Entrepreneurship Development

Assignment

Karsin Kamakotti
102113025
Chemical Engineering

Task 1
Copies of Patents :
1. Automatically generating and maintaining an address book
Patent No. : US7634463B1

Date of Patent : Dec. 15, 2009

US77Abstract:
Techniques are disclosed for automatically generating and maintaining personal data, such
as an address book, a financial portfolio, a discussion groups or blogs book, or other types of
personal data stores, based on a person's structured search data and/or usage data (e.g., browsing)
and/or other sources of personal data (e.g., emails the user receives). Related metadata can also be
used in the generating and/or maintaining of the personal data. Dynamic personal data ranking and/or
autocomplete functions are also provided, which can be used in conjunction with the automatic
generation and maintenance of the user's personal data, to further ease the user's burden in
managing and/or handling such data

2. Computer-implemented method and system for managing keyword bidding prices

Patent No. : US7752190B2

Date of Patent : Jul. 6, 2010

Abstract:
A computer-implemented method and system for managing keyword bidding prices are
disclosed. An example system embodiment includes an automatic keyword bidding module, operably
coupled with a processor and a memory, operable to determine a revenue per click value associated
with a keyword, obtain bidding information associated with the keyword, obtain automatic bid controls
associated with the keyword, and automatically generate a bid value for the keyword based on the
revenue per click value, the bidding information, and the automatic bid controls.

3. Dynamically autocompleting a data entry

Patent No. : US7685144B1

Date of Patent : Mar. 23, 2010

Abstract:
Techniques are disclosed for automatically generating and maintaining personal data, such
as an address book, a financial portfolio, a discussion groups or blogs book, or other types of
personal data stores, based on a person's structured search data and/or usage data (e.g., browsing)
and/or other sources of personal data (e.g., emails the user receives). Related metadata can also be
used in the generating and/or maintaining of the personal data. Dynamic personal data ranking and/or
autocomplete functions are also provided, which can be used in conjunction with the automatic
generation and maintenance of the user's personal data, to further ease the user's burden in
managing and/or handling such data.

Similarities :

All three patents are innovative.

Extensive research has been undertaken to produce each of them.
The patents propose a solution to a niche problem.
They have been published by experts in their respective fields.
They have garnered millions in royalties for their creators.

Differences :
Although all three are patents for algorithmic approaches, they are utilised in
entirely different fields.
Patent 1 and Patent 3 have employed in commercial products but Patent 2 has
been put to use only for academic and research work,
The no. of people utilising each patent indirectly, varies.

Patent 2 in my opinion will go on to become a greater success. The scope for adoption
of Patent 3 is more widespread. Future improvements in technology will propel the
acceptance of Patent 3.

There are products/ other patents which exhibit functionalities similar to Patent 2. But
Patent 2 has a better market dominance because of the implementation and advertising
strategies employed.

Task 2
Patent Infringement Cases in Press reports :
Oracle America, Inc. v. Google, Inc.
At issue in Oracle v. Google is whether Oracle can claim a
copyright on Java APIs and, if so, whether Google infringes these copyrights. When it
implemented the Android OS, Google wrote its own version of Java. But in order to allow
developers to write their own programs for Android, Google's implementation used the same
names, organization, and functionality as the Java APIs.
The court fight hinged in large part on archived emails sent by Android founder Andy Rubin,
who continued to develop the operating system after it was acquired by Google in 2005.
Fair use rulings are made on a case-by-case basis so today's ruling doesn't set any legal
precedent, but it's by far the most high-profile decision of its kind.

Outcome:
A jury in California's Northern District federal court declared that Google's use of
copyright-protected code in Android was fair use, freeing it of any liability. Oracle, which controls
the copyright on the code, had been seeking $9 billion for the use of the code.
It means that, yes, software interfaces can be copyrighted, and yes, copying them is OK, at
least in this case, for now anyway.
This has been hailed the verdict as good news for programmers. An Oracle win would have put
many smaller developers at risk of legal action by simply reimplementing someone else's
software interfaces.

Worlds Most Famous Trademark

Most famous is different than most valuable. Coke or Coca-Cola (almost unique in having two
trademarks) ,I would hazard a guess is the most valuable..
Coca-Cola has also spent more money defending its trademark than any other, right from the
early days. It squashed numerous similar-sounding brands. One brand it didn't manage to stifle
was Pepsi-Cola.
What is interesting about trademarks is that the companies try to make them as popular as
possible without making them generic terms (Coke, for instance is very close to being a generic
term for cola drinks, rather than a specific brand). Products like Thermos, which began as a
trademark, is now a generic term for the product, and hence the trademark is lost. Kodak was
also close to becoming a generic term, considering the unwise slogan "If it's not an Eastman, it's
not a Kodak."

The most valuable trademark in my opinion would have to be G

oogle. The word Google has
become a symbolic and figurative representation of the internet.
This has been backed by various studies and researches. Forbes has released an article on the
Top 20 brands in the world recently and Google bags the top spot.