|
|
Post by fofos2000i on Mar 29, 2016 5:57:05 GMT -5
When To Trade Secret and Managing a Trade Secret Program
In the current landscape, IP leaders are looking at trade-secrets with a new found respect. In the right situation it may be better to keep certain innovation and technologies as a trade secret instead of patenting them. Once a trade-secrets program is in place, it must be managed well, which means managing process and people. What are the best ways of approaching trade secrets? This panel will explore: When does it make sense to trade secret instead of patenting Proactive strategies for implementing trade secrets What is the corporate culture and will it have to change NDAs & Confidentiality Agreements – vendors and employees Social Media Reactive strategies – after a breach David Diamond Vice President of Intellectual Property MannKind Corporatio cf-conferences.com/conferences/the-ip-strategy-summit-orange-county-2016/agenda
|
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 29, 2016 7:03:49 GMT -5
When To Trade Secret and Managing a Trade Secret Program
In the current landscape, IP leaders are looking at trade-secrets with a new found respect. In the right situation it may be better to keep certain innovation and technologies as a trade secret instead of patenting them. Once a trade-secrets program is in place, it must be managed well, which means managing process and people. What are the best ways of approaching trade secrets? This panel will explore: When does it make sense to trade secret instead of patenting Proactive strategies for implementing trade secrets What is the corporate culture and will it have to change NDAs & Confidentiality Agreements – vendors and employees Social Media Reactive strategies – after a breach David Diamond
Vice President of Intellectual Property
MannKind Corporatio
cf-conferences.com/conferences/the-ip-strategy-summit-orange-county-2016/agenda Thank you fofos. Your posts remind me of Sherlock Holmes, "consulting detective."
|
|
|
|
Post by centralcoastinvestor on Mar 29, 2016 10:54:57 GMT -5
When To Trade Secret and Managing a Trade Secret Program
In the current landscape, IP leaders are looking at trade-secrets with a new found respect. In the right situation it may be better to keep certain innovation and technologies as a trade secret instead of patenting them. Once a trade-secrets program is in place, it must be managed well, which means managing process and people. What are the best ways of approaching trade secrets? This panel will explore: When does it make sense to trade secret instead of patenting Proactive strategies for implementing trade secrets What is the corporate culture and will it have to change NDAs & Confidentiality Agreements – vendors and employees Social Media Reactive strategies – after a breach David Diamond Vice President of Intellectual Property MannKind Corporatio cf-conferences.com/conferences/the-ip-strategy-summit-orange-county-2016/agenda Very interesting find. Mannkind staff teaching classes on keeping trade secrets. Think of the experience the surviving Mnkd staff have had getting the crap kicked out them for so long and surviving. If Mannkind becomes the company I believe it will be, they will have a lot to teach others. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 29, 2016 11:13:11 GMT -5
The other moral of the story is that bare patents are frequently worthless but the "know how" protected as trade secrets is the valuable knowledge. Most process engineering in manufacturing plants is closely guarded know how, but frequently unpatented. The two problems with patents is that they expire after a relatively short period (at least for the pharmaceutical industry where the approval process is long) and to get the patent you must disclose your methods. Often disclosure of methods is enough for a competitor to copy and tweak the process so as to be non-infringing.
Which is why I have said Technosphere and its patents are likely worthless, but the manufacturing know how may not be. As any burglar knows, the most valuable jewels are the ones kept hidden.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 29, 2016 11:25:41 GMT -5
Since the reference to Sherlock has been made, I don't suppose anyone's sleuthing has uncovered a discount code? Actually sounds like something I might want to go to.
|
|
|
|
Post by cjc04 on Mar 29, 2016 11:26:38 GMT -5
The other moral of the story is that bare patents are frequently worthless but the "know how" protected as trade secrets is the valuable knowledge. Most process engineering in manufacturing plants is closely guarded know how, but frequently unpatented. The two problems with patents is that they expire after a relatively short period (at least for the pharmaceutical industry where the approval process is long) and to get the patent you must disclose your methods. Often disclosure of methods is enough for a competitor to copy and tweak the process so as to be non-infringing. Which is why I have said Technosphere and its patents are likely worthless, but the manufacturing know how may not be. As any burglar knows, the most valuable jewels are the ones kept hidden. Interesting point you make..... Which immediately brings me back to the way Haaken was "let go" (with a detailed confidentiality and pay pkg) VS. our lead scientist, with all the know how, who is just considered a "past employee" who randomly went to work for RLS. I've never been able to get past either of those situations. |
|
|
|
Post by mindovermatter on Mar 29, 2016 12:05:41 GMT -5
The other moral of the story is that bare patents are frequently worthless but the "know how" protected as trade secrets is the valuable knowledge. Most process engineering in manufacturing plants is closely guarded know how, but frequently unpatented. The two problems with patents is that they expire after a relatively short period (at least for the pharmaceutical industry where the approval process is long) and to get the patent you must disclose your methods. Often disclosure of methods is enough for a competitor to copy and tweak the process so as to be non-infringing. Which is why I have said Technosphere and its patents are likely worthless, but the manufacturing know how may not be. As any burglar knows, the most valuable jewels are the ones kept hidden. Many people place way too much importance on patents. I think we know that TS value will only come to be if drugs are sold using it. We already know Mannkind isn't having any success doing that so far. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Mar 29, 2016 13:06:43 GMT -5
The other moral of the story is that bare patents are frequently worthless but the "know how" protected as trade secrets is the valuable knowledge. Most process engineering in manufacturing plants is closely guarded know how, but frequently unpatented. The two problems with patents is that they expire after a relatively short period (at least for the pharmaceutical industry where the approval process is long) and to get the patent you must disclose your methods. Often disclosure of methods is enough for a competitor to copy and tweak the process so as to be non-infringing. Which is why I have said Technosphere and its patents are likely worthless, but the manufacturing know how may not be. As any burglar knows, the most valuable jewels are the ones kept hidden. Many people place way too much importance on patents. I think we know that TS value will only come to be if drugs are sold using it. We already know Mannkind isn't having any success doing that so far. Too many company do waste a lot of money on patents that don't necessarily achieve any objective. Big companies have the resources to develop patent strategies that can actually be valuable... but it is big bucks to do so. It is a rare individual patent that is really worth a lot. As for MNKD's patents I was hoping that it might be broader than just TS and give some protection for inhaled drugs using other delivery/powder formulations... but then a company recently has developed a nasal inhaled powder for migraine... and none of MNKD's patents apply. Likely even if something were inhaled orally to deep lungs it wouldn't necessarily trip against any MNKD patents if the drug is made into a powder or aerosol by some other means than TS chemical. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 29, 2016 13:21:54 GMT -5
Many people place way too much importance on patents. I think we know that TS value will only come to be if drugs are sold using it. We already know Mannkind isn't having any success doing that so far. Too many company do waste a lot of money on patents that don't necessarily achieve any objective. Big companies have the resources to develop patent strategies that can actually be valuable... but it is big bucks to do so. It is a rare individual patent that is really worth a lot. As for MNKD's patents I was hoping that it might be broader than just TS and give some protection for inhaled drugs using other delivery/powder formulations... but then a company recently has developed a nasal inhaled powder for migraine... and none of MNKD's patents apply. Likely even if something were inhaled orally to deep lungs it wouldn't necessarily trip against any MNKD patents if the drug is made into a powder or aerosol by some other means than TS chemical.Occasionally the topic of nasal delivery comes up. I thought I would look. Abstract
PURPOSE:
The objective of this study was to use a recently developed nasal dissolution, absorption, and clearance (DAC) model to evaluate the extent to which suspended drug particle size influences nasal epithelial drug absorption for a spray product.
METHODS:
Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of mucociliary clearance and drug dissolution were used to calculate total and microscale epithelial absorption of drug delivered with a nasal spray pump. Ranges of suspended particle sizes, drug solubilities, and partition coefficients were evaluated.
RESULTS:
Considering mometasone furoate as an example, suspended drug particle sizes in the range of 1-5 μm did not affect the total nasal epithelial uptake. However, the microscale absorption of suspended drug particles with low solubilities was affected by particle size and this controlled the extent to which the drug penetrated into the distal nasal regions.
CONCLUSIONS:
The nasal-DAC model was demonstrated to be a useful tool in determining the nasal exposure of spray formulations with different drug particle sizes and solubilities. Furthermore, the model illustrated a new strategy for topical nasal drug delivery in which drug particle size is selected to increase the region of epithelial surface exposure using mucociliary clearance while minimizing the drug dose exiting the nasopharynx.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- mucous membranes are covered with epithelial tissue en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mucous_membrane
|
|
