according to the participants. You can bring both IP and businesspeople together in a strategy game where IP is just a part of a business strategy discussion. Then you have learnings on both ends. Sitting down like this you can identify and work through the problems. 

In addition to workshops/hands-on training I partner with a provider of an E-learning platform that provides bitesize interactive modules that people can work through. It is very important to fit the training to the organisation, there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. 

### RH – What trends in IP are you noticing? 

HH- 20 years ago I hardly ever saw anyone calling themselves an IP strategist - whatever that is. Today more and more people use this title and think it says something about what they're delivering, and I think that's a positive thing.  We’re living in a complex world and there's a lot of talk about technology developments and digitalisation opportunities. What I am focused on is trying to help companies truly integrate IP better with the IP business strategy. 

### RH – Currently you are a sole practitioner, any plans to scale up the business? 

HH – Although I am a sole practitioner presently, I cooperate with other people on larger projects. This business is still in an exploratory mode at the moment and I'm still testing stuff. But, I don't picture myself running a one man show for long term future, but then again, I enjoy flying solo right now. 

RH- Many thanks Hanns. 

Community-Spotlight-Hanns.png

Community Spotlight: Hanns Hallesius

### An interview with Simon Lotze at Aera Law Firm 
 
Building a business case is a critical element in career progression and central to that business case is the additional revenue that you can bring to the table. [Tom Nener from Pinsent Masons gave some advice](https://www.righthub.com/insights/do-todays-attorneys) to lawyers looking to sharpen their sales skills in the IP world and central to that point is the kind of service that you can offer to clients as well as the role of IP management systems in transforming the level of service that you can provide. 
 
#### But what does that really mean? What are the core features and tools that allow you to make those changes? And how does the client experience change as a result? 

That is something that can look a little different for each lawyer and firm that implements process changes as scale throughout the organization and so we wanted to talk to an IP lawyer to see how their process and service level they offer has changed as a result of using RightHub. Simon Lotze from Aera law firm in Denmark had some answers! 
 
"Starting at the beginning of what RightHub offers young (or semi-young!) lawyers, one of the most important things it gives you is an overview. Because of the way that IP rights are managed, different portfolios and individual rights are often kind of melded together in your head - mixed up if you will. Right Hub gives you a way to get constant updated overviews of everything. And once you have worked with it for a little while, you will start to think in the way the platform shows you that things are. 
 
In a way, it gives you a sort of memory palace that allows you to keep up to date with everything that is happening as it is happening. If a client would ask "How is Trademark A doing?", you are able to answer that question so much more easily and in detail than you would otherwise. That is certainly the greatest thing that I have taken from it from a client/attorney perspective. 
 
Whenever I am on a call with a client or sitting in a meeting and they say, "we had that design, do you remember?" and I can say "yes, we registered that in January 2021 and in these countries". It works as a sort of catalyst for your memory. 
 
So often, IP rights are managed on glorified excel sheets and your memory cannot really remember an entire excel sheet line by line but when you have a complete overview of the portfolio which is easy to filter and easy to sort and you are looking at that overview every time you are doing work for that client then that is very different. Of course, I cannot remember 2,000 IP rights all at once, but I will always have a very good idea of what is happening when I am talking to the clients. 
 
And that is something that clients value very highly. They will often ask me "how do you remember where we had this mark or what happened with it?" and for me that comes from working with the RightHub platform and the different way that you are engaging with the portfolio and the data - from seeing the visual input every time you look it up. It jump starts my memory. And of course, not only do clients love to have that kind of service but it saves a lot of time for me too!" 
 
To see how RightHub creates visual overviews of portfolios and data that are easy and quick to understand (and remember!), get in touch [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design) and one of our expert team will be delighted to show you how you can begin to transform the service level that you can offer your clients! 

Can new IP Management tools help IP attorney progress their careers.jpg

Can new IP Management tools help IP attorney progress their careers? 

## Meet our Chief Revenue Officer, Adam Wylie

In this interview, we sit down with our CRO, Adam, a seasoned expert in the Intellectual Property (IP) industry.

We discuss the slow adoption of technology in the field and the potential for AI to revolutionize administrative tasks, and the opportunities that RightHub offers. He offers insights into the future of IP management, with a focus on data sharing and the need for a shared standard across patent, trademark, and registered rights’ data. 

Finally, we also delve into Adam's background and how they became a leader in the field of IP, as well as his personal interests.

### Can you just briefly tell me about your background in IP and how you got there?  
 

AW: My first professional career was in sales in telecoms, and quite by chance, I fell across the world of IP. A friend of mine, with a non-IP background, was a serial entrepreneur. One day he said “I need someone to work remotely for me. I'm about to get into IP and start up an IP practice with a patent attorney friend of mine. Would you like to come on board?” So, I spent three and a half years with them driving up and down the UK, talking to corporates, university tech transfer departments and law firms. 

The big idea then was fixed price filings. We'd assess each part of the patent lifecycle and then offer a fixed price for it. That was revolutionary at the time. The US now is mainly on fixed fees. We tried to get it to a subscription basis, which is essentially where we've assessed the portfolio and said for X, we will charge you Y per year. That was coming in as I then left. 

I then had the opportunity to start up the part of a company that bought a piece of patent budgeting software from the patent attorney who created it and redevelop it. We started selling that to some very big corporate IP departments and we would ask them, ‘what are your costs’ so we can get your particular costs into the forecasting software to make it more accurate. One of the biggest costs was renewals. So, we thought, well, let's partner up with a renewals company and offer renewals as well. So that's how I got into the renewals, and then the IPMS business. 

We sold that company to CPA in 2014. I went off and did patent analytics for a few years, which was interesting. But I stayed in touch with the people at CPA, so Jon-James and Toni in particular, and we sat down together and made RightHub, and here we are now. 



### How do you see the IP industry moving forward?

 
AW: I think if I walked into a law firm or a corporate IP department - and I've been involved in IP for over 20 years now, - it would look very much the same as it did when I started. The working practices and the technology is pretty much the same. For an industry that protects innovation we've sometimes been slow embracing new technology, so I think that is going to change in a number of ways. And hopefully RightHub is going to be at the front of it.

If you look particularly at AI - it is massive at the moment. We've chatGPT and that is sort of the first mainstream mass market large language model, and people are already using it for marketing. Lawyers are looking at AI very, very hard at it to automate some of their tasks. 

And from a patent side of things, it's interesting because large language models like chatGPT train on publicly available data. And this stuff is in the public domain. It is by definition not novel, so it can't pertain to patent specifications. I think some smart lawyers are going to embrace AI, natural language processing and large language models, but organise it more to do with the structure of a patent. 

Patents have a defined structure in terms of abstract, description, claims, drawings, etc. So, I think they're going to start to automate a lot of those processes and hopefully get rid of some of the tedious stuff that they have to think about. 

I don't think AI is going to replace patent attorneys or trademark attorneys, but I think it's going to augment them. If they can train it the right way, I see it bringing a massive amount of efficiency to the time that lawyers have to spend on drafting, preparing documents, making sure that everything hangs together correctly. I think that change is coming, and I think the industry is going to have to embrace it. 


>I also think the industry is going to have to embrace the technology that RightHub is providing, which is essentially a horizontal platform in a vertical market, making it easier for people to plug in and essentially move data around more efficiently. Because, as you know, patents, trademarks and registered IP rights generate a huge amount of data. And the way the data is handled at the moment is very inefficient. I think anyone who can provide a solution that automates a lot of the tedious stuff is going to be on a winner. And I see that changing the industry. 

I think there'll be greater efficiency brought to the administrative stuff. I mean, it's already happening in general with contract management. You'll also see PTO’s being forced to come online in terms of the way they provide data. The more advanced offices already have APIs. I think that will grow as the market demands more efficient transfer of data. 

I think the industry is also going to change in terms of payments. The way we as an industry move money around across borders internationally is  vastly inefficient. Look at foreign exchange charges. There's been a massive fintech revolution generally in the world. If you look at retail banking, for example, it's very different now to how it was. The amount of products that the consumer can take are very different from what they were five years ago. And I think the IP industry will embrace some of those changes as well. 

 
### What do you see as the top three challenges of IP management? 


AW: People is a massive problem. The strength of an organisation is really only as good as the people, and the skill set and mindset of the people who work in IP is quite unique. We in the west are facing shrinking populations, populations that are typically not now buying into traditional office jobs. So, I think the industry needs to work hard to make it attractive working in IP because it already has the skills shortage and I think it's probably going to get worse rather than better. 

For the next one I would say processes, as I alluded to before, there’s a massive amount of inefficiency. So how do we manage things more effectively? 

And then short term, I think there will be huge pressure on budgets. Large parts of the world are not thriving economically right now. I think there's going to be pressure, particularly from corporates to trim IP budgets. So, the question is how IP departments respond to that. 

 
### How do you see the future of IP management, specifically with focus on data sharing in the IP industry?  
 

AW: Well, I think it's going to improve because it's inefficient right now. It is going to take some kind of standardisation of data to improve. 

The large problem that people are grasping within the industry right now is that data structures are different from office-to-office. The terminology is different. If we can work towards a shared standard across patent, trademark and registered rights’ data, then I think that's going to become much more efficient. 


### The last question for from me is, what is your guilty pleasure? 
 

Well, I'm not guilty about any of my pleasures! I have two dogs, and I walk the dogs long distances out in the beautiful countryside in Yorkshire. Secondly, I ride a motorcycle. I like to ride out on some of the great roads around here. Others tell me that I am a very good cook, so I cook for my family and friends. I enjoy cooking, sharing my love. 

And then finally, I've always been very interested in art. Particularly the stuff you find in galleries and museums - paintings, drawings, sculpture, film to certain degree, photography too. Sometimes I go to an art exhibition or good museums and stand in front of a picture, and I'll just look at it for an hour or so. 

When I go to the Prado, my favourite museum in Madrid, possibly the world I'll look seriously at seven or eight paintings in the 3+ hours I'm there,  it's just overload otherwise. I tend to read a lot about art, because like anything, the more you put into it, the more you get out. You understand more of what the artist is doing, the provenance, the ‘fit’ within the canon. You understand where they've come from, you understand what they’re building upon. So that's the major interest outside of work.

To hear more about our products you can book a meeting with Adam or any of our experts [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design).

Adam MTT.jpg

Meet our CRO, Adam Wylie

Guy Warner of Unilever and Iain Russell of Russell IP have recently set up EQE Training Ltd in order to deliver their take on European Qualifying Exams training to would-be European Patent attorneys.  

We recently spoke with Guy about their motivation, approach and aims.  

 

### RH - You have formed this new venture with Iain Russell, how do you two know one another? 

GW - Iain and I met when we were both trainee patent attorneys studying for the European Qualifying Exams, Iain was a year ahead and we just clicked. Iain passed his EQE’s with flying colours, I passed the next year. 

### RH – You and Iain already have careers as successful patent attorneys, you in-house and Iain in his own private practice, what made you come up with this? 

GW – I have always been passionate about teaching – when I was younger, I was a ski instructor. I loved skiing, I wanted to share what I did, and felt it was a really good metric of my ability to be able to teach somebody else to do it. I don’t believe in the adage that “Those who can, do. Those that can’t, teach”. I think that those that can teach should teach. I think that there is an obligation to the profession to give people the ability to perform at the best level they can. Also, on a personal level it is incredibly rewarding to see people you have brought along gain success. So, after I qualified I went straight into tutoring. 

### RH - Why was that, why not have a break? 

GW - I wanted to maintain my exam readiness and knowledge. You are never as good as you are the  day before your exam. It’s like being an athlete. You train to your peak for a competition, but you cannot stay at that event-ready level of fitness forever. However, you can, with work, maintain a high level of professional fitness. I wanted to stay on top of the exam techniques and subject matter. 

### RH - I see that you use the athlete analogy in your marketing materials. 

GW - Yes, we say passing the EQE’s, and passing them well is incredibly difficult and requires a real, long-term commitment from the candidates. These exams are like the Olympics for the candidates, they need to perform at their absolute peak to pass. We also say that the process of passing the EQE’s is a marathon, not a sprint.  

With our training plan, we want to enable candidates on the day the results come out, to all be able to stand on the podium as it were, with a winner’s medal around their neck celebrating their individual successes. We try to get our candidates to see their training in these terms and to visualize that success. It acts as a real motivator, not only for those taking the exams, but for us as well. We see ourselves as coaches rather than tutors. The relationship between a coach and the person they are coaching is much more profound than that of a tutor and student. 

### RH - So when you talk about a training plan, how does this differ from other offerings on the market? 

GW – Iain and I used to teach on other courses in what was a pretty standard format for the profession. We only saw candidates for a day and a half, or a couple of days, and go over what they have learned – usually by self-study - in order to try and prepare them for the exams.  

The problem with this approach is that there is always going to be different levels of exam-readiness and competence among the cohort, which results in the outstanding candidates often having to wait for those not as ready to catch up. Cramming is also not as an effective means of learning as ongoing, regular lessons. We felt constrained by the existing format, and very frustrated. Our courses sold out quickly and we had to add extra sessions, but there was a limit to what we could do. This is why we have started up EQE Training. There was no point in re-inventing the same wheel. It’s not to offer another just another course, but we think something better, a premium offering.  

### RH - So what’s the format? 

GW – It’s a hybrid. A series of weekly classes of about 90 minutes running from November until near the March exam, with a one “Mock Exam” at the end that people can attend in person or online. Iain and I are teaching live during these sessions via an e-learning platform. We also record these sessions so students can watch them again, or for the first time if they cannot attend a live class. The sessions are designed to be interactive.  

### RH – Anything else you would like to share with us?

GW - Over the years we have developed a whole number of techniques, such as visualisation techniques, various tools, and templates. We do a deep dive into several past papers, the sheer level of teaching in terms of hours we provide and the toolkit we give is designed specifically to help our students pass the EQE’s and pass them well.  

RH – Many thanks Guy 

Guy-warner-700x480.png

Community Spotlight: Guy Warner

## Do today's attorneys need to be better salespeople? 
 
### An interview with Tom Nener at Pinsent Masons 
 
As Madonna famously sang, we are living in a material world and that includes lawyers! After all, there is little point in having a law firm with an array of expert lawyers who provide phenomenal service to clients if you don't have any clients. 
 
Whether your job title includes sales or not, it's important to recognise that we all need to be better salespeople - and in a law firm where career progression depends almost entirely on revenue generation, it's a skill worth polishing. 
 
We asked Tom Nener at Pinsent Mason what advice he would give young IP attorneys who wanted to become better salespeople: 
 
"I always think that the crucial factor is in recognising the basis on which you are trying to sell to a client. What are the buying factors and metrics that they care about? By what criteria will they judge them? 
 
There are 3 main elements to consider from the client perspective: 
 
1) Price - which is a relatively easy thing to judge 
 
2) Good quality - this can be tricky. The quality of the service they receive is client perception and can really only be accurately assessed when it comes to enforcing your IP rights some time after registration. So, it's difficult for clients to assess the quality of work that you might offer versus another firm. 
 
3) Service - clients can judge the service and the service level that they receive from a law firm with relative ease and it is something that law firms can use as a differentiator. 
 
In my opinion, this is where an IP Management System like RightHub comes into its own. Because it is transformative in a number of ways. 
 
Yes, it helps to reduce workload from both the law firm and client side. And it reduces some of the costs for the client which can also be one of the buying factors that are important to them but fundamentally, it changes the type of service that they are receiving from their advisors.
 
That is the critical element that clients really want and lawyers need to sell to them - offer them an improved level of service and a different service than the one they've currently got. It's difficult to offer that without the right tools to support it."
 
From RightHub’s perspective, this advice aligns strongly with both the experience of co-founder and CCO, Jeppe Hudtloff Viinberg and the company ethos which centers the client experience and the collaborative working relationship that we want to help build between them.
 
To see how the end-to-end IP management system developed by RightHub might enable you to transform the service that you offer to your clients, get in touch [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design). 

Do todays attorneys need to be better salespeople.jpg

Do today's attorneys need to be better salespeople?

We sat down with Florian Traub of award-winning law firm Pinsent Masons to discuss the role of IP management systems in attracting and retaining clients for law firms.

In this case study you can read about the role of technology in the legal sector and how it can enhance the work of professionals and transform the experience of clients.

Florian also talks about the  different approaches to client access in traditional IP management systems, including the limitations of basic client access and the benefits of more intuitive and modern client platforms, such as RightHub, and  the benefits of IP management systems in preventing unnecessary expenditure and duplicate registrations in multi-country, multi-entity portfolios.

If you are interested in the importance of different aspects of IP management systems in attracting and retaining clients, including ease of use, intuitive features, and the ability to provide insights and data-driven strategies, you can read the case study by filling out the form below:

Case-study (2).jpg

Can your IP Management system help you attract and retain clients?

We had the chance to speak with Amala Umeike,  founding partner of the Lagos based law firm, Stren & Blan Partners, about his firm, his background and IP in Nigeria.

### RH – In IP terms where is your firm’s focus? 

AU – Most of it involves the protection of international brands in Nigeria. 

### RH – As you have been involved in IP for a while, I think it would be interesting if you could give us an outline what has changed in Nigeria in terms of IP protection. 

AU – In terms of protection rights, what we are seeing is that international brands are now going beyond just filing and registering marks, to actually policing and protecting their brands. We are seeing more infringement and anti-counterfeiting actions by these brand holders in my country, which let’s be frank, has historically has a problem with counterfeiting and with infringement. This is changing. 

### RH – How so? 

AU – Here is one example. Until recently, it was easy in Nigeria to set up a company using the name of a well-known international company. So if, for illustration purposes, there existed an international sportswear brand called Ladidas Sportswear  International, (LSI) you might see a company formed in Nigeria called Ladidas Sportswear Nigeria . Now LSI and other international companies will typically not have a company formed in Nigeria but they will have one/several registered trademarks. So, you used to see a lot of companies like Tesco Supermarket Nigeria Ltd, or Gucci Nigeria Ltd. 

### RH – What changed? 

AU – Well, I was on a committee aided by the World Bank, that helped the Nigerian government draft a new company law, that not just prohibits infringing company names, but makes it easier for well-known brands to object to these infringing company names. So here we have company law being changed to strengthen or enhance IP law, with multiple stakeholders from both the private sector, public sector, civil service and legislators coming together to make real changes for the better. 

### RH – What is the general implication of this? 

AU – I think it says that we are increasingly serious as a nation, and indeed as a continent,  that trade is important to us. If you look at the Nigerian demographic, we are currently have a population of over 200M that is growing rapidly. It’s also a very young population, and one that is being increasingly educated to a higher level, creating greater wealth and a demand for goods and services.  

This means that here are huge opportunities for international brands to tap into this market, and Africa in general especially with the emergence of the unified market across the continent thanks the African Continental Free Trade Agreement coming into effect covering 54 of the 55 nations in Africa. 

My job is to make it easier for these brands to trade successfully in this emerging market, and we are making rapid advancements.  That’s my passion, my focus. The message from both the private and public sectors is that Nigeria is very much open for business. Come here, do business, and you will be properly protected.  

RH- Many thanks Amala

Amala-Umeike.jpg

Community Spotlight: Amala Umeike

We sat down with our Chief Product Officer Jon-James Kirtland to talk about the role of automation in the industry, AI and machine learning in IP and how he - as a co-founder - imagines RightHub as a workplace. 


**RH: How did you get into working with IP (Intellectual Property)?** 


JJ: Well, it is an interesting one. I studied art, design, fashion, and photography at college. I was there for about two years. A lot of my friends were working in the city, in London. And honestly, I wanted to get a paid job because I could not really keep up with my friends financially. It was 1999 and I found a job in a newspaper called The Evening Standard – It was a position at a law firm working with CAD (computer aided design) producing technical drawings. Turns out that law firm was Marks & Clerk, one of the biggest Patent and Trademark agents in Europe. The position I applied for was doing these technical drawings for one of their big customers, Dyson, who are now a huge worldwide company. Two or three days into the job, Dyson decided to take all of their work in-house and within a few days the role was made redundant.  


But I kind of made an initial impression on the guys there, and they liked me, so they offered me a job working in the post room of the legal department. And from that day onwards, I worked my way up and moved into the patent renewals and formalities team. 


That grew from there, and then I studied and took the necessary exams to become a qualified Patent and Trademark administrator. After ten years or so, I changed direction and started focusing on building technology solutions to help solve some of the industry's biggest problems. 


**RH: How do you see the IP industry moving forward?** 


JJ:  Personally, I think the intellectual property industry specifically has been quite slow to adopt technology. However, in the last five-ten years that has improved, and I see that the industry is moving forward now and really starting to embrace innovative tech. However, the industry is still very disparate and fragmented, and I see the adoption of newer technology helping the industry to become much more inclusive and connected. There will be more transparency, more visibility going on, and I think that will lead to more innovation. 

 
**RH: And related to that, are there any specific changes you wish to see in the IP industry?**
 
JJ:  I want to see the PTOs (Patent and Trademark offices) offer more APIs and access to their platforms. If you look at what the EPO (European Patent Office) is doing now and the EUIPO (European Union Intellectual Property Office), they are working heavily on integrating through APIs and allowing third party products to connect to their systems, finally! That is something I really want to see move fast. And I think that will unlock a lot of capability and do a lot of exciting things for the industry. I am looking forward to waving goodbye to the EPO “Smart Card.” 


**RH: Nice. So, this is a little bit related to the PTOs as well. How do you see the future of IP management?**  


JJ: The management of IP is going to be a much more of an automated process, allowing IP professionals to be able to focus on the things that matter rather than the mundane tasks many are having to deal with today.  


A lot of the roles within IP – managers, administrators, paralegals, etc. - their role will significantly change. There will be a lot more automation, but that brings value across the chain, and it means that the administrators actually become more powerful in their role because they will be owning those processes, making sure that they run correctly, instead of being the ones who just sit there punching in data.  
 

**RH: You're touching upon this already, but how do you see the future of data sharing in the IP industry?**


JJ: You know, AI (Artificial Intelligence) is a hot topic now, and I am personally focusing on that a bit and looking into how that might affect things. Clearly the way that you want to improve processes and data sharing would be through APIs, automation and machine learning, and things like this. If you look at OpenAI, ChatGPT etc. - it is incredible. Once that technology becomes more accurate there will be a lot, lot faster ways that you can do things that relate to IP management. For example, for attorneys, this can already assist in the drafting of applications or generative responses, albeit with a low level of accuracy, but it can save them many hours by helping them get the necessary content off the ground.  


Because of this, we predict the number of newly filed applications is going to skyrocket, and it will be interesting to see how the PTOs and their examiners can cope with that. It is going to be incredible to see how this will all play out over the next few years. 


**RH: Do you see this whole AI and machine learning for online payments as well? Would this have an impact on the future of online payments in the IP industry?**  

 

JJ: Not necessarily AI or machine learning for payments specifically, but there is certainly a huge issue in the industry with the way that transactions and payments are made across the unconnected network. Every law firm and their customers have huge administrative burdens when it comes to transacting, and the docketing of those transactions.  

 

As an example, just one Patent or Trademark, seeking protection into multiple authorities can lead to tons of individual docketing events and multi-currency invoicing activities and this contributes to the bigger issue of how data is not transposed in the most efficient way. It is bonkers, and it has been like this for years. It is my view that these pain points can be disrupted and completely removed just by adopting some of the technologies that are out there today across other industries, such as the financial industry or e-commerce industries as well. 
 

**RH: As one of the co-founders of RightHub, I am sure you had a vision of what kind of workplace RightHub should be. What were your visions about that?**

 
JJ: Well, after working in an office for over 20 years, I wore a suit every day. So, I made a promise to myself never to put a suit back on. But no, in all seriousness, the most exciting thing is having a young, vibrant atmosphere with young, intelligent people. Since starting RightHub, it has been amazing to see all the young talent that has joined our team to help us really look at this industry in a completely different light than we ever have done before. I am really excited about what we are doing for the industry and our customers. 


**RH: And lastly, JJ, I want to know - what is your guilty pleasure?**  

 

JJ: Oh, there are a few, but it is Gaming. I‘ve always loved Gaming and it is something I do not think I will grow out of. When I was eight years old, I remember receiving both a SEGA Mega Drive AND a Nintendo Gameboy for Christmas, I was incredibly lucky that year! Since then, I have been hooked, and I have had every gaming console there is. My son who's eight years old himself, we like to play games, you know, PlayStation and Nintendo at the weekend. So, yes, I am 42 years old now and I think that will never leave me. 

 

RH: Well, thank you so much, JJ. 

 

JJ.jpg

Meet our CPO, Jon-James Kirtland

 We met with Laura West, CEO of Springbird.  Before setting up Springbird, Laura worked as Head of IP at boutique law firm Stephenson Law. 

 
**RH- How did you get to Springbird?** 


LW – It has been a long old path, but I guess it started whilst I was at Stephenson Law. I came across Alice Stephenson (founder of Stephenson Law) on my LinkedIn feed, constantly identifying issues within the legal field; the structure of law firms, time recording, lack of female leadership and an ability for lawyers to be themselves or be ‘human’. This coincided with growing frustrations within my previous role and with every post, I felt like she was reading my mind! I therefore approached her about setting up an IP team within the firm and we hit it off straight away. Fast forward 2 years and I had managed to grow that department to a team of 5, with some absolutely amazing clients, a unique subscription product and with us being identified as a challenger in the industry. This formed the basis for us separating out the IP business into a newly formed (and differently branded) entity, targeting our slightly different client base, and with me taking up the reigns of managing the business and pushing it forward. 

 
**RH- From the outside, Springbird looks very different from a typical law firm.**

 
LW- My aim with Springbird was to create a legal brand that stood out, but that also showed our clients that not only do we understand how to protect their brands, we also understand the value of brand. I really felt it needed to speak to our clients and show everyone that we are changing things up, doing things differently, and practicing what we preach.  


**RH – You are active on LinkedIn. One of your posts that resonated with us was about the problems with billable hours. Tell us more.** 
 

LW – There are so many things wrong with the billable hours model as it stands; I found it a real problem in my previous roles. As a trade mark attorney, you do lots of different ‘types’ of work and many of them can justifiably be described as ‘paper pushing’; it's administrative, it’s process-driven and you're just managing documents and deadlines. Conversely, some of it adds real value: you're providing strategic advice, preventing infringement, overcoming legal issues, pursuing proceedings, conducting litigation, etc. 


There is such a huge range of work, yet clients are paying the same rate for everything. And I could see that it was pissing clients off. Like, why did I just pay £450/hour for you to effectively regurgitate some advice from overseas, or to docket a deadline in the system and send a standard letter? 

 
I think the level of administration that is involved in trade mark management isn't necessarily there for a lot of other areas of legal work, and I could see why clients would get annoyed about it. Equally, even if you move to the fixed fee model, I saw attorneys offer a fixed rate and then just manipulate their billable hours to meet the fee, which kind of defeats the purpose. 

 
You then have the issues from a team management and morale perspective; incentivizing staff by billable hours targets just encourages all the wrong behaviours, for clients and for the team. People won’t leave their desks for fear of missing an hours’ time recordal and individuals get rewarded for hogging work and overburdening themselves, affecting client service.  


You then have the joys of staged billing; most firms will charge a fee upfront for filing, a fee at publication, a fee at registration, and a fee at renewal. All of these fees were reasonably low value invoices being charged at various different intervals. To me, they were all reasonably predictable, assuming that the rights proceeded in the way that you thought they would.  


I used to find that we spent so much time processing these tiny invoices, we'd then get queries back from clients because they didn't know what it was for and why they'd received it. Then you’d spend time answering the queries about the invoices, and have to answer why they're paying an hourly rate for something that seems administrative. I felt like the whole system was broken and it wasn't good for the clients. It wasn't nice for me as a lawyer to have to constantly justify myself and our way of operating. 

 
**RH - So you took a different approach?** 


I decided why don't we just streamline it all and just agree a fee for that basic management that clients think is acceptable and provides value? It acts as an incentive for us to make sure we get the rights through as quickly as we possibly can and in the most efficient way and clients know where they stand. We charge one fee at the outset and don't have to worry about 150 invoices throughout the year (including chasing them up) and our clients get certainty, transparency and access. It takes away the uncomfortable element of the relationship and lets us create really close relationships with our client, with no clock ticking. That’s why we offer a subscription.  


**RH – I see this is a classic win/win?** 


LW - I think so. For us, it gives us a level of certainty in terms of revenue and cashflow from a business perspective, just as it gives the client certainty from a budgeting perspective. As long as you're making sure the fee is fair and representative, that we're making a profit on the service we provide, and that the client feels like they're getting value, it works.  


I also think we're being a lot more open and transparent about the way that we deliver the services and the prices that we charge, and clients see value in that.  

Laura-West.png

Community Spotlight: Laura West

**Do you need a career strategy?** 

Though it might sometimes feel like it, your life doesn’t happen by accident. Where you stand today is the cumulative and collective result of what you have experienced and learned, decisions that you’ve made and actions that you have taken to date. 

Where you will stand 10 years from now, will be the cumulative and collective result of the same factors that you apply between now and then. 

 
Intellectually we know this, but we seldom feel that way. Instead, we feel pushed by the vagaries of fate, driven by the system in which we operate, pressured by those who have ambitions for us that may not match our own and limited by the resources we have available to work with. 
 
These perceived limitations are not necessarily the biggest enemy we face – it's being too busy to strategise! When you are overloaded with tasks, work and life coming at you with increasing speed and in a relentless fashion, it seems impossible to find the time and headspace to gain distance, observe and analyse your circumstances and strategise more effectively towards your goals. 
 
You can only be carried by the current if you drop your oars and exhaustion, burnout and/or overwhelm are the biggest reasons that most of us do it. Which in turn, leads to more exhaustion, burnout and/or overwhelm. So, we drift. 

 
If you are not actively thinking about the factors that will advance your career and deliberately choosing decisions and actions that will move you closer towards the outcomes you would like, then you’re drifting, being carried along in the current. 
 
In looking into the future and deciding where you want to be, a strategy can be developed that ‘reverse-engineers’ the steps you need to take today and all of the tomorrows between now and then to get there. And a good strategy should incorporate a reduction in the overload of steps needed to progress – your quality of life matters too! 
 
**2 essential strands to your career strategy – relationships and process:** 
 
There is little point in denying that the legal world is relationship-centric. The relationships between you and the clients you serve and your relationships with those in the firm will play a key role in the progression of your career. This is the strand that is prioritised in the strategy of the savvy lawyer keen to progress and with good reason. But is it enough on its own? 
 
The roadmap to success frequently delineated by society is to be diligent in your studies from a young age. Choose a good subject for further study. Get into a good company. Work hard. Be promoted. Become successful. There’s one challenge though. It’s not true. 
 
Ask yourself how many lawyers you know that diligently followed this roadmap to no avail. Has every lawyer who attended the right schools, got hired at the right firms and worked hard in the prescribed fashion been successful in reaching their career goals? The evidence, m’lud, is circumstantial at best! 
 
Building relationships with the movers and shakers at the firm is then presumed to be the only differentiator between those that move up the ladder and those that don’t. It is essential but as a sole strategy, it's not without risk. 
 
On the one hand, businesses, including law firms, don’t promote people. Managers do. It is a harsh cold reality for many underlings in every type of company to realise that you can be the best, most efficient, hard-working, result-delivering person in your company or firm, but if your manager or those above you don’t recognise and advertise your efforts and results, you’re not getting promoted. Those relationships are important. 
 
But they are also a double-edged sword. Partners with whom you have strong relationships built over a long time can leave. A falling-out with colleagues can completely derail your progression. Human relationships are tricky and unpredictable things and from a strategic point of view, it might be considered unwise to keep all your eggs in a singular and shaky basket. 
 
The second strand that should form part of your strategy then is process – your own and that of the firm. Processes that you improve, develop or employ then need to be selected by virtue of the essential elements of a career strategy for an IP lawyer. 
 
**What are the essential elements of a career strategy and plan for an IP lawyer?** 
 
Strategy doesn’t always mean what people think it means. Very often what people think of as a strategy is actually more of a to-do list constructed from the observable necessities around you. We talked in the introduction about ‘reverse-engineering’ where you will be in 10 years and your strategy and plan is how you will do this. 
 
It’s said that your strategy should answer the question: “Am I doing the right things?” And your plan should answer the question: “Am I doing them the right way?” So, to answer the question: “Am I doing the right things?”, there are some critical elements to consider: 
 
**Whose interests does your strategy serve?** 
 
Just as teams don’t deliver results when each individual member only prioritises their personal goals, neither you nor your firm will benefit from a strategy that centralises and prioritises your wants over their needs. In practical terms, the first step of your career strategy is in understanding the firms' goals and seeking alignment with your own. And understanding that you need to build flexibility into this element because the ultimate goals of the firm will shift and change through time with market forces. This must be understood as a dynamic element. 
 
What does your firm care most about right now? Where are they currently in the marketplace? What is the Board worried about? What areas are thriving or struggling? This does not need to be too in-depth, but a general understanding is critical. Effort is often wasted on achieving deliverables that, as it later transpired, was not the deliverable that the company cared about in that period. You need to understand the position well enough to be sure that your efforts are moving the needle while keeping an eye on which compass is in play. 
 
**What are the structures and rules for advancement in your firm?** 
 
Every law firm is hierarchical by nature, many with clearly defined seniority steps on the ladder to Partner. 
 
Generalities apply, of course they do, but every organisation has its own little quirks and foibles, and you should make it your business to understand the inherent politics of your particular firm. Knowing the rules doesn’t necessarily mean that you are bound by them. Just know them well enough to know how to break them effectively! 
 
**What are the challenges of the step you are on within that structure?** 
 
Not only do you need to have a clear picture of where your want your career to go, you need to have an in-depth understanding of where you are now and the challenges that you face in getting from where you are to where you want to be. 
 
Some of these are common issues shared by many but if you drill deeper, you will find challenges that represent a unique mix of your own strengths and weaknesses along with those of your firm. 
 
It's important to scope these out in as detailed a fashion as you can manage. But this is not simply making long lists of roadblocks that you need to somehow overcome. This list serves as your directional compass of opportunities to improve on weaker skills, capitalise on stronger ones and learn more about your firm and the people within it. 
 
**What are the specific challenges in relation to the IP practice area in your firm?** 
 
Progressing your career as a Junior Partner, Legal Director or Senior Associate in the IP practice area can have its own challenges in a big law firm. Routine IP management work can often be viewed internally as loss-leading work that is undertaken primarily as a client retention tool that can lead to litigation work and opportunities for cross-departmental service selling. 
 
Increasing the perceived value of routine IP management work and showing demonstrable revenue increases from that work can accelerate the career of younger IP lawyers in a way that is beneficial for their firm too. 
 
But with the ever-present high workloads comprised of low-value, repetitive, manual and time-consuming work that frequently haunts the desks of young attorneys, how can the next generation of IP lawyers find their way off the treadmill and onto the Senior Partner track in Big Law? 
 
**Putting your strategy into action:** 
 
Law firms are, crucially, also a business and the best way to begin putting your strategy into action is in building a business case for yourself! But what should that business case consist of? 
 
Here's an inescapable fact - career progression in a law firm is always linked to revenue brought into the firm. It's perhaps not a fair metric and discards the other value that you might deliver to the firm on a daily basis but it is the one that you will have to work with. 
 
It's a challenge all its own to meet the revenue expectations that are already placed upon you, never mind to exceed them. You need a differentiator, something else that you can bring to the table to boost your revenue generation beyond expectations. 
 
This is where an IP Management System (IPMS) is worth serious consideration. Not only does it give you an opportunity to examine the processes at the firm that you can improve but if you find the right system, you are bringing a new product to the table that clients will love and partners don't already sell (or sell very well!). 
 
It can be a core differentiator that will sit at the heart of the business case that you will build to plant yourself firmly on the partner track. Click [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design) to have one of RightHub’s expert team guide you through the value that you could bring to the table and the kind of business case that you can create! 

Community-700x480-Do ambitious IP lawyers need a career strategy_.png

Do ambitious IP lawyers need a career strategy?

One of the enduring effects of the global pandemic is the stronger realisation of how we are all connected, much more closely than we perhaps thought.

‘Globalisation’ was a word that first began tripping off our tongues only a few short decades ago and now seems a constant companion for every facet of life. Intellectual property is no exception.  


Some of this awareness has arisen from widening our gaze to see the impact of actions in one country on the rest of the world. Discussions on climate change, for example, make it clear that wildfires in one part of the world affect us all in a way we never realised was even happening before.   

Much of that awareness has come from the introduction of speed into our lives. Information that took weeks to move from one country to another happens instantaneously now. The sheer volume of high-speed global travel means that health concerns can move much more quickly from one landmass to another. And there is a volume of information to sort through that is competing for our attention in an unprecedented way in our personal and professional lives.  

**With advances in communications, technology and travel opening up new markets for many companies providing goods and services, it is little wonder that international filings through the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) are rising too, in the hunt for more comprehensive protections in a wider variety of regions.**  

The Madrid System for trademark applications, despite a drop in 2020, rebounded in 2021 with a 14.4% growth to 73,100 applications which represents the fastest year-on-year growth since 2005. The Patent Cooperation Treaty filings hit 277,500 applications (up 0.9%) which is the highest level reached to date.  

Global systems such as WIPO are reflected in increasing legislative cooperation between countries. The frequency of government commitments to international agreements and legally binding systems that apply across several countries is somewhat in stark contrast to the traditionally territorial nature of intellectual property rights. Nonetheless, the direction of evolution is clear. 

Another signpost of this increasing globalisation of intellectual property law practice has appeared in the ongoing patent dispute in the German courts between Palantir (a US tech giant) and one of their early investors where a ‘testimonial discrepancy’ has allowed evidence gained in US courts – where discovery rules are less stringent, and a US provision permits the provision of evidence to foreign jurisdictions in certain circumstances – to be brought to bear in European courts.  

This move is not unprecedented in intellectual property circles. Both Jones Day and Norton Rose Fulbright have successfully utilised this provision in patent cases previously. Multi-jurisdictional IP attorneys are taking note!  

**But the question arises as to whether, in this increasingly globalised world, is there really any such thing as an IP attorney who is not ‘multi-jurisdictional’?** While new strategies in IP litigation are always welcome and needed, it is accompanied by a new problem – the expansion of the volume of information and documentation associated with any individual IP right, the speed at which it needs to be gathered, the number of people who might need access to it and how and when they will be empowered to do so.  

Much of the traditionally manual labour associated with the practice of IP law is centred firmly on paperwork and the limitations of manual management thereof. As globalisation advances and the volume of paperwork associated with each individual IP right grows, solving these core issues is an important one if we are to keep pace with evolving legislation, rules and regulations. 

While the protections afforded to corporate clients for their portfolios may well remain territorial in the long term, it seems unlikely that the relevant paperwork will. It may be a biased view, but collaborative cloud-based IP management is fast becoming an essential must-have tool to coordinate instant access to documentation, knowledge, strategies and efforts across jurisdictions, colleagues and clients.

Globalisation of discovery.png

Globalisation of discovery in IP litigation and IP management challenges 

We recently caught up with Ankush Bedi, who is a partner and co-founder of the India based firm Invent IP Legal Services LLP. 

**RH: Can you give us some background on Invent IP?**

AB: Sure, we celebrated our sixth foundation day on December 14. Presently, we are around 35 people, a mix of engineers and attorneys. We pretty much handle the whole gamut of IP services across various technology areas. We handle filing and prosecution, and patent analytics, such as landscapes, patentability, validity/invalidity, competitive intelligence, portfolio analysis, and technology scouting. With each passing year, we strive towards excellence with a strong focus on consistently delivering outstanding service to our clients. 

**RH: Are there any particular trends in India we should be aware of?** 

AB: I think there has been a change in a couple of areas. The first being that the number of patent applications filed in India has increased. Over the last 4 years there has been a huge increase (by almost 40%) in the number of applications filed in India. Moreso, domestic applicants have increased patent filings, indicating that companies/institutions are trying to create big patent portfolios. However, lot of times to attain high numbers, the quality of applications thus churned out are not even worth the paper they are printed on. If a large patent portfolio is unenforceable, what’s the use of wasting all that money? 

**RH: I suspect you take a different approach?** 

AB: Absolutely. Our focus is on quality. 

**RH: Which begs the question how do ensure that you draft quality applications?** 

AB: It’s a combination of things. Invent IP’s founding partners including me were trained by US and EP attorneys. We apply that rigorous training across our organisation too. We only hire people with very strong technical backgrounds. We have the view that the drafting of a quality patent application would require two aspects: realistically broad claims, and enough matter in the specification so that during the prosecution there is some matter that one can fall back upon if an examiner is able to find a prior-art that one was not able to find during drafting/pre-filing stage.  

Claims as is well known is the hardest part. I believe that teaching drafting of good, no great claims, is like trying to teach somebody to paint, it’s akin to magic. Our experience tells us that some can be taught, and some just cannot. 

We have also developed a rigorous methodology for drawing out from the inventors, the horse’s mouth if you will, what the invention is. We do a lot of persistent cross-questioning. After that the first step is to identify the core novelty that the claims should be focused on.  At the end of the conversation with the inventors, I will ask them to summarise the invention in a couple of lines, including the novelty.  

By doing this, the inventors give you a good road map to a very broad claim, and that is my starting point, terminus a quo.  

Also, we look at different perspectives from the commercial angle. We look at the different use case scenarios for the invention and how the invention will be sold as a product/service, and into what markets. I think a lot of attorneys overlook this critical aspect. This insinuates that we take a broad perspective, so that we seek to obtain the broadest and comprehensive coverage for our clients. 

**RH: One of the issues for applicants is that it can take a long time to judge the quality of the application as prosecution can take so long from filing the application to when it grants, hopefully with a scope similar to that which was originally claimed. This means that it often takes some time before your clients appreciate your approach, the value you provide. Have you experienced this, and if so, how do you get to the point where clients really appreciate your approach?**  

AB: I think you have hit the bull’s eye with this question. It is very difficult to convince the clients. Some say, why are you charging x amount, when other firms charge x minus y amount. However, we have a certain competitive differentiation over other firms.  

We have statistics that show that we have fast grants in the US, one in ~45 days using track one examination, another in 10 months not using track-one. We also emphasise the high percentage we have of first action allowances. But it still takes a while to convince and acquire new clients. 

**RH: Are there any recent developments in Indian patent law you want to flag?**

AB: I think there is a big misconception that India does not grant software patents, and I would like to address that. India does grant software patents. You just need the right law firm to handle your case. There were some revised guidelines introduced in 2017 for examining computer related inventions. Previously there was heavy emphasis of introducing a hardware element in the claims. Without that, the patent would not be granted, even if it was found to be novel and inventive. In very broad terms the law now allows that if you can make an argument that there is a technical effect or technical contribution of the invention, then you may get a grant. Thus, to obtain a software patent in India, it is of utmost importance that the patent application should indicate the features, which demonstrate technical advancement and technical effect in the claims. Additionally, such claims should be enabled adequately in the specification of the software patent application. Such a practice would significantly increase the chances of securing a patent grant for a software invention. 

We have got a lot of software patent grants. There is currently a huge focus on AI with ChatGPT, etc.  The innovation in this field is enormous. Lots of our clients are filing applications in the field of AI and we have been getting grants there. For start-ups in India, the Indian government have a provision of an accelerated examination so the final decision for the grant or rejection of the application typically comes within an year of filing the application.  

I would specifically like to mention four software grants,  two within seven months and the other two in around 11 months. All these grants were for patents involving AI based inventions.  

With India being the 5th largest economy in the world, we would expect to see more MNCs, especially, software companies, filing in India.

Ankush-Bedi.png

Community Spotlight: Ankush Bedi

## Consumption pricing in the IP Industry

Intellectual property (IP) law firms face many challenges in adding value and staying profitable in a competitive marketplace.

They need to stand out and differentiate themselves, and keep up with the changing demands and expectations of their clients. In our white paper 'All You Can Eat' we discuss the challenges faced by clients in understanding the value of the services provided and how IP law firms can price their services transparently.

Read more by filling out the following:

Community-700x480-Whitepaper.png

All You Can Eat

### We sat down with Tobias Bohm, our director of services operations, to discuss the advantages of outsourcing IP management, such as increased flexibility and the introduction of diverse competencies. Alongside this, we sought his perspective on the current state of the industry and his personal experience with IP. 

 

**RH: How did you get into IP?** 

 

TB: By coincidence. Before my final term at the university, where I took Economics and Business administration, I had a few weeks without any courses, which is why I applied for a short-term job in accounting. It was supposed to be a software company - at least that's what the ad said - but the job was to take care of one of the foreign subsidiaries of an IP company. Then, I was asked to continue that work part-time when I was writing my master's thesis. When my thesis was finished, they offered me full-time employment as a business controller. I just went with the flow and here we are. 

 

**RH: It seems like a lot of people came into working with IP by coincidence.** 

 

TB: It's a nice industry with nice people. International, global, and exciting in many ways. Also, very stable, so I think that’s why people stay. That was what they said when I took that job I mentioned earlier: "You know once people start in IP, they stay.” 

 

**RH: What are the top challenges you see in IP management?**  

 

TB: I think one thing is for sure: there still are very few standardised formats for exchanging data. Of course, that makes it difficult to streamline things.  

 

Then it’s the fact that most jurisdictions have different rules - but it's also something that makes it more challenging. I would also say that there's usually a vast number of touch points that need to be handled, in order to move the matter from A to B. I would say that these are probably the top three. 

 

The fourth one is more general. It’s that ironically, and despite the fact that we work with very good innovation, our industry's very stubborn and not always up for quick changes and testing new things. Overall, I would say that that's also a challenge. We want to stick with the old routines that we've had for ages. 

 

**RH: How does the use of the RightHub platform support managed services?** 

 

TB: One thing is for sure: since we have skilled IP administrators and paralegals behind the scenes, we can assist IP owners and law firms with administrative tasks in an easy and cost-efficient way, as opposed to most other solutions and platforms out there, where you are on your own with your system. With most systems, you get the system and hopefully some help setting it up, but from then on, you're on your own. 

 

Another thing is that there's also an ability to make use of common services directly from the platform instead of having to copy paste and create some kind of external workflow outside the portfolio management system. I would say those are the two main ways RightHub supports managed services. 

 

**RH: Which advantages do you see for companies buying managed services externally, as opposed to having in-house paralegals?** 

 

TB: I think the benefits are really those that you find in all types of outsourced services. You can easily grow; downsize and diversify when you outsource and when you buy services externally. 

 

There's really nothing different between our industry and other industries. You can compare it with accounting services or payroll services or I.T. services where most companies outsource everything, or parts of it, in order to be more flexible. Another benefit is to bring in competencies that you might not have in-house, or at least those competencies that perhaps are not as fresh and updated all the time when you have in-house people. 

 

If you bring in people from outside, they usually work with different types of companies and different types of IP and jurisdictions, then their knowledge is broader, than if you are in a company where you do seven jurisdictions, for example, repeatedly. Usually, people like us and other companies that are offering this have the knowledge around those. Then more specifically, benefits from outsourcing work would be reducing headcount, which is usually an important thing for companies depending on the state of the general business. 

 

Furthermore, delivering effective assistance is a key benefit. When you outsource, you really get exactly what you want. And you should get exactly what you're asking for and paying for, so ultimately it is more effective. Regarding the consistency of work - if you outsource, you have people there all the time. In general, you don't outsource to one specific person, but instead, you have a team available, adding resources. 

 

A final thing that I would say we noticed with our clients is that they very often tell us that working with us sort of really energises their own internal teams. Since they work with knowledgeable and professional staff that is brought in from the outside, that sort of makes their in-house team more energised and on their toes. And sometimes, maybe a team is small, but then suddenly they have two or maybe three more people to speak to. This doesn't mean that there are three more full time employees in the team, but they have two or three more people to get help from and cooperate with. I would say that it's not only about cost efficiency in particular or saving time or money. But still, it is super important to not forget this part of using outside resources. 

 

**RH: How do you see the demand for using external paralegals and IP professionals for managed services? Is it increasing or decreasing? What has the development been like?** 

 

TB: My definite feeling is that it is growing, and that the view within the industry is changing. Perhaps a little bit connected to what we discussed earlier, about this industry not always being in the forefront of embracing new ways of working. I'm not saying that that this slow pace of change is negative – it is what it is. But I think that it is definitely changing. Another reason is that there's a lack of resources and it is difficult to find skilled people. Therefore, you turn to a company that can offer that and that's fine - that's definitely one reason that has grown. 

 

**RH: In general, how do you see the future of IP management?** 

 

TB:  This is a combination of what I believe, but also of what I hope. 

There will be a lot more streamlined processes - automation and standardisation - because everyone in this ecosystem will demand it just like in any industry. People demand it because you have a lot more ability nowadays with systems and such, so of course we will see more streamlined processes, more automation and more standardisation. For a corporate or an IP owner, they will want to focus on things that actually create value, and they're happy to pay for it, but they don't want to pay for a lot of administration. Hopefully we'll see a lot more IP being created compared to today, but with less administration. 

 

This will all take time. I remember when I started in the industry in the early 2000s at the company I mentioned, and we still had a telex machine standing in a closet since there was one or two foreign agents or PTOs that still used that as a means of communication. Someone had to check that machine every day and, as far as I understand, today there are still a few PTOs where you sometimes need to send a fax. 

 

**RH: The last question is, what is your guilty pleasure?** 

TB: Since I actually knew that you would ask that, I turned to my daughter for advice because I didn't come up with anything right away, and she's usually very frank and outspoken. She tried to come up with something, but basically concluded that actually I was pretty boring when it came to things like that. Perhaps watching a little too much sport from time to time and listening to really early and basic punk rock would count as my guilty pleasures. 

Feel free to contact Tobias to talk about our services by clicking [here.](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design)

Tobias (1).jpg

Meet our Director of services operations, Tobias Bohm

**There can be no argument that the pandemic has tested us in many arenas but there are positives to take from the experiences that we have all shared too.** As many of us have begun to work from home more frequently, our home lives have risen to greater prominence and visibility throughout the day. Of course, our home lives always existed and were of great importance to us but somewhere along the way, an unwritten rule formed that dictated your life outside of work must remain underneath an invisibility cloak at all times. Harry Potter would be proud.  

Over the years since the industrial revolution, a new lexicon formed in the workplace – an entirely new vocabulary arose that put employees (and particularly women with children) in an impossible position.  

 ‘Professionalism’ came to mean being really good at pretending that you aren’t a real human person with concerns outside of the workplace. ‘Work ethic’ was reimagined as presupposing a willingness to sacrifice your health, life and family on the altar of earning a wage. Promotional opportunities vested primarily in those who could maintain the façade of never having a personal life and demonstrated often enough that their strongest relationship was the one they had with their desk.  

**This has been, and remains in some areas, a challenge with which the legal industry is particularly afflicted.** Stories of needing to bill more hours than actually exist in the working day are commonplace. Burnout is a very real and far too frequent feature of the legal landscape. Mental health issues in the legal industry remain one of the hot topics du jour.  

No matter the subject, you can’t build something sustainable on foundations that aren’t real. Every person is a whole person with skills and talents, passions and hobbies and much-loved people (and often, pets) in their lives. The demand that people should hide every aspect of themselves except for their skills and talents for 40+ hours per week was always doomed to failure. The wheels were coming off that bus eventually. 

The phrase ‘work-life balance’ came into existence as the beginning of the pushback against this dedicated, 'sacrificing of everything' mentality that career success required. It was the start of a movement to say “Hey, I love my job but there are other things in my life that I love too.” The idea caught fire, but it too is lacking reality.  

The co-founder of Rightly (now RightHub), Jeppe Hudtloff Viinberg, is a strong advocate for the position that there is no such thing as ‘work-life balance’. Many of us have learned that we cannot ‘balance’ our home and working lives any more than we can ‘balance’ between our children. There will always be work issues that need attention during ‘personal time’ and home tasks that require completion during ‘work time’.  

**That’s why RightHub offers the liberty to structure your working day as you see fit – because we recognise the importance of a ‘whole life’ approach. We spend time with family and work throughout the day spread out in different time slots.** 

We bring people together to make a difference in the world and that includes all people – the whole of who they are, not just the bits that best serve us in the moment. Nothing bonds us all more than shared laughter. Nothing promotes creativity like mental well-being. Bringing our ‘A’ game means understanding that as we step more fully into our new roles as complete, complex individuals who can care deeply and give and receive from all the parts of their lives simultaneously, we all benefit.  

These things don’t represent a lack of professionalism or lack of work ethic. They represent all of us living our best lives, doing our best work and being free to love and care about all the different aspects and parts of our lives. Because that’s the RightHub way.  

The myth of work-life balance.png

The myth of 'work-life' balance

**It seems as though resistance to change lies amongst the most frequent commonalities of the human experience.** And while that resistance exists in almost every person, the legal profession seems to have acquired outstanding excellence in this particular field. And yet, all the markers show that change is happening, albeit slowly. 

The legal department of Thomson Reuters had some interesting insights to share in relation to "Overcoming lawyers' resistance to change" and the potential sources of that resistance. The reliance on the past for information and decision making in the form of precedent and the difference between fixed and growth mindsets were particularly interesting. 

While I think it’s likely that these are amongst the factors that contribute to the slow pace of change, there may be bigger players in town. I believe that I’m correct in thinking that at no point in human history have there been a wider selection of aspects to tackle or choices of methods by which to do so. We’re not always so much resistant to change as overwhelmed by choices. 

On a personal level, we might simply make a decision to eat healthier. Awesome. What does ‘healthier’ mean? Is it time to explore the delights of vegan cookery? Is keto the right choice? Raw versus cooked? Should you try to discover what our cavemen ancestors ate and try that for a while? Have a packet of cookies while you mull it over. 

**This particular challenge is called ‘paralysis by analysis’ and it is endemic in our society generally and more so in the business world.** As a natural over-thinker to whom performance matters intensely, it was transformational for me to realise that clarity and focus are the weapons of choice in driving change and transformation. And in business, while Jerry Maguire might have been somewhat over-eager about it, money is king. You don’t stay in business without it. 

Putting a focus then on the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of law firms that relate directly to the bottom line can often light the way to clarity on the kind of changes that both law firms and individual lawyers can implement that will bring them truly holistic value and tackle internal issues on many fronts. Small changes can have big impacts and our perspective dictates the changes we choose. 

The 2021 Legal Trends report from Clio looked at patterns in relation to law firms in a growth phase, stable or shrinking phase through the lens of a number of aspects. One of these related directly to reporting tools and the fact that law firms in a growth phase are twice as likely to use reporting tools in their firm. 

### They cited 3 critical KPIs for law firms:

1) **Utilisation Rate** - How much of the work carried out in a law firm is assigned to billable work, broken down by individual lawyers? 

2) **Realisation Rate** - How many of those billable hours are actually assigned to a clients bill as opposed to being absorbed by the firm? 

3) **Collection Rate** - How much of those bills are paid (on time or at all)? 

According to their study, in 2020, lawyers achieved an average collection rate of 89% which equates to an average loss of the value of 11% of the work that is provided. 

Interestingly, Claude Duclox addressed this issue in an article titled “What's your collection rate” in 2017. He says that in his experience, a range of 5 - 10% is an expected range of lost earnings and has maintained a steady collection rate of 97%. 

### He also lists a number of ways in which law firms have traditionally tried to tackle the issue:

- Requiring upfront payment for flat fee arrangements 

- Ensuring your retainer fee is enough to cover the future bill 

- Limiting your practice to clients with a high likelihood of payment or instructions that can be controlled. 

It is clear from Clio’s report that law firms in a phase of growth are achieving higher rates of growth in their revenues, client base and casework. On the other hand, Claude Duclox sees traditional practices adopted to try to improve collection rates as contrary to growth strategies. How then can law firms seek to implement growth strategies, achieve higher revenues, client volumes and additional casework whilst still ensuring that they get paid for the work they provide? 

The answer may lie in the tools that legal technology is increasingly providing that allow real collaboration between lawyers and their clients and create the possibility for new types of billing in the legal industry. The consumption pricing (and billing!) that is a standard feature of modern life for your clients, could improve your collection rate and your bottom line.

Community-700x480-What's your firm's collection rate.png

What's your firm's collection rate?

# World IP Day 2023: Women and IP - An interview with Helen Kavadias and Katherine Zheng of HWL Ebsworth

We had the opportunity to sit down with Helen Kavadias and Katherine Zheng of HWL Ebsworth to discuss their journeys in the field of intellectual property (IP) and the current state of gender representation in the Australian industry. 

 

**RH: How did you get into IP and what has your journey been like?**
  

HK: It's been a bit of a long journey, but it doesn't feel so long. Sometimes it feels like I only started in IP yesterday. 

I have always been interested in the commercial side of science and innovation. I did a medical science degree, and law, and as part of it I had to do an honours research here in the medical science component. It was during that time that there was an IP dispute in the lab that I was doing this project in, and that’s what sparked my interest in intellectual property. So, I took some intellectual property electives during my law degree, and then when I finished law, I was certain I only wanted to do IP. 

I wanted to do enforcement and litigation, so I moved around to sort of get the skills that I was interested in obtaining and HWL Ebsworth has allowed me to bring all of that together and offer a full scope of IP services in a full-service commercial law firm. The firm is very commercially orientated, and it does sort of promote itself as offering unrivalled value, so it was a good value proposition for the clients that I had worked for in the past. 

KZ: It has been a much shorter journey for me so far. My interest in IP is built on my interest in film and the arts. I studied film studies and marketing at university, and I also had a law degree combined - and IP just felt like the most natural intersection between those two areas. I really enjoyed the subject, and when it came to applying for graduate roles I was really drawn to the firm because of the great IP practice we have here. I've been in this role for coming up to two years and that's been my journey so far. 

  

**RH: This year the theme of World IP Day is women and IP. Do you think that your IP journey has been different due to being a woman?** 

 

HK: My IP journey started because of an interest I have rather than being a particular gender. And I think if you are good at what you do and you're passionate about what you do, then gender really becomes irrelevant. So, from my personal experience, I can't say that I experienced any sort of gender differences, and I don't think my journey was any different because I was a woman. I think even if I was a man, it would have been the same because I made decisions based on my interests rather than my gender. 

  

KZ: In the relatively short span of my career so far, I don't think there's anything in particular about being woman that made my IP journey different from another person's. The partners that I've worked with so far have all been incredible women, and I think that just felt very, very supported. 

  

**RH: Have you needed to overcome any gender-related obstacles in your career, or felt a difference in the dynamics of working in a group where the majority were male?** 

HK: In our Sydney office, all the IP members - partners, associates, graduates, lawyers - they're all female. So, I can't say I really have any obstacles. I think if just like I said, you’re interested in what you do and passionate about what you do, gender just really becomes irrelevant. 

And the composition in our team, it being all female, wasn't by design. It just kind of happened. Where I've been in IP teams in the past, it's probably been somewhere between 5050 at times. In terms of how you work and interpersonal relationships are, I can't really point to any clear, obvious difference. 

I think, again, if you're working with sort of like-minded people, you're obviously drawn to a particular area for a reason. And if you have similar interests, it makes working together with other people, regardless of their gender, just really easy and natural. 

KZ: I would just sort of echo the same things about being passionate about and interested in what you do. And I think the best work comes from that. And in my experience, that sort of helped me get to where I am today. And as Helen said, we are an all-female team and that's just been the norm for me. So, I don't know any different. And I feel really fortunate that there are these incredible women working on the team. 

  

**RH: How do you see the landscape for women in intellectual property evolving in the future?** 

 

HK: If you look at the statistics in Australia, we have more than 60% of graduates being female now. And so, I think you'll probably see, at least in Australia, more women in IP law. And not just IP, but other legal areas as well.  

 

KZ: I guess I think it's also important to recognise that maybe our team might just be an anomaly and we don't want to sort of say that ‘yes, it's just all women in IP now’ or ‘this is the norm’. I think there is still room for discussion in terms of whether in other countries or other firms there might be sort of still that imbalance. But in my experience, that's not been an obstacle to me progressing throughout my career. 

  

**RH What is the biggest challenge in managing a global IP portfolio in your experience? And how do you personally approach overcoming it?** 

 

HK: The biggest challenge when you're dealing with large portfolios is managing all the deadlines. Whether it’s prosecution deadlines or renewal deadlines, we're fortunate that we're in a place in time where technology has evolved so much. We're not just relying on our outlook calendars or diary entries in a hard copy diary to keep on top of deadlines. 

For that reason, we're really excited to be working with RightHub because from our experience, we're still learning and finding the ways to utilise it best for our practice and for our clients. It's evolving and the product itself is constantly evolving as well. 

It really takes away that administrative burden that is a part of IP practice. It's not the only part, obviously, but it does take away that administrative burden that, as IP professionals, allows us to sort of get on with the more interesting work as well. So, we're really grateful that there are now platforms out there like, like Righthub, that make our life easier in that respect. 

Other than just managing the deadlines, it's nice to just be able to bring up a client's portfolio with the click of a button - it's a nice report and it looks good. And obviously, it's dependent on the quality of the data entry, but it's just a lot easier than how things used to be done in the past, which was manual and very time consuming. So that's a good improvement that I've seen in my IP journey and I'm sure it's just the beginning and there is still a long way that we that we could that we could go. 

worldipday2023.png

World IP Day 2023

We recently met with Andrew Samm, a director of Patently - a company that provides a search and analytics software platform. 

**RH - What was the genesis of Patently – I understand it span out of a UK IP law firm?** 

AS -It came about because the IP law firm ultimately did not trust the data that they could get from other sources – public and paid for - to handle the data verification required to check patent portfolios that the law firm was taking on from other attorney firms. Published patents and their data is all in the public domain, but the data is notoriously ‘dirty’ and error-ridden. We ended up developing our own database, initially for internal use by the law firm. Then utilising our skill set, we use our developers, patent searchers and attorneys qualified in different jurisdictions to improve the data. This we contend has made the data we supply more easily digestible and understandable than other patent data sources. 

**RH- In practice, what does this mean?** 

AS- It means that we are combining data from disparate sources, organising it intelligently, particularly when it comes to our treatment of patent families. We also parse the data to remove duplicates and check for false links. E.g. those caused by number transpositions that link one case to another erroneously. We are also checking statuses, organising sub-families by invention and checking priority links. We are doing lots of these little things which combined provide a better/cleaner and ultimately more useful data set. 

**RH-Who’s using the system?** 

AS-Primarily IP law firms and companies with in-house IP function. The feature set of the Patently platform has been essentially client led. We spend a lot of time developing the UI so it presents patents in an intuitive manner that then can be reviewed, rated, annotated and shared with other people within a team.  

**RH-What else is different about Patently?** 

AS- Again, led by our clients, we have spent a lot of time and effort developing our Standards Module which currently contains ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) SEP (Standards Essential Patents) data. Now that’s quite a mouthful with a lot of acronyms, but concerns allowing users to query which company has declared which patents essential to different telecoms standards, e.g., 4G & 5G and to run analytics on these. We allow users to slice and dice the data in a variety of different ways to suit their use cases. E.g., we allow users to review all family members associated with the base patent that was declared to the standard, as sometimes there are variations with a family. It’s a growing market with wide applications beyond mobile telephony such as autonomous vehicles and the Internet of Things. Patently has also been used to support recent patent litigation concerning SEP’s and FRAND licensing. So again, it comes down as it always does to being able to clean data effectively and then present it usefully. 

RH- Many thanks Andrew 

Andrew-Samm.png

Community Spotlight: Andrew Samm

The need to be appreciated for who we are and what we contribute, whether that is within our family or our work environment, is a very deep and truly human one.

Without a sense of being appreciated, it is very difficult to feel any sense of value or belonging. Feeling alone can be one of the most destructive emotions but yet experienced by so many of us. And it is not necessarily the situation of being alone that causes loneliness, but rather the lack of being seen, heard and appreciated.


To quote Robin Williams,

>“I used to think that the worst thing in life was to end up all alone. It’s not. The worst thing is life is to end up with people that make you feel all alone."


So, when we think about issues with wellness in the legal profession, appreciation (or lack thereof) should be an important topic within that discussion. Generally, it could be usefully argued that while lawyers are very necessary advocates in the journey of life, they are not often as well appreciated as other professionals, although of course this varies by practice area.

One lawyer I spoke with recently in a rather more contentious practice area told me that he absolutely dreads always seeming to be the voice of doom in squelching enthusiastic plans. Nonetheless, it is his role to foresee potential problems, rate the likelihood of their occurrence and the potential problems and advise accordingly. Such advice is immensely valuable.

**But is it appreciated?**

From the client side then, it is easy to see where ‘appreciation’ in some practice areas might fall down between the gaps. It is a question of focus, perspective and experience in reality. It’s tricky and a study in human nature all its own.

If you have an accident in your car which you genuinely begin to fear for your life, your attention is wonderfully focused on continuing this existence. Were someone to come along and take action that meant your life was no longer in danger, your appreciation of them would be slavish in nature. Newspaper reports would laud their heroic acts. There might be songs written about them. TikTok would almost certainly get involved.

However, if you are merely enjoying driving your car and a person pops out of the bushes, waving to slow you down and warn of impending dangers, you might feel a little differently. Rather than appreciation, you might feel annoyance instead. While annoyance might live at the same end of the dictionary to appreciation, it is on the opposing end of the emotional spectrum. And yet, that person’s contribution to your continued existence on this little blue/green ball might have been every bit as meaningful as that of the TikTok hero of the hour.

What that boils down to is that while an ounce of prevention might be worth more than a pound of cure, it isn’t anything like as sexy or exciting. And therefore, not appreciated in the same way. It’s more difficult to appreciate the ‘never happened’ than the ‘happened but I was saved’ despite the fact that inarguably, ‘never happened’ costs less and leaves no scars. 

To be fair, lawyers do their fair share of heavy lifting in the ‘happened but I was saved’ category but the core purpose of the profession lies in creating, guiding and supporting the ‘never happened’ non-stories that we tell no one about.

So, as we head towards the annual lawyer appreciation week, what can we find to truly appreciate about lawyers? What would I say to my lawyer friend who dreads being the voice of doom? I might say this:


>“I don’t have another professional in my life that dedicates so much time to my specific well-being in the world as you do. That considers in such detail the problems I might face and the actions that I can take to never experience them. That takes care of the myriad legal details that govern so much of the success that I want so that I don’t have to. As I think about the last year of working together, I think about so many things that were never my experience because of the work that you do. And I really, really appreciate that!” 

Community-700x480-Are lawyers appreciated_.png

Are lawyers appreciated?

We sat down with Ralph Schroeder, President (North America) at RightHub, and asked him about his journey into working with IP, and today's main challenges behind managing IP.

**RH: How did you get into working with IP?**
  

RS: Like many of us who have worked in intellectual property for a while, I came to IP in an indirect way.  My undergraduate studies were in biochemistry, and I had no idea of becoming an attorney or working in intellectual property.  At the time, in the early 90’s, the term ‘intellectual property management” had not been coined and IP had not yet become a significant industry.   On the advice of a colleague, I  decided to go to law school, during which I discovered my interest in IP and technology law.  I attended law school in Chicago, which ended up being the epicenter for the development of Intellectual Asset Management best practices.   

My transition from legal practice to the business of IP began in 1996, when I had the idea that companies could benefit from ‘auditing’ their IP assets.  I formed a small consultancy called—not too creatively—Intellectual Property Management, Inc., which was the catalyst for me joining, and helping found and build, PwC’s first Intellectual Asset Management consulting practice.   Our practice grew to over 500 consultants, working with innovator companies in IP strategy, portfolio development, and transactions.  While at PwC I was fortunate to work with a number of pioneers both as colleagues and clients.  It was really an extraordinary time in the development of IP globally.   I was lucky to be in the right place at the right time. 

From PwC, my journey in IP has included founder and leadership roles with Delphion, Dennemeyer, Anaqua, and Hyperion Research, before ultimately starting Helios IP, as the industry’s first managed IP operations service.  Our combination with RightHub represents a culmination of my career experiences, and the next step in transforming the IP industry. 

 

**RH: In your experience what are the top three challenges Innovators and Brand Owners face in managing Intellectual Property?** 

 

RS: As both a legal right and highly valuable business asset, intellectual property is complex and multi-faceted.  The first challenge many Innovators and Brand Owners face is getting clear visibility and understanding of their portfolios.  The ability to correlate—and then communicate to key stakeholders—how intellectual property delivers business value is fundamentally important, yet very difficult.   We spend a lot of time helping clients achieve these insights.  

Another important challenge relates to IP investments, and understanding where and how to best develop and maintain IP rights.  Budget and costs savings are important, but for core innovation and brand protection the more important considerations are focused on ensuring adequate spending optimize intellectual property.  Companies do not like to waste money, but they understand the importance of investing in quality IP that delivers value to the business.   

A final challenge is understanding the future direction of IP management across the spectrum, from global protection strategies to efficient IP operations.  A myriad of changes such as IP laws and practices, the impact of emerging technologies, and operational support systems are but a few of the critically important areas that IP leaders must consider as they build, maintain, and deploy their IP assets.   

 

**RH: How do you see RightHub supporting Innovators and Brand Owners in these challenges?**  

  

RS  In my experience, the most successful Innovators and Brand Owners excel in two critical areas: information and resources. Firstly, they have a keen ability to gather and analyze information across the intellectual property process, which is crucial for informed decision-making. Secondly, they build IP specialist teams that are capable of executing strategies and delivering results. These two elements work together seamlessly, forming the cornerstone of effective IP management. 

RightHub is focused on helping Innovator and Brand Owners achieve success. As the first solution provider to unify leading technology and data within a collaborative, open platform, RightHub empowers all stakeholders across the IP lifecycle to work seamlessly together, fundamentally reimagining their IP management.

Feel free to contact Ralph to talk about our services by clicking [here](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design).

Ralph.jpg

Meet Ralph Schroeder

**RH – You began as a Government research scientist in the UK. How did you find the transition into IP?** 

 
 

NC -Initially it was a real culture shock coming from R&D and moving into IP. For me the logic systems were entirely different even though patents are supposed to be the IP protection for science and technology. There’s a disconnect, in my opinion, between the mind of a scientist/engineer compared to that of an examiner. My career has been spent trying to make it easier for this scientific/ STEM community to engage with the IP community. That's really where my enthusiasm still lies. 

 
 

**RH – This led to different roles at the EPO?** 

 
 

NC - When I first joined EPO as an examiner in the early 90’s we were given introductory sessions that explained the various EPO locations. The Munich headquarters, the Hague, Berlin, and a new office in Vienna just opening up that had to do with patent information. I thought that sounded interesting. But I parked that and started work in search examination in a lot of (new to me) technologies. I learned how to read loads of information in different languages and how to analyse these and to write critical and concise reports. Later, the opportunity came to work in Vienna with patent information. I saw this as great opportunity. My first job here was to coordinate the PATLIB (patent library) network in Europe. This led to forming relationships with the PATLIB centres and patent offices. It was a very stimulating job with a steep learning curve. I made many contacts and friends in the different offices and centres. They are still friends to this day, although we are all older. 

 
 

**RH- And then you went on to Espacenet?** 

 
 

NC- The team and I were the “face” and product champions for Espacenet. I worked with some really talented people, the back-end devs, the UI designers and the user support team. It was a great job as we introduced Espacenet, one of the earliest online patent databases, to the patent information community, and to anyone wanting to mine patent literature.  

 
 

**RH- When was this?** 

 
 

NC- Espacenet launched in 1998, I joined in 2002 because it needed dedicated marketing. We had a handful of developers in The Hague, a handful in Vienna working on the promotion of the tool. There was never a huge team. 

 
 

About six years ago there was a reorganisation and I was given the job of “patent research” which at the time wasn't very well specified. The EPO said: “you are from a research background so apply this to patent information”. 

 
 

**RH- Where did this lead?** 

 
 

NC – I focused on three areas. I observed the commercial patent information market to see who was doing what, and what was on the market . I looked at institutions, e,g. the European Commission, the OECD, to see how they used patent data. Then we got into the field of patent analytics. We created patent landscapes from the point of view of future and emerging technologies that were emerging from the labs & R&D, such as graphene, quantum, additive manufacturing, personalised medicine etc.  

 
 

We put together “patent insight reports” with patent examiners, who are the subject matter experts and external consultants who are the patent analytic experts, to create narratives on the emergence of these technologies. That was really very exciting. The idea here was to show the utility of patent information, to showcase examiners expertise, and the EPO data.  

 
 

We sought to make the approach transparent in order to give the reader the tools to apply the same methodology to other areas of technology.  

 
 

I managed to come up with the acronym for this, which we used at the EPO, ‘FETA’ – Future and Emerging Technology Analytics – if you employed it properly, it was a fait accompli! 

 
 

**RH- Ha! What were the last projects you were working on?** 

 
 

NC- One of the last two which is still ongoing, is the Fighting Coronavirus platform. This came about as I thought the EPO was doing a lot for the workforce by introducing remote working, web meetings, etc, and for the applicants as there are many concessions on things like deadlines, the provision of online opposition, etc. I felt that the office could do more for the general public, so I pushed for a platform where we could put together everything we knew about the patents associated with coronavirus; vaccines, diagnostics, treatments, medical technologies, etc - that was a big project. 

**RH- What are you up to now?** 

 
 

NC – I have my own consultancy where I am currently doing some work around the practice of patent offices, and I support IP helpdesks. In academia I am working with researchers on innovation and IP management and I develop training materials, and education programmes for other IP offices.  

What I want to do is to hopefully share some of my knowledge of IP and my learned experience. It’s rewarding to help people along , particularly those new to IP, to try and avoid, or at least lessen some of the culture shock I experienced when I left research and started working in IP. 

 

Nigel-Clarke.png

Community Spotlight: Nigel Clarke

**There is no object on this earth with which we have a stranger relationship than money.** For much of our history, we traded goods and services in a barter system. It worked really well but it wasn’t exactly convenient. As we spread our wings and travelled further afield, the need to carry 200 chickens to cover your costs was….challenging.  

In perhaps the greatest act of co-operation that humanity has managed to achieve, we created the concept of money. Small pieces of metal or paper that symbolise a specific number of chickens (for example). They fit easily in your pocket and there is a lot less squawking and feathers everywhere.  

But almost the instant we achieved this co-operative innovation, we simultaneously created a conflict around how amazing it is. I dispute the idea that money makes the world go round, innovation does. But it’s difficult to argue that money supports it.  

**So how did we get so quickly to the idea that it is a bad thing?**   

It seems that money confers freedom and shame in almost equal measure. We need money to keep a roof over our heads, to eat and if not to dress fashionably, then certainly to avoid inappropriate nudity. There is nothing wrong with wanting any of these things, nor any of the things beyond the basics.  

And yet and still, societal views demand that we sit across a table in job interviews afraid to ask about pay, in case the company might think that we want the job for any other reason than our burning desire to introduce people to the joys of cheaper long-distance calls for 8 hours per day.  

**There are similar roadblocks in the provision of any service, including legal advice.** While many lawyers feel the value of the service they provide, there are many others who merely know it. And there is a critical difference between the two.  

It is not unusual for a lawyer to have a set fee for the services they provide but when the crunch comes in conversation with a client, they heavily discount in advance of any client objections. These lawyers rarely even charge the fee their service is worth, never mind receive it. 

And it is certainly not unusual for law firms to find themselves providing a variety of small, critical but undervalued services to their clients without charge, simply to zealously protect their interests.  

This difficulty is not assisted by the diminished value that clients can sometimes put on creating and protecting their own IP. This is especially prevalent in earlier stage companies who are not yet leveraging established revenue from their innovations.   

As an IP lawyer, you know that without the foundation work, they may well face challenges to creating that established revenue in the way they deserve to. This is why client education in the IP world remains such a persistent topic of conversation.  

It can be a difficult concept to grasp but money and value, whilst often related, are not the same thing. Companies create value with their IP which may or may not translate into money. Or chickens. But the value remains.  

**And IP lawyers deliver value too. One hypothesis might suggest that it can be difficult for clients to see the value delivered in routine IP work. After all, there are a lot of tasks, forms and fees involved, few of which deliver to the client an appreciable sense of value. It’s on a par with paying road tax on your car.**  

Where it is more easy for them to see value is in the strategic advice provided by an IP lawyer who understands their business. In the successful defence of their brands against infringement. In the healthy increase in their bottom line as a result of the work that you do. It doesn’t make the routine work any less valuable. Just less visible.  

So, as RightHub began their journey into transformation in the IP world, that routine work was our focus. We introduced automations to empower IP professionals to work more efficiently in maintaining correct IP record data, handling routine maintenance tasks and managing portfolios across countries.  

This is the core of what we do. Your workday experiences a dramatic reduction in stressful, repetitive, time-consuming work and an equally dramatic increase in your freedom to spend time doing the work that you love and where your clients see the value in what you do.  

Our goal is to bring people together to help the IP world thrive, on both sides of the table. While it might be hard for clients to see your value in routine busy work, it’s challenging for you to feel it too. And when you don’t feel the value of the service you provide, it’s an additional impediment to charging appropriately.  

**Ready to feel the value that you can deliver? [Get in touch](https://www.righthub.com/contact?expertise=Patent,Trademark,Design) to begin the journey!** 

Community-700x480-Money, value and the practising lawyer (1).png

Money, value and the practising IP lawyer...

We sat down with Timmi Rysgaard, Product Owner (Brand Protection) at RightHub, and discussed the challenges and future of brand protection. He highlighted the increasing threats of counterfeit goods, sophisticated fraudsters, and the exploitation of online sales channels, especially on social media platforms.

**RH: What do you think are the most pressing challenges facing brand protection specialists today? And how do you see the field evolving in the future?**

TR: I see a lot of pressing challenges, including the proliferation of counterfeit goods, and I also see the field evolving greatly in the future. There's also something about the increased sophistication of fraudsters which creates a need to keep up with change regarding infringements, but also change in consumer behaviour. Over the last few years, there's been a lot of growth of online sales channels, especially social media, marketplaces and standalone websites – the pandemic really created a shift here. The entire world was kind of shut down for a long time, which essentially meant that people would stay at home and spend more time on the Internet, and buy more on the Internet, which created a playground for counterfeiters.

The latest huge thing that happened is that people now are online more, buying online, buying through apps, buying through social media, which is just causing a lot of ways for counterfeiters to exploit unknowing consumers. I would say that a challenge for BP (brand protection) specialists today is that through this growth, you as a specialist, need to have an overview of a way larger array of websites and often also across multiple jurisdictions. So, imagine sitting as an in-house legal team in Denmark you go by Danish law and by European law - but then all of a sudden you start to see something popping up in Malaysia, then Peru, and then Nigeria and now you need to understand what rules and laws apply in those jurisdictions.

I would also say that the fields are vaulting in the direction of more advanced technologies from the counterfeiters to the point where they are definitely getting more sophisticated. Sometimes you see something pop up and it's clearly a fake, you have no doubt in your mind that this is a replica or brand impersonator. But with some of the latest advancements, especially AI and machine learning, it's very easy to make pretty good fakes. You can go and 3D print any given object essentially. I thought a lot about this question actually, since part of the company is in Denmark and we do a lot of work in Scandinavian design, which is essentially a very minimalistic style. And since it's minimalistic, it is also very fit for a 3D printing mechanism to just go and replicate it. So, the thing that makes Danish design stand out is also the thing that makes it be very easy to replicate.

I would say that BP specialists also rely more and more on technology. As I said earlier, you have increasing amounts of websites and jurisdictions that you need to cover and keep up with, and you just need to have a technology-based approach to it. Now, everyone has heard about ChatGPT and large language models in general, and AI just became a buzz word – and they are not only useful, but also needed. You have to cover so much ground to protect the brand, and you can't do that by hand – that's impossible. And of course, also something like blockchain - where we haven't been involved a lot yet - is definitely something that you can start to use to verify authenticity.

**RH: In your opinion, what are some of the emerging trends or threats in the world of brand protection? You already mentioned 3D printing and AI. Is there anything else you see?**

TR: I want to spend a bit of time talking about AI because it's such a wide concept. It essentially comes down to; what type of AI do you like? What's your intent of use with the AI?

You can use it to create some text, but you can also use it to alter or generate some images for you, which essentially then can be used as your own design. You can feed it with a billion images of well-known designs and then ask it to create something that's similar and then you're on the border of creating a design infringement right there – so we sense AI powered counterfeiting as one of the emerging trends. And you see it on some of the websites that are popping up on a daily basis, because right now you can go and create a website which just a few clicks, you don't even need to be able to code that much. So, you can set up a website that looks professional and you can have people come in there and spend some money and the only thing they receive is a thank you letter (if they are lucky), and also a bad customer service experience because they are not getting anything at all.

Another trend is probably “social media”. Again, very much due to the pandemic people went to social media to buy stuff. And it is just so rapidly changing - you could go to a social media site and post a ‘story’ where you are selling or advertising something, and then that something is now in your description or in your bio leading to a website that is not indexed by Google yet, but you can still go there since you have the link from this particular story. And now you can go and buy something. This means that if somebody has enough followers, they can reach an insanely large audience, and then disappear within 24 hours again. So, to stay on top of that, you need to involve some sort of technology in this because then you might just miss out on this short story, and that story and so on.

But then again, as I said before, we also use AI and technology. So, it's sort of like an AI versus AI world both for creating counterfeits, but also for tracking them down and removing them. AI is something that we use heavily in our line of work for image recognition and for spotting trends among product pages using similar keywords or phrasing. They might have different selling names and brand names, but if you link them all together, there's breadcrumbs all over the place and you can pick them up and see that, ‘Oh, that's actually one guy going under 100 different names’, which is pretty helpful. And again, you wouldn't be able to do that by hand unless you have an insane mind.

One thing I want to mention here as well is that the number of brand impersonators - where a company is claiming to be another company - is growing. If you go to a social media page, there's one that has a verified mark and then some others that have a verified mark – but within their profile picture. So, you think they are verified, but that's just the picture that looks like it, and the name is the same and so on. They claim to be that company which can be very detrimental to a brand's reputation because they might pose as customer service and then ask for confidential information and so on. And now you're in trouble because you as a consumer have a very hard time distinguishing between this and the actual brand. The last year or so it's been also very easy to create deepfakes in terms of faces and also to recreate voices - so you can have a face of a CEO or someone else and you can also create fakes with the voice if you have enough material to do that. It's just crazy to think about how you might impersonate a brand and pretty much do everything that they do. As a consumer, it's very hard to recognise, so I would say that's definitely one of the emerging threats.

**RH: What do you believe are some of the key indicators to a successful brand protection program?** 

TR: That really depends on your program's strategy. The “reason” why you are trying to protect your brand is to see less problems, but it could also be that you just want to increase your brand's value. It could also be that you want to reduce the number of complaints your customer service personnel will be receiving. It really comes down to the brand’s brand protection KPIs.

I would say that if you were seeing counterfeits or brand impersonators online, and now you see a reduction in the number of new appearances of these online - it's a pretty clear indicator that you're doing something right.

We have very strange conversations sometime with clients where they are dissatisfied with us finding less and less infringement on them. And I'm like, ‘Well, isn’t that a good thing?’. I know that from a client perspective, they go ‘yeah, I spend X amount every month and now we're removing less than we used to’ - yes, that's because you are less ‘ill’ or ‘targeted’. Which is a good thing essentially.

A key indicator could also be that you are reducing your legal costs - if you spend X amount every year on legal battles because a few legal issues are arising out of these infringements, which you have to actually go to court for or settle in some kind of legal dispute, and you are now doing that less and less, then that could also be an indication of succes. Then, especially brands within retail, they could see the success from a brand protection program being that they are increasing their revenue in terms of increased sales. My point here is that if you have 20 offers on the shelf and only one of them is yours and you take down the 19 others - which one of the offers is the consumer going to pick? They're going to pick yours, right? And through that you will see an increased number of sales, even though you didn't really change anything in terms of your sales and marketing strategy – you just started to clear the market a little bit of all the bogus offerings.

**RH: We talked a little bit about this as well with the threats and opportunities within the world of brand protection - but what role do you see technology playing in the future of brand protection? And how are you leveraging technology in the current work that you do?**

TR: The first one is definitely data analysis. You're able to use technology to analyse a very large amount of data in split seconds, which is not something that a human could do. You could use this to identify trends and patterns, and to create clusters of sellers working under different aliases. Again, this is the talk of breadcrumbs being spread everywhere and you just need to collect the pieces. We also use technology for image recognition, as I mentioned earlier. So now we can go through hundreds of thousands of images in a very short amount of time to look for copyright infringement, which is something that's technology based to its core. Also generating DMCA letters and complaints of notice to take down to websites.

We're also using technology to label findings to make sure that we can actually take them down. If it's a trademark infringement of some sort, then we need to assign a NICE class number to the finding - and how do we do that? If it's not going to be done by hand, it's going to be by the images and the text on the page, using tools like ChatGPT to estimate whether this might fit within the IP portfolio of that particular client. This being done by computer is essentially saving us a lot of time, making our services cheaper, but also allowing humans to do whatever humans are meant to be doing - which is something that computers cannot, like connecting some pieces together that are not obvious to the computer, or creating associations, etc. You can use machine learning AI to identify, analyse and essentially automate a lot of processes and just help companies as well as the end user by making the services more cost effective.

A lot of companies see brand protection as a cost for the company that they are not too willing to invest in, even though in the long run it kind of works like an insurance for you. Now you're able to lower that cost because you can automate so many things. I think this is a great way of using technology – making it cheaper and more affordable for IP owners to actually protect their brand.

There's also anti-counterfeiting technology which is widely used for companies to add some sort of physical security measure to their brand. If you buy a laptop and you open the box either on or in the box, there is a sort of “invisible” QR code that you are not aware of until you scan it. And the counterfeiters can't really replicate that. There might also be some sort of plastic film that you need to pull off which again is something that makes it hard to replicate. Again, this is technology-based but there is digital watermarking of your images online which embed a certain pattern within an image that is something that you can't see as a human but something that works as a sort of invisible QR code as well. And I think those types of technologies are brilliant because they can then be connected to a blockchain as to even further protect your brand and to increase the chance of authenticity. But also when you scan something with that app to verify that it's not a fake, then if it is a fake, that could immediately be reported to the cloud somewhere alongside the geo-location of the app user.

**RH: Do computers have the potential to do things in our work that humans cannot do, either now or in the near future?**

TR: Spotting very, very, very small changes between true and fake or genuine and fake. That's something that a person cannot do, we need technology to do that. Deepfakes are a good example of it. You can make a deepfake and then it's really, really difficult to tell the real and the fake apart - but a computer might be able to let you know instantly because of something that's hidden to the eye. Analysing images for copyright infringement and so on, it comes down to tiny pixel values, and sometimes within those pixels is where you'll find the digital watermarking. You can also essentially say that since what we're doing is within the legal world, you need someone who doesn’t make too many mistakes because those can be very costly for you. And then how do you get an employee that can work for you 24/7 without being tired, always producing the same output? Well, that's a computer. This goes for filing complaints, filling out forms and running searches during the night where, yeah, some people might drink a lot of coffee, but they're still not able to pull the same amount of time as our virtual machines.

RH: Thank you for your time.

Timmi (1).jpg

Meet Timmi Rysgaard, Owner, Brand Protection

There’s no denying that intellectual property in all its forms is one of the most fascinating (in our admittedly biased view) practice areas of law. Many practice areas are centred on the sometimes-tenuous balance between human behaviours and very human ambitions. No matter how much we evolve as a species, there seems to be always that more primitive part of us that seeks to steal, lie, cheat and harm others for a stunningly wide variety of reasons.  

For sure, monitoring for infringement and enforcement of rights forms a good (and critically important) part of intellectual property management but the better part of it is focused on growth and innovation. Promoting those key elements becomes a way of life for its practitioners. Along with the attendant workload composed of a heavy volume of time-consuming tasks.

The value of that time is indisputable. But correctly valuing and prioritising that time seems to be one of those long-standing human failures. Seneca, a Roman Stoic philosopher, statesman and dramatist (4 BC – 65 AD), repeatedly highlighted the importance of time as a resource. The popular DKB Show that extracts insights from historical figures and old books, imagined a conversation with Seneca today using his words and philosophy to provide modern answers to an age-old problem.  

“DKB: It’s true that we all waste a lot of our time. Why do you think this happens? We all know that our time is limited, but many of us continue to make this basic mistake.  

Seneca: In your mind, you genuinely think you’re going to live forever. You think you have an infinite supply of time, and you keep spending it on the first thing that pops up without giving it much thought. You act like a mortal in all that you fear, and an immortal in all that you desire.” 

We are all familiar with life-altering events and circumstances that bring our focus more sharply on to how we are spending our time. Colloquially known as the ‘phoenix effect’, life-alerting events such as accidents, severe injury, life-threatening illness or even the loss of a loved one can change, temporarily or over a longer term, our priorities and how we assess our relationship with our most precious natural resource – time.  

And it is of particular importance in the intellectual property world. WIPR investigated some of the elements and factors involved in an article titled: Mental health and law: does IP have a culture problem? The article centres around three organisations in the UK that provide specific supports and resources to the legal profession and the intellectual property niche in particular. One of those, Johnathon’s Voice, was created by the parents of patent attorney Johnathon McCartney after he tragically took his own life in 2017.  

The piece highlights the many struggles of intellectual property professionals and unsurprisingly highlights the risks of burnout associated with long hours of manual and time-consuming labour. More surprisingly, there were insights about the type of people who are drawn to working in this profession:  

“IP tends to attract perfectionists, people who have perhaps been successful in previous careers but can suffer imposter syndrome in law” said Graham McCartney, Johnathon’s father. Elizabeth Rimmer, CEO of UK charity LawCare agreed “The type of people who become lawyers have thinking styles that are very helpful for law, but if you don’t manage them well, they can negatively affect your mental health.”   

Of course, the nature of intellectual property work is a critical factor in the challenge, as Elizabeth Rimmer goes on to clarify “The 24/7 culture didn’t exist then as it does now. The advent of technology means it can be very hard to switch off. The long working hours culture is endemic.”

Culture at RightHub is a very big part of what we do. While technology has undoubtedly created problems, it can provide solutions too. It’s a core element of who we are as a company and what drives us. We bring people together to make a difference in the world and here at RightHub, it's a 'whole life' issue and it is the application of technology in the very best of ways - empowering professionals to lead more creative, energetic, growth-orientated and fulfilling lives.

Community-700x480-Could there be more to life in IP.png

Could there be more to life in IP?

For today’s Community Spotlight feature we go to Strasbourg to meet with Paul Reboh, the founder of Bernstein.io, a trailblazing company leveraging the power of blockchain technology to provide robust solutions for securing IP assets and innovation processes.

Companies can establish an immutable digital trail of records with Bernstein.io, offering indisputable proof of ownership, existence, and integrity for their inventions, designs, and proofs of use.

\
**RH – What does Bernstein do Paul?** 

PR- We help people secure and then leverage their IP by providing certification of their digital assets on the blockchain. 

**RH – Whoa – could you break this down so I can get my head around it?** 

PR – Sure. We provide proof that IP owners knew about, and owned an IP asset, or group of IP assets at a particular time. If you think about the old (analogue) way of proving copyright ownership, the owner could post themselves a copy of the work, preferably by registered post. Once the envelope arrived, and providing the date stamp was clear and the envelope unopened, this would be usually enough proof of ownership at the date on the stamp. Our method, is almost instantaneous, can handle many different types of assets – for example it would be tough for the post to handle a complex 3-D model, or the many 1000’s of lines of code of a complex piece of software, and can handle groups of assets such as (insert best example here).  

**RH – Very cool – what other advantages does your solution provide?** 

PR – It’s scalable, cost effective, can handle multiple files, provides version control so can work on a project, rather than individual piece of IP basis and is most importantly, completely secure. We offer what we call, ‘zero-knowledge architecture’ which means our clients’ IP assets are encrypted directly in the browser on the client side before going to our digital vault storage. No-one, not even us can view the assets. This is the really clever and detailed stuff, but we have wrapped it up in a UI that hides the complexity and makes it really easy for the end user! 

**RH- sounds great, anything else you want to tell us?** 

PR – in addition to direct clients, we offer a white label version for law firms, which we see as a huge advantage for the firms looking to offer a secure digital vault and time-stamping for their clients’ assets. Upcoming releases will also feature decentralised storage – great for example for facilitating the defensive publishing of inventions. Also look later this year for something really cool in the NFT minting space – in effect and NFT launchpad where the entire history of the NFT token is linked to the entire history of the project. For those who know NFT’s, and the issues around them, this is a gamechanger. 
 
\
In the intricate landscape of intellectual property (IP) protection, Bernstein emerges as a gamechanger. By adopting Bernstein's advanced blockchain solutions, companies gain the tools they need to confidently navigate this complex terrain.

Want to be featured in our Community Spotlight? Please let us know at awylie@righthub.com!

Paul.png

Community Spotlight: Paul Reboh

**In every industry, the ability to make data driven decisions to support business growth is becoming increasingly critical as the variety of options available to law firms seeking increased revenue grow exponentially.**  

Of course, the difference between correlation and causation must always be borne in mind whether your target is gaining more referrals, increased profitability, greater efficiency, or higher client retention rates. Nonetheless, increasing volumes of research are providing interesting insights to bear in mind as you formulate strategies. 

One such insight (amongst many!) is provided by the 2021 Legal Trends Report published by Clio who identified strong links between a law firm’s growth and the revenues they realised. 

Their study analysed the differences in revenue growth amongst law firms who were growing, holding stable or shrinking across a 5 year period and they defined the groups by examining total year-over-year revenue across that same period. The minimum year-over-year revenue change experienced by growing law firms was an increase of 20%. Those law firms (when an initial analysis in 2019 was re-examined) had also seen their client base expand along with leveraging increased casework volumes and increased revenue per client over the same time period and these were identified as playing a role in that revenue growth. 

For law firms whose growth is stable, their associated revenues over the period didn’t shift by more than 20% in either direction but those law firms who are shrinking realised declines of more than 20%. 

Unsurprisingly, there was a period of stalled growth for these firms correlated with the onset of the pandemic. However, over the long-term view, these same firms have experienced persistent year-on-year increases which tot up to a hefty equivalent of 135% revenue gains since 2013. Law firms identified as being stable in terms of growth have, over the long term, achieved much smaller gains in revenue. The twist in the tail came from shrinking law firms who have seen small gains in the period since 2017, including 2020 when growth stalled for growing firms for a period. 

**Perhaps even more significantly, Clio’s report investigates a variety of technology adoption rates that may contribute to the growth status and strategies employed by these firms in relation to the revenue they generate.** They examined these technologies, such as client portals, online payments and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems, through the lens of two key benefits - firm efficiency and improved client service. Across the board and amongst all the technologies they examined, growing firms are earlier adopters of technology and at a higher rate than firms who are shrinking. 

The adoption of technologies has been found to be a critical question in several different sources as highlighted in RightHub’s own white paper [“All you can eat - Consumption pricing in the IP industry”. ](https://www.righthub.com/insights/all-you-can-eat)

In one year, clients’ interest in technology tools has grown from 41% in 2020 to 51% in 2021. Over the past few years, and perhaps particularly with the impact of the pandemic, technology is becoming an undeniably influential factor in every aspect of the growth of law firms. 

The 2021 Legal Trends report doesn’t answer the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg, but what is clear across the board is that growth strategies, revenue increases and technology use are inextricably linked and your choice of growth (or not) strategy may be more important than you think!

Community-700x480-The relationship between law firm growth and the bottom line.png

Law firm growth and the bottom line

### A myriad of challenges are driving Chief IP Counsel and in-house legal teams to rethink their traditional approaches to operations. From new hybrid work arrangements to economic uncertainty, law departments face increased urgency to improve how they support their business stakeholders across the IP lifecycle.

Law departments are challenging traditional operating models by adopting new resourcing models and more sophisticated technology. The 2022 Wolters Kluwer Future Ready Lawyer survey report shows “a significant and growing trend across legal departments over the past three years in ‘who’ does the work,” with changes including:

![MIPOPS1](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_1_45aaee68d1/MIPOPS_1_45aaee68d1.png)

Alternative legal service providers (ALSP) and managed legal services (MLS) are growing professional services categories that focus on bringing operational flexibility to the legal function. As corporate legal departments leverage law firms, business consulting firms and new provider entrants that are heavily investing in building new legal solutions, it is predicted that the ALSP and MLS market will grow to $25B by 2025.

Hyperion Research finds that the use of non-legal support services is likewise an important element of the Intellectual Property group’s operating model. Patent annuities (89%) and trademark renewals services (72%) are well-established and widely adopted. While areas that have generally been internally staffed are being outsourced, including docketing (44%), trademark and patent filing (44%), and paralegal services (28%).

![MIPOPS2](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_2_1fb6bca35c/MIPOPS_2_1fb6bca35c.png)

_Outsourced IP Services_

In combination with these resource changes, technology has become a critical enabler of the process improvements IP teams are implementing to improve their operations. Automation, PTO data interfaces, and AI are table stakes for innovative IPMS solutions that are seeking to address the increasingly sophisticated needs of IP departments. The challenge for many Chief IP Counsel is understanding the market and how to best approach integrating these technologies into their operations.

## ENTER MANAGED IP OPERATIONS
For most companies, IP operations have traditionally been supported by one of two approaches: an internal staff of IP professionals using an IP management software system; or a reliance on outside counsel to take responsibility for managing day-to-day activities including docket calendars and portfolio reports. In certain areas, such as patent annuities or global filing projects, point solution specialists have become well-established for transactional, outsourced services.

Today, these established models are being reconsidered in an effort to improve IP operations. A combination of multi-dimensional staff models and greater investment in technology are becoming the catalysts for new and improved ways to build valuable, cost-effective, and strategically aligned assets.

### Managed IP Operations Explained
Against this backdrop, intellectual property solution providers are introducing new solutions that combine process best practices, flexible staffing, and advanced technology that allow innovation and brand companies to reimagine how they build and manage their IP portfolios. Operations managers are empowered to go beyond the traditional operating models, and put into place more flexible managed IP operations that are responsive to the needs of IP teams and their stakeholders.

Managed IP Operations (MIPOps) defines a new solution category that transcends the “menu” approach in which support services and software are separate and disjointed. MIPOps integrates the core operational support resources with advanced IPMS technology to provide a single end-to-end platform.

With managed IP operations the inefficiencies and process risks inherent in the existing model of disconnected services and software, are eliminated. The IP team can build their operational support model with the optimal allocation of internal and external resources with full information connectivity provided by a common platform. As IP teams adjust to changes in their requirements, the managed IP operations model provides the needed agility to meet stakeholders demands with appropriate skill sets, scalability, and budget control.

![MIPOPS3](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_3_a62adb6c10/MIPOPS_3_a62adb6c10.png)

## USE CASES FOR MANAGED IP OPS
Hyperion Research data validates that the MIPOps model can be widely applied. In a recent survey of IP operations experts, we defined MIPOps as, “the combination of IP management software and IP services to provide a software platform that can be managed and maintained by experienced IP administrators without the need for in-house expertise.” Then we asked which services are best suited to MIPOps. While docketing came out on top, several other types of services were selected and 30% indicated that all of the services we mentioned could be handled under the Managed IP Operations model.

Survey responses were similarly widely distributed regarding the types of organizations that would benefit from the MIPOps model. Nearly half indicated that the model would benefit corporations and law firms of all sizes, and it is noteworthy that 83% saw applicability for corporations across the size spectrum.

### SERVICES BEST SUITED TO MANAGED IP SERVICES

![MIPOPS4](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_4_8419d4183d/MIPOPS_4_8419d4183d.png)

### BEST SUITED ORGANIZATIONS FOR MIPOPS MODEL

![MIPOPS5](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_5_6ecc2e743f/MIPOPS_5_6ecc2e743f.png)

![MIPOPS6](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_6_a0ffe3d65c/MIPOPS_6_a0ffe3d65c.png)

## ADOPTING MANAGED IP OPERATIONS
The need for IP teams to rethink their approach to operations is driving the opportunity for new service models. Managed IP operations (MIPOps) is emerging as a way for innovation and brand companies to address the challenges of existing operating models whose service and technology are inherently disconnected.

By adopting the MIPOps approach, IP teams can achieve a balanced, flexible operations structure that achieves the goals and objectives of creating valuable, cost-effective IP assets. In the pursuit of managed IP operations, we recommend the following steps: procedures, to provide the blueprint for building and executing a managed IP operations structure.

![MIPOPS7](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/MIPOPS_7_4393be214d/MIPOPS_7_4393be214d.png)

## By providing a ground-up redefinition of how IP operations can be managed, MIPOps provides an approach that starts with integration of capabilities as a fundamental principal and puts in place an effective technology, services and governance infrastructure.

## WANT TO LEARN MORE?

Reach out to Helios: a RightHub Limited company, provides Managed IP Operations services to corporates and law firms. Offering an integrated technology and services platform, Helios is at the forefront of helping innovator and brand teams achieve greater operational efficiency and improved return on investment across the IP lifecycle. For more information please visit https://heliosip.com.

![Helios logo](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/Helios_logo_33cd899e46/Helios_logo_33cd899e46.png)
 
Epiq’s Legal Business Advisory experts empower legal teams to re-envision the delivery of legal services, create necessary and data-driven strategies, and then provide legal services to help these teams execute their new strategies quickly and with ease. Among our areas of expertise, we have dedicated experts in the field of IP Advisory with more than 20 years experience in this industry as well as long-standing relationships with major IP management vendors. Learn more at https://www.epiqglobal.com.

![epiq logo](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/epiq_logo_ce96e108f7/epiq_logo_ce96e108f7.png)
![hyperion gp research logo](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/hyperion_gp_research_logo_af5119e3f2/hyperion_gp_research_logo_af5119e3f2.png)

Community-700x480-blogpost-v2 (1).png

IP Outsourcing and The Rise of Managed IP Services

**Cracking the secret sauce of client retention at your firm can be tricky but nonetheless immensely valuable.** It's one thing to make it rain, it's another thing entirely to keep it raining and for that, you need to answer the question - why do clients leave a law firm? 

There's not a quick answer to that because human relationships and the human behaviour that drives them are multi-faceted circumstances with an ever-evolving set of complex needs and desires. The only thing you can be sure of is that nothing ever stays the same for long. 

Despite that, there are some certainties to rely on. Whether someone is packing up their IP portfolio or all their clothing, books and the cat to exit your life, you can be sure of at least one thing - their needs aren't being met. It perhaps doesn't clarify what those needs are, but they are unfulfilled either way. 

And often, as some part of that, their life has been harder in some way than they needed it to be. It doesn't have to be dramatic. Over time, even quite small but unnecessary challenges can take their toll and become a relationship ending factor. On the face of it, as an isolated incident whatever it is, it's no big deal but as time rolls on and the incidences mount up, a breaking point is reached. 

**And then, often as a direct result of point 1 and 2, trust in the relationship is lost. And at that point, it's all over.**

Of course, in the context of clients leaving a law firm, how you might translate those certainties is a little different but they always apply. Sometimes there is a trigger that can't be helped. Personality can be a really big factor and sometimes when a much-loved partner leaves the firm, clients will go with them. Market forces might well drive clients out of business or demand significant down-sizing. Alternatively, they might expand so much that they develop their own in-house legal department and simply need you less. 

These are all factors outside your control and in investigating your particular secret sauce, they need to be excluded from the mix. Worry instead about the factors that you do control and recognise that just like more intimate relationships, it is often the little things that have the biggest impact which brings us directly back to points 1 & 2 again: 

**Are their needs being met? Are you making their life easier in some way?** 

The first of these questions is a business one and it should be relatively easy to identify and define what those needs are. When in doubt, you can just ask! The second is much trickier because we don't always recognise when our systems don't make the lives of others easier. We think it 'ought to' but that isn't the same as 'does'. 

**The rise in 'convenience' everything, from food to online shopping, should tell us the importance of 'easy' in providing products and services.** So, when you begin to look at your client retention plan, list all of the services that a client needs, put yourself in their shoes and ask, **"How easy do we make this?"** 

It is at this point that you discover the drivers for behaviours that will add to your retention rate. How difficult is it for a client to find out what is happening with their case? What if they want to know the status of a recent registration? How frustrating are those processes for them? 

The big services that they need from you are easy - they make an appointment with you and sit down to work through whatever is needed but don't underestimate the deep frustration felt by many clients in the smaller things. If it takes your client more than 5 mins to get an answer to a question that in this day and age should be instant, that's eventually going to be the reason they leave. 

Because they will find someone who will put the plate into the dishwasher instead of beside it. Or a firm that gives them the kind of simple online access to their information that they have come to expect from every other part of their life. Because it doesn't make their life harder than it has to be while still meeting their needs. 

Providing this kind of service doesn't have to be difficult for you either. In fact, it can make your life easier in a myriad of ways too. Even trying it out is simple! 

Community-700x480-Why do clients leave a law firm_.png

Will they stay or will they go now?

### For this week’s Community Spotlight feature, we are in Southwest France, to meet with Muriel Bourgeois-Tassanary, founder and CEO of MT consulting.

Muriel has worked in IP for nearly 3 decades, in many different aspects of IP, with a focus on patent information, intelligence and analytics. She is a former President of CEPIUG (Confederation of European Patent Information User Group), and Vice-President of CFIB (French speaking Patent Information Group), she plays an active role in Patent Information Education before QPIP, the French Patent Office, and Universities.

  

**RH - After a career of which was spent mostly with very large companies like Nestle and Technicolor, what made you start MT-Consulting?** 

  

MT – My principal driver was my desire to share the knowledge of IP – and the many different aspects of IP that I have been involved with and have acquired during my career specifically with a section of the innovative community that does not really understand IP, nor is well-served by the large service providers. So, I am talking about SME’s, sole proprietors, inventors, start-ups, etc. 

  

**RH – We think that is an admirable goal, how’s it going so far?** 

  

MT – Pretty well I would say. I teach university courses, I am involved with a local BNI group (Business Network International)  - a professional network of entrepreneurs who are sharing referrals founded in US in 1985,  and began to act as an independent consultant for INPI (French Patent Office) IP Master Classes.  

I am trying to deliver content and training that is different from that which, e.g. large search companies or the patent offices would provide. I give content that reflects the reality of a start-up or SME which is often time and resource poor. It is about providing pragmatic, useful advice with results like operational pictures that can be easily understood by those without a massive background in, or knowledge of IP. 

  

**RH -I am sure you have seen some changes in the tools you have used over the years, what has been the impact of this?** 

 
MT – Ha – that’s an understatement. When I started, we loaded CD-ROMs with the latest patent information on local pc’s! We have moved from classical Boolean searching to semantic searching, now including AI and Deep Learning. This has mean that for us professionals in the industry we have had to adapt and employ a different mindset to that which we had previously. We now need to report to many different people in different roles, with different areas of interest and different knowledge of IP. I liken it to be a Swiss army knife – we have to pull out one facet, one tool to meet one particular need, then another different tool to meet another need. It’s about being adaptable. Having said that, I think that these are very interesting times with many very useful tools more accessible to users. I try to equip them to be able to make the most of these tools, to navigate IP landscapes to further their aims.

Muriel.jpg

Community Spotlight: Muriel Bourgeois-Tassanary

**The billable hour is dead. A quick Internet search will provide a selection of obituaries ranging from confident predictions of gloom to irreverent and somewhat gleeful 'bon voyage' elegies. But are they premature?** 
 
 

To no one's surprise, the answer is: it depends. 
 
 

In the very precise and yet complex style that perhaps only the legal industry can achieve, the billable hour is dead and yet very much alive. A sort of financial zombie lurching through the accounting department of law firms everywhere, if you will. 
 
 

This duality is beautifully summed up by a 2017 article by the Legal Tech Blog titled "Death of the billable hour - rise of legal tech?" They describe the confusion to one of definition and a 2017 report by the Georgetown Law's Center for the study of the legal profession and Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute entitled "State of the Legal Market" as saying: 
 
 

"One of the most potentially significant, though rarely acknowledged, changes of the past decade has been the effective death of the traditional billable hour pricing model in most law firms. This isn’t to suggest that most firms have done away with billing based on hours worked, indeed the majority of matters at most firms are still billed on an hourly basis." 
 
 

It is clear that in understanding the celebration of the demise of the billable hour, that we are talking about the death of a client-facing pricing model rather than an internal measurement of business value contributed by lawyers working at the firm. It is that definition of the billable hour that is very much alive and well. 

**How does this shift affect IP law firms in particular?** 
 
 

It's said so often that it seems irrelevant but the volume of manual work in routine IP management practice is a showstopper in many ways, not least when it comes to client-facing pricing models for that work. Flat fee arrangements are a common practice for more routine kinds of work and the combination of flat fees, the volume of manual work and a certain 'je ne sais quois' element to how many hours any particular renewal, registration or monitoring service might actually take, gives rise to fundamental concerns about profit margins - a creature whose existence in law firms is rather more credibly under threat than the billable hour! 
 
 

In our white paper ["Consumption pricing in the IP industry"](https://www.righthub.com/insights/all-you-can-eat), we took a look at the factors that tie into the average IP law firms ability to achieve the kind of work flows and pricing models that grow their business, increase revenue and create sustainable profit margins. 
 
 

The 2020 Altman Weil report "Law Firms in Transition" found that just over 90% of lawyers agreed that competition on pricing between firms is a legal market trend that is here to stay. If you will be forced to compete on price and you cannot reduce the hours that manual tasks take, then the result is to reduce the flat fees that clients now demand. To do so is to charge less for your lawyer's time than you pay them. 
 
 

Add in the all-too-frequent free services that many IP law firms offer to their clients as the price of doing business and retaining their business and it is difficult to see any potential for growth in that market. Core to any unified position on this topic is the understanding that is the way in which we manage routine IP work that must change to both satisfy clients and increase profit margins. 
 
 

It is this fact that creates such opportunities for legal technology companies in the IP space to contribute in a meaningful to change that benefits the entire eco-system. If lawyers must do more with less (and they must), then it is the role of legal technology companies to provide intelligent tools to help them and excitingly, that future is now here. 

Community-700x480-The billable hour is dead. Except that it isn't.png

Is the billable hour dead?

### For this Community Spotlight, we are in Bavaria, Germany, to meet with Robert Klinski, the MD of the Munich-based IP law firm, Patentship. Robert is internationally recognised by IAM 300 as one of the world’s leading IP Strategists, rated by the FT as a leading EU patent attorney for 2019 & 2021, a serial inventor,  author and speaker.

**RH – Good to see you Robert - tell us about invention harvesting, one of your newest ventures.** 

RK – We are in a world of digital transformation with new tech such as Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things, and 5G to the fore. However, most large companies’ R&D departments invent incrementally, improving existing technologies, or do not go near software implementations as there is a perception in the EU at least, that such digital innovation is non-patentable.  Engineers will try to find faster, lighter, more stable, more scalable improvements to existing technologies. E.g. Look at how the internal combustion engine has evolved. 

**RH – Is there something wrong with this approach?** 

RK – Wrong is a subjective term. However, we come at the problem from a different perspective. Rather than improve the existing, we say what does the market need, where is there a gap? Consider that in mobile networks, existing 4G (LTE) tech is being widely used by 5G networks but even though the underlying infrastructure may be the same, the way you design the network to carry out a specific task – let’s call it a ‘network slice’ is fundamentally different. You can scale up or scale down depending on the service.  For example, the speed and quality of the connection required for a voice call and that demanded by an autonomous vehicle navigating a city street are very different. 

These ‘network slices’ are becoming one of the most highly sought after, and potentially lucrative sources of patents. There will often be a lack of prior art in this area, you may be concerned that no patents will be granted on any software. However, we have proven that thinking about innovation this way, we can chart a course that satisfies the disruptive demands of the market and meets the criteria for patentability.  

We use a defined process: First clearly set out the challenge for your market, the gap, the need. Second, define the technical problem. Third, set your developers/engineers loose on innovation creation. We are bridging the gap between SME’s/innovators and the patent systems. 

**RH – It’s a lot to take in Robert. As always, I guess the proof of a new approach comes from the results. How is it going?** 

RK- I will give you one recent example working with a mobile operator. Using this approach we harvested more than 80 inventions which resulted in more than 50 patent applications, over which more than half have already been granted. I think that shows something. 

**RH – As always Robert is has been a pleasure catching up. Many thanks.**

Robert-Klinski.png

Community Spotlight: Robert Klinski

Brand protection services can drive revenue by reducing administrative burden and enhancing client awareness and protection.

In this case study you will find answers to the following:

- How can companies measure the tangible impact of brand protection efforts on their bottom line?
- What are the key criteria for selecting a brand protection platform that aligns with a firm's needs?
- How can law firms proactively address online reputation challenges and protect clients from potential disasters?
- How do brand protection strategies differ based on the industry and geographical location of the clients?

Read the case study by filling out this form:

Community-700x480-BPasrevenuedriver.png

Brand Protection as a Revenue Driver

### In this interview, our Head of Sales (GP law firms), Marc Storm Andersen provides insights into the unique features and customized approach of RightHub for GP law firms, such as the significance of prioritizing user experience (UX) and establishing and maintaining client relationships.

**RH: What unique features or benefits of the RightHub IPMS solution do you emphasise when targeting GP (general practice) law firms, and how do you tailor your approach based on their specific needs?**

 

MSA: As a starting point, most often people do not tend to come to me or to us as a software company with a wish to buy our solution. I think even before thinking about how we can present our offering in a meeting, I must think a little bit about how I can incentivise people to accept the meeting with me - which is easier said than done.

 

I don't believe in spreading a ton of information in an email, so I usually just stick to introducing myself and the reason why I'm reaching out. I might include what I believe to be a unique selling point, but as you know, times change as well as trends and hot topics. There is not one standout solution for such an approach, in my opinion at least. But when I actually get a meeting, I always do a minimum of research on both the law firm and also the people who I'm having the meeting with. This could be simple, such as whether the firm advises on all types of IP rights, whether they brand themselves as expert on certain IP related services such as brand protection, and approximately how many people they have in the IP team overall. Furthermore, I would probably look up the profile of the person or people that I'm having the meeting with on the company website to better understand their position and thereby their roles and responsibilities. There is only so much information that you can get beforehand. So, in the actual meeting, if it is the very first time I talk to these people, I would try to ask different questions to get a more detailed understanding of both the firm, but also the people. And sometimes I believe that this can be a little anxiety-provoking because you may end up in a situation where you have prepared a lot, but the information that you get from the people means that you need to adjust all the preparation that you have done.

 

When we come to the actual presentation of our software solution, and in general when we talk about IP, there are certain things that need to be in place before you can call a software an IP management system. There is a need for you to have a space for IP records and related information. Even though this is a minimum requirement, I would still show this product as part of my presentation - not because of the data, but merely to show the look and feel of it. For me that's a great example of the importance of UI and user experience. I strongly believe that user friendliness, which characterizes our solution, is one of the most significant parts of the software solution. If you as a law firm already use the software tools for IP management purposes, then you are not exactly keen on a migration process. Consequently, you can have the most powerful tool with all kinds of amazing features, but if you as a customer can't figure out how to use it without a lot of training day and night for half a year, I don't think we will win many customers. 

 

When we talk a little bit more specifically about actual features, it depends on the people in the call and on the information I received. If I'm in a meeting with people from a firm that does no enforcement and litigation work or the other way around, I tailor the presentation accordingly. In this case I would focus on our online brand protection tool and show them how this can bring their level of efficiency and proactiveness to protect a client to a totally new level. 

 

I think two big buzzwords of the RH solutions are automation and integration. Automation in the sense that we build workflows that ease the manual workflow for our customers where we see that technology can replace the human touch. Let's say you would like to notify a client about upcoming renewals - why would you then spend time copy pasting information from the relevant IP records into the report when you can just have technology to do so? Why would you copy paste information from a PTO (Patent & Trademark Office), a foreign agent, a registration of a new trademark - risking typos or even missing information when you can just rely on OCR reading technology and the likes to extract the relevant information and submit that directly into the relevant data fields in your software leaving you with the only task of just verifying if the data is correct. I’m not saying that our software changes data or sends instruction and reports and so forth without the approval of the user, but when such actions need to happen, it is far less time consuming to click a button and verify, than doing the groundwork yourself. I think that's why I always focus a lot on our automated renewal process, for instance, which can bring down the time of handling a renewal from around maybe 2 hours to 5-10 minutes. I know that 2 hours may seem like I'm exaggerating a little bit, but from the very start, when we send a draft or renewal list, budgets should be calculated, an email is sent to the client, maybe one-two reminders are sent to the client in an instruction to a foreign national agent and updating the real data and all of that. Then at the very end reporting to the client, it just takes a lot of manual effort, right? If all you have to do in such a process is to review the instruction from the client, simply select the preferred agent and verify the updated data, that will save a significant amount of time. That is exactly how it is done in our renewal flow. 

 

The final buzzword that came to mind was integration. And we would, of course, love to be a one-point solution for everything IP related. And I also believe that our vision is to be that platform where you don't need any separate system for time tracking and invoicing, trademark watching, or docketing - but of course, we also need to be realistic. We know that a law firm with other legal services than just IP in most cases would probably have a company-wide software for certain things that could be financial, where they have a company-wide billing system. In such cases, I think the likelihood of convincing the whole firm to switch out of their existing financial software and into ours just because it makes life easier for their IP department is close to zero. That's also why it's a crucial part of our business to build our solution open-ended in the sense that we can integrate with other external software solutions. This will eventually allow our customers to operate partly in other software systems but still benefit from the automation that we are building. Of course, I always love to also show in the general practice law firms the client portal side of things, and it might seem simple, but being able to offer clients access to a user-friendly portal where they can find their own portfolio, budget, forecasting for future renewals, registration certificates, and much more is a great way to provide that extra layer of transparency that makes the client even more loyal to you and to stick around longer. 

 

**RH: What is the difference in your approach towards general practice law firms compared to how we would approach IP boutiques or even enterprises and other IP owners?** 

 

MSA: I think one notable difference is that, while not applicable to everyone, general practice law firms often have limitations regarding patents. To work with patents, you not only need a team of lawyers but also individuals with technical backgrounds, such as physics or biology. This requirement sets them apart in terms of their needs. 

 

If we are talking to an IP law firm, then everything that they do is with IP in mind. It's very different for them to convince the whole firm that this is a good solution for IP, because everybody understands the value of what we are showing them. If you compare that to a general practice law firm, it might be that the head of IP needs to report to some other C-level person about this, and that person doesn't necessarily understand why this is a good idea. This creates a different selling point. 

 

Also, as an IP law firm, you have some software in place already when we approach you – so, I know that nine times out of ten I'm competing against the existing system they have. It is something that they have thought very well through because it's their core business. That's where I need to show why our solution is so much better than their existing set-up, because they have probably been running that for several years. Apart from these differences, I still see similar synergies and target personas across the board. Although there may be engineers and such, my focus remains consistent. With corporations, things vary depending on whether they have an in-house IP team. If they do, their IP expertise matches that of general practice or IP law firms. In such cases, I would highlight the ease of accessing information and finding details about their portfolio, tailored to their level of IP expertise. 

 

**RH: How do you build and maintain relationships with general practice law firms?**  

 

MSA: Building and maintaining relationships is my specialty, and I believe it is crucial for fostering great collaborations. Personally, I strive to be the same person no matter who I talk to - and at the same time also understand and respect different backgrounds, cultures, opinions, etc. I don't try to get too personal with everybody, but I still enjoy having conversations with our existing and potential new customers about topics that are not IP or business related. I also think that this is a good way of building strong relationships, and although my primary role is to sell, it's not the most frequently used term in my vocabulary. 

 

Also, I think maintaining a good relationship requires honesty, and thereby also providing an answer that you may not wish to deliver. I have tried in my relatively short career to oversell something unintentionally, but merely because it was my expectation that we would be able to meet certain criteria within the foreseeable future. And it's safe to say that I would rather be honest from the beginning than later on having to explain why we cannot deliver what I told we were able to do so. So being transparent and totally honest is one of the key elements here. On that note, I also think it’s better to consider the big picture, instead of solely focusing on individual ideas. It might be that a law firm asked about something specific that will solve this one problem, and they also have an idea about how this feature should be built - but if we as a team can actually solve five other problems by implementing a new feature in a slightly different way than been proposed by the customer, I'm also sure that they eventually see that we bring much more value than just taking in and building exactly what they are looking for. I consider this as being respectful and open to taking in requests, but also saying, “Hey, I think we can build what you are asking for, but in a slightly different way.” 

 

And then a final, very important thing is that it doesn't hurt to bring a good - or bad deal, for that matter - into a meeting with a customer now and then, and maybe even squeeze in 1-2 bad jokes so you can start off with laughter and end the very same way. I would then also say, if no one laughs, then you just look stupid twice within a short period of time, which can also be funny in itself. 

 

**RH: The last question, how do you stay updated on the latest trends and advancements in the legal tech industry? Of course, especially those relevant to general practice law firms?**  

 

MSA: It's important to understand the industry that we are operating within. If we only cared about trends from a technical perspective because we are a software company, but we didn't understand anything about IP and the pain points that lies within working as an attorney or a paralegal, then we would probably not be building something of much value. For that reason, I am extremely happy with the people at RightHub, because not only am I lucky to have amazing colleagues on a personal level, but we are also a team of people that one way or another have worked within the IP space for a long time. I think this definitely gives us an edge in building something that solves problems in our industry. We host our very own user conferences where we invite both law firms and corporates, we participate in IP conferences and in general I think we are in very close dialogue with our customers to ensure that we keep working proactively instead of falling a little bit behind and developing reactively. 

 

On a more personal level, I guess it's the same for everyone - a day is no longer than 24 hours and there's probably also a capacity limit in my brain. So, I will never know the details of all laws and rules around IP globally. However, I am signed up for different newsletters that publish information about new regulations, trends and the like. This way I can keep a finger on the pulse and thereby understand the needs of the markets a little bit better and share that with our product team. When I come across IP related articles on LinkedIn, on the RightHub Feed or somewhere else, I typically give it a read. And it's not only because I'm interested in keeping my job, but also because I generally find IP interesting, which is of course nice. I think from a technical standpoint, it is no secret that I don't possess the skills that all our great developers do, but I engage with them as often as I can to understand how, what, when, etc. And these conversations make it far easier for me at least to communicate internally, but especially externally to customers, including potential new ones. I'm in a better position to answer a question about customisation of workflows like labelling, data hosting and security to a much greater extent than I would be if I solely focused on the customer facing interaction. I'm also able to better understand more technical questions, get more realistic estimates of timelines for future projects, and answer whether a future request is technically possible to build and if it's already part of our roadmap. So, I really think it's important to keep on track with new trends and hot topics in the IP industry, but also working at a software company I think it's key for me to also understand our own software and the capabilities from a more technical perspective, so that I can actually be prepared to whatever questions I might encounter.  

 

**RH: Thank you.**

Marc-Storm.jpg

Meet Marc Storm Andersen, Head of Sales (GP Law Firms)

### This week we sit down with Nick Finnie, who has worked both for private practice and for a number of companies in the pharma/biotechnology and related space.

**RH – Could you share some of your experience and strategies for managing your in-house work?**  

NF – Sure, I think one key thing an in-house attorney does is learn how to manage both outside counsel and internal clients i.e. management/IP stakeholders.  For the former you need to be able to maintain a good flow of information so that they translate the strategy properly into sound IP protection and advice.  Value for money is also important. So an ability to manage budgets, give clear instructions as to the scope of work, as well as review costs in a systematic way is a useful skill.  You also want to be a good client that outside counsel want to work for. So cost management ideally needs to be done in a way that works for both parties.  

**RH - And internally?** 

NF – You need to acquire a really strong commercial understanding of the business by digging deeper than would be the norm for outside counsel – this is one of the key requirements of my job. You need to know the internal portfolio of IP assets, where they align with product lines, where the strengths and potential issues are; but similarly a good understanding of your competitors. Patents provide a very comprehensive source of knowledge, so I have learned how to construct search strategies effectively, to review large numbers of patents efficiently, and to report my findings in ways that meet my internal clients’ needs. Not only establishing freedom to operate but also understanding the competitor landscape.  Then you need to be able to convey all of this to different types of internal clients.  In-house departments also spend time on developing consistent practices across the team, thinking about wider policy issues and trying to see how internal practice and strategy needs to be adapted to recent developments in law and the industry.  

**RH – What has changed over your career?** 

NF – In very general terms, I think business people have become more aware of the importance of IP.  There is greater understanding of IP,  how to build IP into business decision making.  Access to patent information is now easier than ever and I am often sent third party patent filings by the R&D team to review.   

Even those who don’t like IP usually acknowledge its importance in my industry sector!  

What is not often appreciated by those who are not in the role is that to be good as an in-house attorney, you have to do a lot of internal marketing, and be as good at building internal relationships with the many different internal clients you work with as outside counsel are at business development.  Whilst internal clients may not be able to go elsewhere that doesn’t mean you don’t have to “sell” your services so that you can provide a really good service to the business.  The client relationship is still very important. 

**RH – Thank you very much Nick.** 

Nick-Finnie.png

Community Spotlight: Nick Finnie

## We sat down for a conversation with Pernille Østergaard, our Head of Customer Success, to ask her about customer satisfaction and her approach to ensuring that our customers get the most out of the RightHub platform.

 

**RH: What do you see as your greatest responsibility as the head of customer success?** 

 

PØ: I think my greatest responsibility is to ensure that our customers who have bought our platform get the most out of it. So, it's tips, tricks, making sure they're properly trained, making sure that the feedback that they give us is received and passed on to the relevant people. Also, another main thing is listening to any issues and complaints. 

 

They pay for the use of the platform. But to actually listen be available for when they need to have a solution to something - I think that's my greatest responsibility and my greatest joy. 

 

**RH: I'm sure that this requires some sort of relationship with the customers. So, what is your approach to building and maintaining these strong customer relationships?** 

 

PØ: Well, first of all, I make them laugh as much as I can, because I do think that a smile creates a connection. I make sure that they know that I'm approachable and that they can contact me. And I spend quite a lot of time in trainings, because I feel like they need to know that I know the platform, so they can trust that I can help them. And so that's very important to me that they understand that I understand what they do. What takes up some of my preparation time before trainings, for instance, is that I spend quite a bit of time figuring out who is my customer. That's why I love our onboarding meetings or kick-off meetings where we meet them first, make sure they feel well received, heard and understood. And that's really my job and the tools that I use. 

 

**RH: And how do you then ensure effective communication and collaboration between your customers, the sales team and other departments within the company?** 

 

PØ: That's a tricky one, especially with all the changes that has happened within RightHub over the last couple of years. We went from being able to get up and just talk to the people in the next room to now everything being online. So that is something that Karin Holm, our Director of Customer Experience and I are working on at the moment, making sure that we filter the information that comes in to the right departments.  

 

**RH: Are there any means to proactively identify and address potential customer issues internally before they escalate?** 

 

PØ: We just had an issue with our emails - something wasn't working, and the system was able to tell us that there is an issue. I think that's something that we need to focus more on in our future development, that we are able to put out the fires before the customer even knows that there is a fire, rather than just reacting to the customer issues. 

 

 

**RH: So, we have a lot of things going on in RightHub. And something that is inevitable is losing customers sometimes along the way for different reasons. How do you handle customer churn and what actions do you take to minimise it?** 

 

PØ: Every churn is different. I think becoming a company that measures churn as one bulk entity is a mistake. We need to look at the customer because we have lost customers and services that they are buying from us before. Sometimes it's because of the financial state of the company that is cancelling our services, and we also have some customers who are simply not a great match for us, and we are going to lose some of them – these we need to be okay with losing. 

 

But we have some customers I will fight tooth and nail not to lose. Involving them in the development process is very important because there is nothing worse than moving over to a new platform and feeling like this is not what I signed up for. So, I am desperate and very happy to get their feedback and have open communication, making sure that they know we value their feedback. And we will act on their feedback; we will collect it and analyse it and most importantly, act on it. And I think that's the most important step coming up, making sure that we know exactly what to do with their feedback. 

 

**RH: And that is a great point as well, that sometimes it’s just not the right match between the customer and the company and that's important to realise and it's best to accept.** 

 

PØ: I tend to take every churn personally because I love our platform so much and I don't understand why anyone would leave, but analysing who is leaving and why they're leaving is in my book more important than just looking at the statistics of people leaving. Because we cannot keep every customer, and the customer relationship is a give and take from both sides. We also need to get something valuable from them. Otherwise, we are just pouring our energy into someone who is not a good match for us. Whether we are good match for them can be secondary in those cases. So, we need to go very far for our customers, but we also need to make sure that we're going very far for the right customers. 

 

**RH: How do you manage to stay up to date with the RH product updates? A lot of things are happening all the time - how do you stay on top of that?** 

 

PØ: I'm quite blessed because Karin is also incredibly knowledgeable on the development. We have the migration meetings where we get a presentation, and we have tech presentations that go online. I am also in some MS Teams groups with our developers where I get information. I do feel that that's very hard because often there will be five or more messages in the same day and then finding the communication around that is difficult. 

 

And but I do have trainings with Karin because I have to know the new platform as well as I know the old platform. So, twice a week we do have trainings on the new platform where she goes very in-depth with the different features and developments on the new platform so that I feel already quite well dressed for running out there in the rain with the new platform. 

 

**RH: That's lovely. And speaking of our new features, how do you ensure that customer feedback is considered when building new features on the platform?** 

 

PØ: I have set up a few teams chats directly with our customers. It is a direct line to me, so that all our customers know exactly where to go, and - which is more important in my book – we also know exactly where to go internally because just ending up on a table is not acceptable for anyone. 

 

**RH: What is the process for getting feedback from a customer to creating a feature? Because my understanding is that one request can come from one customer, but that doesn't necessarily make it a great feature.** 

 

PØ: No, it doesn’t. One of the most important things is what our CPO, Jon-James Kirtland said when we were in Malta, and it stayed with me ever since. It is to not take what the customer says that they want, but to figure out what issue they are trying to solve is. Once you understand the issue they are looking to address you can solve the issue in a way the customer might not have considered. Often better than planned as we have such amazing recourses with lots of experience from the industry. Not to mention, we have users all over the world. So using the experience as well as the solutions from other countries is a huge benefit.  

 

We still have a long way until everything is perfectly smooth, but we work on advancing our internal structure every day. And with the passion I feel daily in colleagues I know we will get there. That, more than anything is why I love this company. Everyone working here comes to work with the desire to make RightHub a little bit of magic. And boy do I feel lucky I get to be part of that.  

 

**RH: Thank you, Pernille.** 

Pernille.jpg

Meet Pernille Østergaard, Head of Customer Success



None of us are any stranger to the extreme changes and challenges of a pandemic world and many of us are living life very differently than we once did. Experiencing so many things virtually and remotely is commonplace for many of us now and virtual conferences, virtual onboarding and remote officing is an everyday fact of life. 

It’s hard to imagine how this scenario might have been so very different in a pre-technology, internet enabled world. That’s not a very long time ago either. Twenty years ago, in Ireland, mobile phones were the almost exclusive preserve of Armani-clad stockbrokers shouting instructions into their telephone in first-class train carriages. Dial up internet was the only kind there was. Few homes had an email address. ‘Social Media’ consisted of sending photos and ‘round robin’ family newsletters to far-flung relatives at Christmas time. 

**Today, we are skyping and zooming like we have been doing it forever.** These and other tools have allowed us to eat together, visit each other and rather more crucially, work together. However, it is not achieved without some suffering. 

There are days when it feels like no matter how many apps you have on your desktop, you have to download and install yet another one with each new meeting or client. Got a task management app? The people you need to work with are using another one. Back to the App Store you go! 

**And then there is the cost of onboarding** – the time and resources that it takes to learn a new system and all its capabilities – and more importantly, that it’s not capable of doing the one thing that you purchased it to do. 

Sharing materials and documentation presents yet another issue. Each individual system is paywalled for the storage of documents. Want to add additional seats? There’s an additional cost. Then, if you have your documents stored in one system, your task management in another and all your communications in another, then you will be walking a well-worn path back and forth between them all repeatedly - digitally speaking! 

**All of these and many more frustrations of collaborative working in a remote environment are relatively new to most of the world. It's time to recognise that the struggles in working collaboratively, yet remotely, that are now reality for so many of us, have been an issue for lawyers and their clients for many decades.** 

With the exception of in-house lawyers, lawyers and their clients have never occupied the same office space. Critically important documents and information needs to ebb and flow, back and forth between them, in relation to every matter that is active at the moment. As a generality, they don’t have shared calendars, shared chat functions or shared document storage. 

Apps and systems designed for lawyers are rarely designed (or priced!) for clients to also use. Internal commercial tools within the company ecosystem are rarely suitable for lawyers to use as a general part of their practice, except with this specific client. There are a vast range of such tools and it would be practically speaking, impossible for any law firm to subscribe to and usefully use more than one or two of them. In the IP world, task management tools are a far cry from meeting docketing needs. Task management means something different inside a law firm where the threat of malpractice hangs heavier than a missed deadline in marketing. 

The silos that have traditionally divided the information, resources, communications and tools between attorney and client have been continuously reflected in the development of the technology to support both parties. There are a proliferation of lawyer-only tools and client-only tools that emphasise the delineating line between the two functions. In truth, there is no line. 

**An IP Attorney and an IP Owner are on the same team - they need tools that let them play on the same field. Bringing people together to make a difference in the world is a huge part of the RightHub ethos. Central to this idea is the creation of a platform to bring the IP Attorney and the IP Owner together to work collaboratively while automating many of the manual tasks involved. Whether you are concerned with managing, protecting and enforcing your IP rights, or your clients IP rights, our goal is your peace of mind. To see a little more about how we achieve that, visit righthub.com** 

 
 

Community-700x480-The remote relationship between a lawyer and a client.png

The remote relationship between lawyer and client

## We met with Zsofia on a significant day, the second anniversary of the founding of her company, Fillun, which provides training for paper D of the European Qualifying Examinations for patent attorneys, in addition to patent services.

**RH: You started this when studying for the EQE’s, why?** 

ZSP: It was the first COVID lockdown so I was dependent on looking online for different materials and information to understand how the EQE works. The exam was also going to be different due to COVID with all the papers sat remotely.  

There wasn’t much information available online about the EQE. There were two blogs by tutors and of course, the EPO's website. Those blogs were both written from the perspective of tutors and qualified attorneys, so you couldn't find anything about study plans, preparation or anxiety. I realised that there was no EQE blog written by a candidate. 

Due to lockdown, there was not much distraction in my life which gave me the time to focus on studying and the idea to also create a blog about my preparation. 

I was also extremely lucky as I was in the EPO's candidate support program, so I had a few other people to study with. At first, I just wanted to organise my notes about the EQE in a clear summary, so  I just put them up on my website and I sent a link to the other participants in the candidate support program.  

**RH: Your website is striking in design. Did it always look like this?** 

ZSP: I started with this website as I wouldn't want to put anything out there that I was not completely satisfied with. 

When I had about 5 posts on my blog, I took a brave step and starting posting them on LinkedIn as well. For the first few posts, I probably got maybe one like or two likes. But then I kept doing it, made new connections and the blog took off surprisingly quickly. 

**RH:  This led you to think about how to commercialize it?** 

ZSP: Commercialising never crossed my mind until August 2021.  

Firstly, I obviously had to take the EQE myself. That was a lot of pressure. I mean, failing in front of all of these readers would have been quite a shame! 

**RH: You passed with flying colours?** 

ZSP: For Paper D, my favourite, and the one I now teach on, I got 86 marks out of 100, which I think is good. After the exam you have to wait months for the results. I didn’t make any plans during those months but concentrated on my patent practice. After getting the results and being contacted by several candidates I came up with the idea (in August 2021) of launching a study group for EQE 2022, Paper D with just 4 people, but then 5 applied on the same day so I closed the group. 

That group was good, the study plan worked, but unfortunately not all the candidates passed. The two who didn’t couldn’t put the work in. Passing the EQE is notoriously tough and for more reasons (extreme work pressure, kids, mental health and technical issues on the day of the exam), these candidates could not find the time to attend the classes and study the questions. Finding the time to study on top a full time job and taking care of family and children is hard. 

From this initial group I learned a few things.  

Firstly, to plan better. E.g. for the first class I forgot to include a Xmas break. This year I have scheduled a two week break.  

Secondly, I really felt bad for the people who failed, but came to rationalise that I could not take the exam for them. All I can do is prepare the classes, turn up every single week and explain the questions, strategies, approach, common mistakes, etc.  

Thirdly, I underestimated the time it took me to prepare, and I still find it hard to say no, to set boundaries. E.g. my classes always run longer than scheduled. 

**RH – You are running classes again this year?** 

ZSP – Yes, different groups for Paper D1, D2 and the Pre-exam. Two Paper D1 study groups already started in September like last year and another, more intensive D1 study group lasting 3.,5 months rather than the normal 6 in November. The take up has been good, the D1 study groups have been all fully booked in September. 

**RH – Why do you think that is?** 

ZSP – I think that I approach this differently than the big training companies. The study groups I organise are not 2 or 3-day trainings but 15 or 25-week long programs with weekly meetings. I act as a personal trainer who is there with you, who motivates you and gives you "homework" for the next meeting. It comes back to my experience studying. I found that you needed to be persistent and to find some kind of accountability. To make sure that you actually show up every time. Unfortunately, it is not possible to prepare for the Paper D in a few weeks' time, you need to study for months. Furthermore, not everyone has the motivation to sit down after work, and do one or two legal questions every single day or week. This is the reason why I decided to organise these study groups with weekly meetings, a good study plan and "homework". 

All of our meetings start with the small chats, like how are you, how was your week, and so on. After a while, these group really grow, they share their study materials with each other, they motivate each other and the small group becomes a supporting team of friends. Last year we even met personally in Munich after the exam which was amazing. I hope to repeat that next year! 

**RH – That sounds great, but possibly is a business that won’t scale?** 

ZSP – Yes, I am aware of that. Also, it takes a lot of energy to do this. I have to give up basically all of my weekends but I do enjoy it, for now at least. Near exam time last year I was really tired. However, after the exams I thought: I have made a lot of new friends and connections and helped a lot of people pass the exam. That is so rewarding. 

**RH – What next?** 

ZSP – I always have many ideas, and working on mulitiple projects at the same time. By request, I am steering a Paper C study group but will not teach or attend it. Also the EQE’s are changing they are in consultations now so teaching methodologies will need to change. We will see what happens. I guess it’s a case of watch this space. 

Zsofia-Pintz.png

Community Spotlight: Zsofia Pintz

In this interview, Enrico Panza, our business development director for southern Europe, discusses the unique traits of the Southern European market compared to Northern Europe and the United States. Enrico emphasizes the significance of relationships, shares strategies for connecting with clients, and recounts amusing cultural differences he's encountered.

**RH: Can you briefly describe your experience in the intellectual property industry in southern Europe?** 

 
EP: Everything started 12 years ago when a very old friend of mine, who was a manager in Ipan, a German start-up, asked me to join them to strengthen their position in the southern European markets for administrative services like patents, annuities, and trademark renewals, which were the main services they were selling at that time. 

 
It sounded like a nice challenge, and as besides Italian I also speak French and English, I thought that my experience in highly competitive industrial sectors - from electronics to chemicals - could be an asset to use in the IP services business. So, I took the opportunity, spent some time studying IP, and that's how everything started. After 12 years I'm still here, enjoying this incredibly inspiring business that IP is! 


**RH: What are some of the differences you see in Southern Europe compared to, for example, Northern Europe and Scandinavia?** 


EP: In the southern European market, both on the corporate side and practice side of IP business, things are a bit more conservative than in northern Europe. It's more relationship-driven and reciprocity-driven, especially when we talk about IP counsels and firms. The life cycle of data management and software solutions is longer. 


**RH: And in your experience, how is it compared to the United States?** 


EP: The principles are the same, but there are significant differences. When we talk about reciprocity, it's completely another world. For example, IP firms in the US have completely outsourced administrative services like patent annuities or trademark renewals, while Italian and French firms still handle these tasks mainly internally. Also, US corporates are more open to discussing IP services, automation, and software integration, whereas French and Italian companies tend to be more cautious in this regard. 


**RH: So, for you coming from the tech business, what is the key to approaching leads and potential customers in Southern Europe, maybe especially in France, Italy, and even Switzerland?** 


EP: As I mentioned earlier, it's a relationship-driven business, and being known in the community is crucial. Having a good reputation, connections and established relationships is essential in Southern European markets. Cold propositions don’t go through easily, and the sales process tends to be longer.  


**RH: So for you, it's about being everywhere.**  


EP: Exactly, but you must know how to be everywhere: you must be always up to date with the market, solutions, always open to listen to clients’ challenges and needs. You can learn so much by keeping your attention high on every potential business partner and only after that offer a solution.   

 
**RH: But how do you personally connect with potential customers? Do you have any secret tricks up your sleeve?**  


EP: I find that asking questions and showing genuine interest in learning about them is the key. IP managers, whether in a firm, practice, or corporate, face challenge every day in a highly complex business as IP is. They make choices that involve many different corporate levels. By talking to them, sharing your knowledge, you might bring some value to the process, while learning about the solution they are looking for. Many sales processes run through questions, not propositions, and sometimes even through a denial of delivery because you don’t’ have the right solution at that given moment. You won’t sell, but will win trust, ad open doors in the future.  


**RH: Yes, that's a good approach. Do you have any funny examples where cultural differences led to interesting situations?**  


EP: Oh, yes, there are many instances where cultural differences created amusing situations. For example, I worked in Germany, and there were clashes between Italians and Germans in business environments. Italian spontaneity and openness sometimes clashed with German adherence to decisions.  Also, I had funny experiences in Japan, where the cultural differences were evident in simple things like gestures. Italians tend to use hand gestures to communicate, and in Japan it almost never worked as expected.  

 
**RH: Thank you so much for your time, Enrico. It's been a valuable insight into the cultural differences between southern and northern Europe.** 

Enrico (1).jpg

Meet Enrico Panza, Business Development Director for Southern Europe

### The Ever-Evolving Demands of Global IP

The demands placed on intellectual property (IP) practitioners require improved coordination, adaptability, and responsiveness. These imperatives are driving a transformation in how law firms and corporations address their IP management system (IPMS) requirements. Replacing the traditional, one-size-fits-all Software as a Service (SaaS) model are new, highly flexible platform-based product architectures that are better suited to address the multifaceted needs of today’s IP practices. 

This shift is driving a transformation in the IPMS solution market, moving from traditional SaaS systems to platform solutions better suited to meet these evolving demands. 

Intellectual property is a core strategic asset for brand and innovation focused companies. Significant challenges arise from the need to effectively manage increasingly complex and expanding IP portfolios. The core issues center on several key areas:

• **Operational Complexity** driven by the demands of global expansion and the increased coordination needed between owners and their outside counsel, associates, agents, and PTOs, across jurisdictions and workflows.

• **Data Management** is required to integrate a growing volume of information including emails, documents, reports, and other correspondence, received in different formats and in different ways.

• **Asset Maintenance** to ensure the accuracy and enforceability of assets across families and jurisdictions, including data quality, renewals, assignments, and other formalities.

• **Operational Effectiveness** to efficiently manage workflows across geographies, business units, products, and stakeholders to ensure optimal productivity and cost management.

• **Communication and Collaboration** to provide information flow and transparency across participants and stakeholders related to building, maintaining, and deploying IP assets.

These challenges necessitate a comprehensive approach to IP portfolio management, encompassing global coordination, information integration, asset upkeep, workflow efficiency, and transparent communication. Successfully navigating these complexities is essential  for companies to protect and leverage their intellectual property, ultimately driving  their competitive advantage and business success.

![Group 427319096.png](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/Group_427319096_36550f716f/Group_427319096_36550f716f.png)
_What would help you work more efficiently? (Survey by IP Trend Monitor)_
### The Limitations of Traditional SaaS in IPMS

The evolving complexities and new requirements in intellectual property management are driving IP teams to reassess their current IP management systems (IPMS). Most organizations have deployed SaaS-based systems that provide hosted, subscription licenses with standard modules that allow only limited, or expensive, configurations. These systems increasingly fall short in addressing the diverse and complex challenges faced by IP practices.

The limitations of traditional SaaS in IPMS include:

• **Mismatched Functional Capabilities.** The standard, modular features of the traditional SaaS software are inherently generalized and therefore are not precisely aligned to the specific needs of different portfolios or organizations. The result is inefficiency and inability to meet specific data, workflow, reporting and other needs.

• **Lack of Customization.** SaaS systems either prohibit or are expensive to customize due to their multi-tenant architecture. Any significant customizations require altering the core application, which can be costly and may affect stability and scalability.

• **Inflexible Data Integration.**  Traditional SaaS solutions are unable  to easily or cost effectively integrate or consume disparate data sources, especially those specific to IP. The resulting siloed data environments lead to data quality issues and lack of control.

• **Sub-optimal Global Coordination.**  The inherently closed nature of SaaS is  not well-equipped to provide open collaboration or sharing of information or workflows between internal stakeholders, outside counsel, foreign associates, agents, or PTOs. The result is inefficient processes, inaccurate data, higher costs, and risk of missed deadlines.

• **Limited Flexibility to Fit Complex Environments.** The SaaS multi-tenant, shared infrastructure model can limit how infrastructure, such as servers and databases, are deployed across global datacenters. This limits how organizations can support users and meet data control requirements.

• **Security and Compliance Concerns.** Where high value, sensitive data requires strict security and compliance controls, the multi-tenant, shared database environment of SaaS systems poses risks in data security and privacy. 

![Group 427319098.png](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/Group_427319098_9caa3e0a0c/Group_427319098_9caa3e0a0c.png)

### The Rise of Platform Solutions in IPMS

In response to these limitations, there has been a significant shift towards Platform Solutions that can provide the benefits of the traditional SaaS model, but which offer superior capabilities across the full range of today’s IPMS requirements.  

This new Platform Solution model in IPMS leverages the power of a solution ecosystem composed of purpose-built apps that benefit from both low code, quick-to-develop, and custom development. 

Importantly, the platform model is flexible to allow new advanced technologies including PTO data APIs, automated workflows, and AI to ensure the best experience and future enhancements.

A platform solution offers several superior capabilities including:

• **Rapid Application Development.** The platform-based approach allows for rapid application development in a low-code environment. This empowers users to quickly build and deploy solutions without the need for extensive coding resources.

• **Customization and Complexity Handling.**  While the low-code environment caters to speed and ease of use, the platform architecture also allows for the integration of custom components. This is crucial for addressing more specialized or complex functionalities that generic tools cannot handle.

•  **Directed Information Flow.** By focusing on the specific needs of users, the platform ensures that information and functionality are fundamentally aligned with user requirements, leading to more efficient and effective outcomes.

• **Seamless Integration Users Familiar Day-to-Day Tools.** The significant advantage of this approach is its ability to integrate seamlessly with commonly used work tools such as Microsoft Office, Teams, Outlook, SharePoint, and Power BI. This integration streamlines workflows and enhances user experience.

![Group 427319099.png](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/Group_427319099_1b90d66ccb/Group_427319099_1b90d66ccb.png)

### Introducing RightHub Enterprise, Built on the Microsoft Power Platform

RightHub Enterprise has been designed to solve the challenges of traditional SaaS based IPMS systems with an advanced Platform Solution. Built on the ‘Microsoft Stack,’ the solution offers both law firms and corporate IP teams advanced features, full customization, flexible integrations, and options for deployment.

![Group 427319053.png](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/Group_427319053_d6701ed780/Group_427319053_d6701ed780.png)

The key benefits of RightHub Enterprise include:

• **Advanced IPMS Features** support the diverse and complex requirements of IP practitioners across the full IP lifecycle. The modules and features are purpose-built to streamline IP workflows, ensuring efficient handling across IP types and processes.

• **Close Microsoft integration** enables the IPMS to work with popular Microsoft tools such as Word, Excel, Outlook, Teams, SharePoint, and Power BI. This offers a familiar and cohesive environment for users, enhancing productivity and collaboration.

• **Enhanced Workflows with Power Automate** allow users to automate tasks and complex processes, thereby saving time and reducing the likelihood of errors. Users can customize workflows to match their specific operational needs, ensuring greater efficiency in IP management tasks.

• **Global IP Docketing** (DocketEngine) provides comprehensive laws and rules to automatically create tasks across all record types and prosecution stages.

• **ePTO Sync** enables case creation and updates through electronic bibliographic and prosecution event data, with data quality review and auto-docketing.

• **Power BI Analytics** empowers IP practitioners to create and analyze sophisticated reports that support a full range of management decision making from filing through maintenance.

• **Scalability Built on Microsoft Azure** with full infrastructure control across data security, recovery, and access with Entra single sign-on and optimized geo-location.

![Group 427319097.png](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/Group_427319097_124c18fce6/Group_427319097_124c18fce6.png)

### How to Move to a Platform Solution

Transitioning the IPMS from a traditional SaaS system to an advanced platform solution, such as RightHub Enterprise, offers numerous benefits that are in line with the evolving demands of modern IP practices. Enhanced integration capabilities, particularly with the Microsoft ecosystem, streamline workflows and improve user experience. Advanced customizability and automation features, such as those provided by Power Automate and DocketEngine, lead to significant efficiency gains and ensure compliance with global IP laws and regulations. This shift also facilitates real-time data synchronization with PTOs, a critical factor for accurate and up-to-date portfolio management. Moreover, the integration with Power BI supports data-driven decision-making, a vital aspect of strategic IP management.

The scalability and flexibility of platform solutions cater to the growing and changing needs of businesses, while robust security and compliance features meet stringent industry standards.

In conclusion, moving to a platform solution like RightHub Enterprise represents a strategic move towards a more integrated, efficient, and adaptable IP management system. It positions IP practices to effectively navigate the complexities of the intellectual property landscape, ensuring that they remain competitive and responsive to the changing dynamics of the industry.

### Final Words

Ralph Schroeder leads RightHub's North America business and was the architect of the RightHub Enterprise solution.  Ralph has dedicated his career to advancing best practices in managed IP operations, having worked with some of the industry's most well-regarded corporations and law firms. Prior to RightHub, Ralph was the founder of Helios IP (acquired by RightHub), and previously with PwC, Delphion, Dennemeyer, Anaqua, and Hyperion.

Contact Ralph at rschroeder@righthub.com or +1 813 540 3739

LinkedIn-Article-LinkedIn-Article-2400x1264 (3).jpg

Navigating the Shift in IPMS: From SaaS to Platform Solutions

### Discussion by Ralph Schroeder

As Presented May 9, 2024, to the IP Counsel Cafe Annual Meeting

![IPCC.png](https://storage.googleapis.com/righthub-cms-media-production/IPCC_f5c6af707c/IPCC_f5c6af707c.png)

# Introduction

In the rapidly evolving landscape of intellectual property management, patent departments face increasing demands for efficiency, integration, and operational innovation. As technology advances—driven most recently by AI—and global competition intensifies, the need for a transformative approach to patent operations becomes imperative. This discussion presents five important trends that are redefining patent department operations. These trends, fueled by technology innovations and new operating models, promise to streamline processes, enhance collaboration, and optimize the management of intellectual property. By building capabilities consistent with these trends, patent departments can achieve significant competitive advantages and operational excellence. 

# Trend #1: Integrated IP Lifecycle

Patent departments today face the challenge of managing a complex set of contributors involved in the IP lifecycle, including internal stakeholders, outside counsel, ex-U.S. associates, PTOs, and service providers. The lack of standardized data, disparate workflows, and high transaction costs are significant hurdles, as business processes often span multiple systems without integration. This fragmentation leads to inefficiencies, increased costs, and potential errors, making it difficult to maintain a smooth and cohesive operational flow.

The new integrated approach, such as RightHub’s platform, creates an environment where participants work in a common platform and with common data standards. By lowering transaction inefficiencies, processing times can be reduced by up to 30%, directly lowering operational costs and expediting patent issuance.  An integrated approach also enhances the overall agility and effectiveness of the IP management process, positioning organizations to better capitalize on their intellectual property assets.

# Trend #2:  'Appification' of the User Experience

The IP process involves inventors, business managers, attorneys, outside counsel, and agents, each contributing in related but different ways.  The information and functional needs for each of these contributors can differ significantly.  The challenge is that today’s general-purpose systems are not tailored to these specific needs, resulting in poor engagement.

The deployment of purpose-built ‘apps’ that provide each role the right information and tools significantly enhances user engagement and productivity.  Built on top of an integrated platform, RightHub provides apps that are designed for specific purposes helping to ensure that users can easily participate in the process.  Apps can reduce the user learning curve and streamline tasks tailored to individual roles. This approach leads to a measurable increase in productivity of 20-25%, alongside a reduction in training and onboarding time by up to 50%, enhancing user satisfaction and participation.

# Trends #3: Platform based IPMS

For most organizations, their IP management systems are SaaS-based product solutions: monolithic, all-inclusive, offering one-size-fits-all functionality.   While meeting general requirements, the need for business-aligned information and workflows are either impossible or extremely expensive.  Moreover, these systems can be challenged to work with other systems, leading to disconnected data and processes.  The result is an IPMS that is sufficient but not adequate to the needs of the organization.

The emerging trend are platform-based solutions built on top of enterprise architectures that provide the advantages of traditional IPMS products but with the flexibility to configure and integrate with other data and systems.  For example, the RightHub Enterprise solution is built on the Microsoft Power Platform, providing organizations a leading IPMS system plus native integration to Microsoft Teams, Outlook, SharePoint, Office, Power Bi, and other tools.  Users can work in and across their normal day-to-day tools, thereby improving the efficiency and quality of their work product.  This adaptability can drastically reduce IT overhead and enhance the ability to respond to changes, ensuring that the patent operations are always cutting-edge. The transition to PaaS reduces IT development and maintenance costs by up to 40% and improves system adaptability by 60%, lowering the total cost of ownership with cloud-based solutions.

# 4. AI for Operations

IP practitioners have long utilized technology for document management, workflow enhancements, and basic automation, as well as search and analytics as a core part of their practice.  As AI has rapidly entered the toolset, early applications of generative AI have focused on content-related tasks such as patent classification and drafting. These innovations have provided useful advancements, yet they have been somewhat isolated, focusing more on improving substantive attorney work rather than transforming overarching operational workflows. 

The emerging trend is the integration of automation-focused AI with content-centric generative AI to build new applications capable of managing complex workflows. This combination of process automation and substantive work product enables true end-to-end AI workflows. Such tools not only streamline operations but also maintain high accuracy and efficiency.  Implementing AI, such as RightHub's Copilot, automates routine tasks, reducing workload and minimizing human error in processes like docketing and client communications. This automation reduces operational costs by up to 30% while improving task accuracy and reducing human error by 50%. It also allows staff to focus on higher-value tasks, significantly increasing the overall value of the department.

# 5. Managed IP Operations

Today's patent departments are challenged to meet the needs of an increasingly complex work environment.  Growing work volumes, constrained budgets, and difficulties in recruiting qualified, experienced staff are common issues. These challenges are exacerbated by changing expectations regarding work environments and preferences for remote or flexible working arrangements. This evolving landscape necessitates a fundamental rethinking of how companies manage their IP operations to remain effective and competitive.

Managed IP operations present an alternative strategy that addresses these multifaceted challenges while optimizing internal team dynamics. This approach integrates both technological solutions and professional expertise within a service agreement framework, effectively extending the capabilities of internal teams without traditional outsourcing. Managed services are designed to act as a seamless extension of the company's existing IP department, providing specialized support that enhances efficiency and strategic focus, allowing internal teams to concentrate on high-value, strategic IP activities.  A managed services partnership reduces associated costs by up to 25%, increases focus on strategic activities by 40%, and enhances scalability and flexibility in resource allocation.

# Conclusion

Patent department operations are rapidly evolving, driven by critical challenges such as the increasing complexity of global portfolios, heightened workloads, and evolving workforce dynamics. Innovation in both technology and process improvement offers exciting opportunities to address these challenges.  The integration of advanced platforms, tailored applications, flexible service models, and AI-driven processes are new ways that patent departments can enhance their operational efficiency and improve the strategic management of IP. These innovative trends not only streamline patent operations but also empower departments to adapt to changing demands effectively.  RightHub is at the forefront of these trends by offering targeted solutions that optimize patent management practices, thereby ensuring that departments can leverage technology and expertise to stay competitive and resilient in the ever-changing IP arena.

## RightHub - One place for everything IP

RightHub is a collaborative and inclusive platform for managing and enforcing innovation and ideas. It's built by experienced people passionate about perfecting solutions that allow people to work smarter solving difficult problems in the IP space.
Our platform is connected, reliable, intuitive, profoundly efficient, automated and very powerful. It's (potentially) also the only one you'll ever need.
We named it RightHub to signify one hub for everything IP.

Please visit https://righthub.com for more information

## About the author

Ralph Schroeder leads RightHub’s North American business, working with both corporate IP departments and law firms to improve their IP operations.  Over the course of his 25 year career, Ralph has worked with many leading innovator, brand companies, and solution providers across the full spectrum of IP management activities.  Please contact Ralph at rschroeder@righthub.com 


Insights

Five Trends That Are Shaping The Patent Department