Korean IP Help Desk Operated by Meta Intellectual Property

25/08/2023

Patent Trolls or Rightful Owners? A Perspective on the Recent MPV vs. Hanwha Vision Lawsuit

Recently, Monument Peak Ventures (MPV), a subsidiary of the patent consulting firm Dominion Harbor Enterprises (DHE), dubbed as a 'patent troll' in South Korean media, filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Hanwha Vision in the Western District Court of Texas. MPV alleges that Hanwha Vision infringed on six of its patents, which were originally acquired from the renowned American company Eastman Kodak.

Now, here's where things get interesting. The term "patent troll" is a derogatory term frequently used in South Korean media, implying a negative connotation towards companies like MPV. Yet, one might wonder – is this perspective correct? By viewing MPV as a villain, aren't we implicitly turning those potentially infringing on patents, into innocent victims?

The narrative often ignores that MPV's acquisition of Kodak’s patents was rooted in recognizing their legitimate value. For Non-Practicing Entities (NPE) like MPV, the worth of patents is evident in royalties and potential resale profits.

Isn’t the core of the issue not about the so-called 'patent trolls', but about entities potentially infringing on valid patents? In fact, the very term "patent troll" might be more apt for those infringing on patents rather than those upholding their rightful claims.

Before judging NPEs or those defending their patent rights, we should ask ourselves: Who is the real wrongdoer? Let's take a step back and evaluate the bigger picture, separating nationalistic biases from objective realities. In a world that thrives on innovation, valuing intellectual property should be paramount.



Reference:

미국 소재 특허전문관리업체(NPE)가 한화비전을 상대로 특허 소송에 나섰다. 10일 업계에 따르면 미국 NPE '모뉴먼트 피크 벤처스(MPV)'는 지난달 26일(현지시간) 미국 텍사스 서부지방법원에 한화비전을 상대로 특허침해금지 소송.....

17/08/2023

The Critical Importance of Patent Filing in the Global mRNA Tech Race

I recently came across a compelling article that discussed South Korea's positioning in the ongoing global race for mRNA technology supremacy. For those unfamiliar, mRNA technology, previously touted for its potential for over two decades, has now emerged as a frontline contender in not just COVID-19 vaccinations but also in treatments spanning various diseases including cancer and influenza.

The article drew attention to how powerhouse nations like the US, China, and even our close neighbor Japan, have been making significant strides in this domain. Their efforts are not merely confined to development, but they are ensuring they secure the necessary intellectual property rights to protect their innovations.

Now, this brings me to a very pertinent question - When companies are ready to invest billions in equipment, raw materials, and other resources, why do some hesitate to invest a few million won in patent filing fees? It's a critical aspect that cannot be undermined. Intellectual property rights not only offer protection but can be vital assets in global competition, further strengthening a company's standing in international markets.

While many argue that there's a need for national support in patent filing expenses, I'd like to gently remind everyone that it's high time our corporations realize the value of such filings. While seeking governmental assistance might seem like a viable solution, we must ponder - Is it correct to always lean on the state for these fees? And moreover, doesn't this border on the realm of unfair state support, something that FTAs intend to prohibit?

Conclusively, while national support can act as a cushion, the real need of the hour is a paradigm shift in corporate perspectives. Companies must recognize the crucial nature of patent filings and not relegate them as secondary.

Do you believe the nation should continually bear the patent application costs? Or should firms step up?

Reference:

메신저리보핵산(mRNA) 코로나19 백신 개발이 지연되면서 한국은 글로벌 mRNA 기술 패권 전쟁에서도 밀려나고 있다. 팬데믹으로 ...

15/08/2023

Understanding South Korea's Efforts in Protecting Cultural Content Globally

In recent weeks, several developments have shaped the landscape of intellectual property and content protection, especially concerning South Korean cultural content. If you're curious about these changes and their implications, let’s delve into the heart of the matter.

South Korea's Global Influence: A first glance at the data reveals South Korea's growing footprint in the global cultural content scene. As of 2021, content exports reached an astounding $12.45 billion, surpassing traditional heavyweight sectors like home appliances, secondary batteries, and display panels. This growth is not only reflective of the economic scale but also underscores South Korea's cultural prominence, which was ranked 7th out of 85 countries in 2022 in terms of influence.

The Challenge of Illegal Distribution: However, with prominence comes challenges. The rise in illegal distribution, particularly from massive sites that host their servers overseas, threatens this burgeoning industry. Notable instances, like the closure of 'NoonooTV' in April 2023, depict a scenario where these illicit platforms destabilize the growth ecosystem of the content industry.

South Korea's Response - The SCSC Strategy: In light of these concerns, the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism announced comprehensive measures to eradicate illegal distribution. This strategy, termed the 'SCSC Strategy', has been formulated following thorough consultations across different government departments, content industry experts, and public-private dialogues.

Speed & Strictness: The goal is to expedite processes from content evaluation to site blocking. Introducing automated detection systems and strengthening legal consequences for copyright infringements further emphasize the commitment to swift and stern actions.

Cooperation: Internationally, South Korea is tightening its collaboration net. Notable partnerships include an agreement with the U.S. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and sharing copyright infringement information with the Motion Picture Association (MPA).

Science: Reinforcing scientific investigative capabilities is key. As a result, the ministry has restructured its investigative team into the 'Copyright Crime Forensic Investigation Team'.

Change: To instill respect for copyright, the 'Copyright, Right Now' project has been launched. This initiative is geared towards transforming societal understanding and appreciation of intellectual property rights.

In essence, South Korea is not just creating content; it's leading the way in safeguarding the intellectual and creative treasures that resonate with audiences worldwide.

Wishing everyone a deeper understanding and appreciation of the arts, culture, and the efforts that go behind protecting them.



Reference:

03/07/2023

The Imperative Shift in South Korea's Patent System: From Quantity to Quality

In the world of technological advancements and economic growth, intellectual property rights, including patents, are crucial assets. Despite heavy investment in research and development (R&D), which stands at 2nd globally relative to GDP, South Korea's current system has been revealed to yield a large quantity of low-quality patents, often dubbed "empty patents." The troubling truth, as highlighted in a recent local news article, is that these patents lack practical applicability and commercial viability.

A collaborative investigation conducted by a local newspaper and the Korean Patent Attorneys Association revealed that many of the patents registered by Korea's top ten universities, funded by millions of dollars in government grants, proved commercially unviable. With a focus on high-tech fields such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence (AI), innovative drugs, and healthcare, the analysis found only 4% of these patents have the potential for commercialization.

For instance, a system patented by Korea University last year, funded by a government grant of about $170,000, uses AI to organize hospital diagnostic test results. However, the patent was deemed practically inapplicable by experts, emphasizing the existence of already available alternatives. Similarly, another AI-based counseling technology patented for treating depression, funded by approximately $130,000, was also deemed commercially unviable due to its lack of marketability.

This phenomenon, unfortunately, is not exclusive to these universities or to the field of AI. The survey revealed that a whopping 71% of patents across multiple high-tech fields registered by South Korean universities lacked the quality for commercial application.

These revelations underscore a need for a shift in South Korea's approach to patent applications. As it stands, the pressure on universities to produce patents to secure government grants has led to a proliferation of low-quality patents. Instead, we need to shift our focus from the quantity of patents to their quality.

This does not suggest a dismissal of the patent system's significance, but rather an appeal for an overhaul. As the global race for technological advancement intensifies, it is vital for the future of South Korea that we invest not only in patent quantity but more importantly, in patent quality.

Investing in high-quality patents is investing in our future. A patent is not just a legal document; it can provide a competitive edge in the global market, shape the course of industries, and even alter our everyday lives. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize quality over quantity and strategically invest in the creation and protection of intellectual property rights.

15/06/2023

"Reconsidering the Current State of Korean Battery Patents Amid Intensifying Global Competition"

The recent news has shed light on the daunting reality faced by Korean companies in the electric vehicle (EV) and innovative energy storage systems sectors. According to the analysis, the patent gap between Korea and China has grown nearly tenfold, posing a significant threat to Korea's foothold in the next-generation EV battery market, an area once dominated globally by Korea.

As of 2022, China owns 5486 of 9862 patents in EV and renewable energy innovative battery development, making it the leading nation in this sector. Korea, on the other hand, lags behind with a total of 595 patents, creating a gap of more than nine times that. This development does not bode well for Korean firms, particularly when coupled with China's burgeoning technical abilities and rich mineral resources, key elements of competitive battery manufacturing.

The figures are even more concerning when we consider not just the sheer quantity but also the quality of patents. China also led the comprehensive index including patent quality with a score of 4930, once again surpassing Korea. This scenario indicates a pressing need for a drastic shift in Korea's approach to patent application and innovation.

One might argue that in Korea, where the professional fee for filing a patent application in Korea, even for a large corporation, stands at less than USD 1700, it is impractical to expect high-quality patents. The rate, which is significantly lower compared to global standards, might be contributing to the current situation of a high quantity of low-quality patents. Although the relatively lower cost encourages more applications, the downside is that the quality of these applications may be compromised, eventually leading to a weaker competitive position in the global market.

In light of this, it's high time that Korean companies and policymakers rethink the existing patent application process and prioritize improving patent quality. This shift might necessitate increased investments in research and development, enhancing the professional competencies of those involved in the patent application process, and aligning patent application fees with international standards to reflect the value of innovation.

In a rapidly evolving global landscape where battery technology plays an integral role in multiple industries, clinging to outdated practices could be detrimental. The future of the Korean battery industry relies on its capacity to adapt and innovate, leveraging higher-quality patents as part of its competitive arsenal.



Reference:

지난해 기준으로 한국과 중국의 전기차 및 재생에너지용 혁신 배터리 개발 분야 특허 차이가 10배 가까이 벌어지면서 국내 기업들의 차세대 먹거리인 전기차 배터리 시장도 위협을 받기 시작했다는 분석이 나온다.2020년까지 글....

18/05/2023

The Impediment of the Korean Intellectual Property Office and the Future of Intellectual Property in South Korea

In South Korea, a surprising reality lies at the intersection of legal practice and patent administration. The Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), led by the Commissioner, supervises the patent attorney community—a situation that raises eyebrows. Imagine the Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office, who could potentially be a party to the litigation, supervising patent attorneys. It's a peculiar arrangement, to say the least.

The stumbling block in the progress of IP laws, particularly those beneficial to patent attorneys, is the antiquated mindset that the Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office should have patent attorneys under his authority. This reflects a regressive mentality within the government structure.

The recent exclusion of the Patent Attorney Law amendment from the Patent Subcommittee of the National Assembly's ITRSMVBC discussion is a prime example. This amendment, clarifying patent attorneys' roles in IP valuation and patent infringement lawsuits, has yet to see legislative debate despite the industry's demand.

Suspicion arises as the KIPO seems to delay the discussion deliberately after the Commissioner's controversial statement regarding patent attorneys' representation right. Even though KIPO planned to progress the IP evaluation Patent Attorney Law amendment with the Invention Promotion Law revision, only the latter saw discussion and decision.

KIPO's selective approach to legislation highlights the power dynamics within patent administration, raising serious concerns for South Korea's IP future. The office should no longer be a supervisory body over patent attorneys; instead, we need a progressive, inclusive, and balanced approach to IP law development.

A thorough re-evaluation of the relationship between KIPO and the patent attorney community is overdue. Striving for a balance between administrative oversight and fostering a thriving, autonomous community of patent attorneys is essential for South Korea's IP future.

Reference: Breaking News on the Korea Patent Attorneys Association's Current Issues

13/05/2023

A recent development in South Korea reveals a peculiar situation where real estate appraisers are attempting to monopolize the appraisal of intellectual property rights. This raises concerns about the legal implications and the influence of interest group lobbying on lawmakers who may lack institutional expertise in this area.

The Korean Patent Attorneys Association (KPAA) has submitted a proposal to the Regulatory Reform Committee, demanding a revision of the 'Enforcement Decree of the Act on Appraisal and Appraisers'. They argue that the current decree allows real estate appraisers to monopolize the appraisal of intellectual property rights, undermining the role of patent attorneys and infringing upon the public's property rights.

The KPAA claims that the Appraisers Act Enforcement Decree is overstepping its bounds by granting sweeping authority to appraisers without providing clear criteria. It covers not only tangible assets like real estate but also intangible assets, such as copyrights and industrial property rights. The decree even imposes criminal penalties for unauthorized individuals performing related tasks.

The KPAA points out the contradiction in allowing appraisers with no knowledge of intangible assets to monopolize their appraisal. This situation is not found in any other country and highlights the need for regulatory reform. South Korean lawmakers are known to lack institutional expertise and be easily swayed by interest group lobbying, which may have contributed to this alarming development.

In response, the KPAA has submitted its opinions to the Regulatory Reform Committee, stating that the current decree infringes upon public property rights and restricts the work of patent attorneys. They stress the need to remove industrial property rights from the scope of appraisal subjects in the decree to rectify the issue and mitigate the influence of interest group lobbying on policy-making.

In conclusion, the attempts of South Korean real estate appraisers to monopolize the appraisal of intellectual property rights have raised concerns over public property rights infringement and the restriction of patent attorneys' work. This situation highlights the need for lawmakers to develop institutional expertise and resist interest group lobbying. The KPAA's proposal emphasizes the importance of regulatory reform and a revision of the Appraisers Act Enforcement Decree.



References:
http://www.lec.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=743167
https://www.mk.co.kr/news/society/10727677

“국민의 재산권 침해 및 변리사의 업무수행 권한 제한” [법률저널=안혜성 기자] 감정평가사의 업무에서 특허 감정평가를 제외해야 한다는 의견이 규제개혁위원회에 제출됐다.대한변리사회(회장 홍장원)는 “부...