Nice Stories

Nice write, hope to have an interesting discussion today. Prepare your questions and issues regarding cases discussed by your peers. I would like to hear your comments about the weaknesses of your peers' cases.
--Rauf 

What is Human Genome Project ??

The Human Genome Project (HGP) is an international scientific research project with the goal of determining the sequence of chemical base pairs which make up human DNA, and of identifying and mapping all of the genes of the human genome from both a physical and functional standpoint. It remains the worlds largest collaborative biological project.

The Human Genome Project (HGP) was one of the great feats of exploration in history - an inward voyage of discovery rather than an outward exploration of the planet or the cosmos; an international research effort to sequence and map all of the genes - together known as the genome - of members of our species, Homo sapiens.

Myself, Muhammad Sarim Shahab – (Founder Member & C.E.O of “Research Lab for Human Genome”) started working on this project along with my friend Hani Jameel (Later on My Bussiness Partner) in 1996 when we were doing Bachelors in the field of Computer Science from DHA Suffa University. In the beginning, we even didn’t know the meaning of the word ‘Genome’, but our Teacher Mr. Rauf Ahmed Malick supported us and provided a platform to both of us and also gave a great opportunity to work on his interesting project as his assistants. It was the very first step and then days passed on and we were slowly attracting towards this project.

In 2000, After completing our Masters Program in DNA Sequencing / Human Genome Project, we had decided to continue our efforts by establishing a Laboratory for the research of DNA Sequencing, for the betterment of the Software to get more accurate information and annotations of Human Genome.

We both agreed to become a Bussiness Partner because we knew the Future importance of this field. By working together we had developed so many softwares, which the research institutes demanded for the Human Genome. Here are the names of some of them who are still using our product :

·         American Society of Human Genetics – 2003

·         University of Michigan for Human Genetics – 2005

·         University of Virginia – 2006

·         DNASTAR – 2008

·         National Instittute for Genome, Russia – 2009

And here are the some Global Achievements as a result of our combine effort :

·         Paul di Sant'Agnese Award of the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation – 2002

·         Champions of Pediatric Research Award, Children's National Medical Center – 2005

·         The Biotechnology Industry Organization and The Chemical Heritage Foundation Third Annual Biotechnology Award – 2005

·         Walker Prize, Museum of Science, Boston – 2007

·         Breath of Life Award, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation – 2008

·         Scientist of the Year, National Disease Research Interchange – 2010

·         National Medical Research Award, National Health Council – 2011

And here are the some Honorary Doctoral Degrees :

Emory University, Mary Baldwin College, Yale University, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, George Washington University, University of Pennsylvania, Brown University.

In 2012, I don’t know what happened to my partner suddenly, was it lust or anything else but finally he had decided for Partition of our Research Lab for Human Genome.

After mutual discussion, we both agreed upon to signed a Non Disclosure Agreement between us, that he will not share our future plans and project and will never work in the same field in any other organization. Then, I continued my services to provide more innovation in this project.

In 2014, I got the news 4 days ago that He is going to start work at National Human Genome Research Institute, Virginia as a Director of Innovations of Genome Generator Products.

As NDA was signed between us earlier that he will never work in this field again. Now, he is violating the policy and its illegal. So, I want to file a petition against My Ex-Bussiness Partner Mr. Hani Jameel.

Muhammad Sarim Shahab

Founder Member & C.E.O of “Research Lab for Human Genome”

sarimshahab@rocketmail.com

0301 2442224

Case Study:

In 2003, I [Hani Jammel] came up with an idea to create a device that allows people to control all their multimedia functions along with phone calls and messasges system from specific watch. I decided to share my idea with microsoft.
Microsft liked my idea and NDA was sign between us and we started working on this project.

In the starting of 2005,we launched a specific watch model H119.specifications of this device consist of 1 megapixals camera,a built in bluetooth feature,128 of RAM and a 240 video resolution.Along with all this it was also design to make calls,send and recieve text messages.

On the first day of opening of our model H119 we received a very good responses .Because of such   good responses we launched an update version in 2007 model PRO H119 in which we tried to make the features more better.

IN the fall of 2010,Samsung stole the idea of our technology and launched it with some of their modifications and updated features.
 As a result of this our market shares started to drop with a rapid speed and put our bussiness at a risk of going to bankruptcy.

After Samsung launched their product we came to know that Microsoft company which we made our NDA deal with, sold the idea of h119 to Samsung.

This is clearly against the laws and illegal and also violation of NDA signed between us. On the basis of NDA I [ Hani Jameel ] will file a case against Microsoft and seek justice from the court 

He intended to create hype of X8...

I, Israr Ahmed is the owner of “IA Technologies” which was founded in 2004 in Karachi, Pakistan. IA manufactures mobile phones, ranging from entry level budget cellphones to high end smartphones. Initially, IA was a small company which operated in Pakistan, but it grew over the span of 10 years and now IA smartphones are being sold throughout Asia.

In March 2008, we employed Mr. Arsalan Mubeen. He had excellent skills in product designing and therefore we appointed him as a senior design engineer. A Non-Disclosure Agreement was signed between Arsalan and IA Technologies which clearly mentioned that all the designs made by Arsalan during his stay at our company would be the property of IA.

Everything was going fine and IA was making its name popular day by day. We were planning to launch our premiere smartphone “Tune X8” in World Mobile Congress 2013, which was going to be held on 25^th February 2013. It was in 15^th January 2013 that Arsalan made the biggest mistake ever. Without the consent our company, Arsalan leaked a few images of X8 over the internet.

Arsalan intended to create hype of X8 on the web, that’s why he pulled such a stunt. The outcome was completely opposite. Technological blogs and reviewers started commenting on IA’s possible upcoming model.  Many started giving their views in a very criticizing manner. The leak went in its own direction, causing IA’s flagship smartphone to gather hatred even before it was launched. The action of Arsalan caused a very deep scar on the company’s upcoming model. It was then, only a matter of time before we released X8 officially in WMC’13. Unsurprisingly, X8 became a flop smartphone.

Arsalan was dealt with company’s lawyers and was taken under trial. The case was proceeded in Pakistani court. Finally, after 3 months Arsalan was declared as innocent. On 5^th May, the court gave its decision in Arsalan’s favor saying that IA’s NDA only stated regarding the ownership of designs. There was no clause against leaking/sharing designs in order to create hype among the people. IA Technologies learned a big lesson that day.

smart contact Lens NDA violation

In September 2013, the C.E.O of iLabs (Abdul Sattar) came up with quite different idea , which was not in market at that time , I discussed my idea with my partner and we decided to find investor for smart contact len project . We discussed our idea with Google Inc. under the non disclosure agreement ,which was sign in December 2013.

Basically wearable devices are already making technology much more intimate than once seemed possible. Our company has started a project to make a smart contact lens. But this gadget isn't going to be used to deliver your e-mail straight into your skull — at least not yet. The project is working to tackle one of the biggest health problems facing the country today: diabetes.

Smart contact lens project had launched with collaboration with Google Inc. After a few months Google has announced that they are going to present a new technology which can control diabetes from a smart contact lens . We heard that news and realize that was our idea which Google shows its own proprietorship . Our company had a NDA agreements and other documentation about our project that is enough for proof against Google . iLabs is going to case file against Google for violation of idea and breaking NDA agreement , we want justice from court.

Patent case between Java Enterprise and LEAP Inc.

In 2010, I [Hussam Javaid] came up with an idea to create a device that allows people to control their digital device from a specific distance by using their motion. I searched on the internet whether such devices exist or is someone working on it, but found none. I decided to share my idea with an old friend Khurram Abas Khan with whom I use to work with on small project in college. A NDA was sign between us and we started working on the prototype.

Thus in 2012, we [Hussam Javaid and Khurram Abas Khan] founded a company by the name of Java Enterprise with its first successful prototype launched called P3C-armband that allow user to control all operation and other feature without touching their Desktop computer or Laptop. After the successful launched of our product, we submitted an application to Pakistan Patent and Trademark Office (PPTO) to patent our product. 6 months later we got the patent of our product and the serial number of our product is PN #9 415 271.

In starting month of 2013, Java Enterprise collaborated with Fujitsu Co. Japan leading IT Company and a MOU was signed by both Organizations. Java and Fujitsu started working on a update version of the P3C-armband that allow user not just control PC other thing such as their T.V, music player, car, toy helicopter, playing game without using analog controller etc. On 4 July 2013, the update version of P3C-armband was released. On the first day of the opening P3C-armband hit the global market with 7% market share and still rising. By the end of the first week we made 82.5 $ Billion and our share in the market were 14% up and our product demands started rising worldwide.

In the staring of 2014, our market share started to drop putting our company at great risk of going out of business. The matter was related to LEAP Inc and their partner HP that launched their product Leap motion devices. Leap motion device allows user to control their digital device by reading their hands and finger motion. We suspected that LEAP Inc was infringing in our product and we thought that they were using our EMG sensors and nine-axis IMU’s modified version of our software.  Although we had no proof that they were using software. But we believe that there was no other way for the Leap motion to detect the hand and finger motion without using EMG sensors and nine-axis IMU’s software. We filed a petition case against the LEAP Inc for software theft. The International criminal court petition accepted our case.

A jury trial will began in December 2014 and specialist programmers will be called to check the owner ship of the software program. 

CASE: Need of an Awareness Campaign

R. Is a company of computer science students who not only aim to achieve something in their field, but also plan to utilize this time and energy on things that would make a difference and serve humanity. Rather than developing something that would benefit the fortunate, they focus on facilitating the less fortunate by their ideas and products.

About two years ago, the team members planned to develop such a device which would facilitate the farmers in looking after their fields and take necessary precautions afore time as it would be a source to acknowledge them about the hindrances that can harm the field and its crops. Having different

Levels SC-SH will inform about different hazards. From the minute living organisms to the natural calamities that can harm a specific plant based on its sensitivity towards each.

For the purpose, I, Rafia Rashid, owner of R. held talks with an agency named Z. that look into related matters and invests accordingly. Getting a positive and affirmative response, the team started working deliberately for the successful completion of the device.

It was on January 2014 that R. and Z., after the completion of the product, met and discussed the ways they must follow to publicize it. We knew, the product is the need of a person with one profession. Yes, farming! Before, when the agreement was made it was discussed only till the point where one just tells who their buyers would be and how would it benefit them. A major fault by our side, no doubt!

 During the meeting, analyzing and keeping in view the situation and literacy rate in rural areas of Pakistan, we came up to the conclusion that just the posters/ commercials or even going there with our product telling farmers about its benefits won’t do.  

After mutual discussion, we agreed upon contacting an Educational consultant for the purpose of hiring a team of instructors who have command in technology as well as the pros and cons of farming. They will conduct a series of sessions for farmers and will create awareness about using modern technology to benefit their work and lifestyles.

Although, very risky and tough, we have taken an attempt to contact the consultant. Such a worthy product and the hard work behind, must not go in vain.

STUDY CASE OF NDA VOILATION

In 2012,i Osama Arshad  got the master degree in automotive engineering  from the university of Warwick. After I completed my master degree I started  working on a project of a mini super car. Its size is smaller but can give tough competition to the other super cars with an advance computation and 616 HP 3.8-liter V8 twin turbo engine combined with a 7 Speed SSG dual-clutch transmission. This car can sprint from 0 to 60 mph in just 3.1 seconds and will hit a top speed of 204 mph.

           

            It got patent in 2013,PN-2305 from the UK patent and Trademark office. I had a meeting with a well known and one of the biggest automobiles companies in the world “Toyota motors”. We signed an Non Disclosure Agreement[NDA] before the meeting started. I show them a simulation of my mini super car from the detail of performance  to the interior and exterior design that how it will look. They got impressed with my mini super car but because of some terms and conditions we could not sign the contract.

           

           And now  i got to know that “Toyota motors” introducing a mini super car and which was my concept. I filed a petition against “Toyota motors” for the violation of the Non Disclosure Agreement[NDA].Please check the patent under the law of UK and do justice with the ownership the product.

CASE OF SMART TECHNOLOGIES VS PANASONIC ELECTRONICS.

I Jahanzeb Khadim ,owner of  the SMART TECHNOLOGIES and co.SMART  provides innovative and interactive solutions for Business and Education.SMART brings  technology to your meeting rooms,class rooms and work spaces.

 In 2008 SMART TECHNOLOGIES start working with PANASONIC ELECTRONICS on an interactive white board system called SMART BOARD.As an integrated system, the SMART BOARD  gives teachers and students the freedom to work together on lessons, bringing exceptionally natural collaboration to the classroom.The integrate system combines an interactive whiteboard with an ultra-short-throw projector. It also includes a multiuser Pen Tray and a control panel that enables teachers to manage all classroom technology products from the front of the classroom.In between the manufacturing of SMART BOARD, PANASONIC ELECTRONICS show lack of interest and  broke the partnership,but under the circumstances we got an NDA signed with them.In 2012 when we were about to launch our product PANASONIC ELECTRONICS launched their product with exactly same features and  different interface  like our SMART BOARD has.

This is clearly against the laws and illegal and also  violation of NDA signed between us.On the basis of NDA SMART TECHNOLOGIES is going to file a case against PANASONIC ELECTRONICS and seek justice from the Court.
 

CASE: NDA VIOLATION.

CASE

“AA-Labs” is a very well known research lab in the world of computer science. The leading lab in its circle. Since 2005, I (Ammar Ahmed) have been working with “A-A Labs”. We had made many products using ubiquitous computing. After many products  we had thought of something meaningful in the world of education, something for students, writers, etc. In 2010,  gave them an idea for a making a pen by which you you cannot have to write again an again, or writing a paragraph on paper then type the same thing for a soft copy on your laptop. Isn’t time consuming ??? So, by our pen you have to write only once, and then it automatically saves your article in its built-in 32gb memory, pen has another feature, which are you connecting this pen to your PC, so you can move your article to your hard disks. It has some other features like Bluetooth, Mp3, 3” touch panel. We had named our product “A’Pen”.

AA-Labs has signed the NDA with every employee working on this project, and registered the patent with our research lab name under PN-21/1239 from the Germany patent and trademark office.

After 2 years of starting a project one of our employees has resigned from the lab, which was hired by Apple Inc. 2012. Our lab signed another NDA with that employee which is lifetime NDA.

We had completed our product in 3 years. In Sept, 2014 we are about to launch this product all over the world. As we are making preparations for launching, we had seen a new product name “ipen” by Apple Inc. which is the same product as “A’Pen”  using the same technology.

Our Lab has decided to file a petition against Apple Inc. for copying our product, and against that employee for the violation of NDA as it has been invested that they he had revealed our idea and gave our researched material to Apple Inc.

This is to request you to accept the petition under the Germany Act Law and reconsider the patent checker specialist to authenticate the ownership of the product.

Thank you.
Ammar Ahmed
Cs 12 2004

CASE STUDY: NDA VOILATION

I Fahad Ajab Khan, am the owner of the company named La Venidero. Our company is well known for developing different computation technologies used in automobile industry.Our company has bring revoulutionary changes as we are best at both software and hardware implementation.

In 2005 our company started working on a product which can make a car, park by itself with no need to drive. We worked on the product and after a year we completed using latest technologies, named our product Intelligent Parking Assist System (IPAS).The basic components used in it were cameras, sensors and microcomputers. On these things we got patent to our product, #RV 6192.We also got our NDA signed, also with our two companies which had collaborated with us, KIONIX company from which we uses microcomputers and Lexus motor company with whim we agreed to launch our product on their cars first.

Now in 2014, Leddar Tech company in collaboration with Ford motor company has also launch an auto parking system namely Advance Parking Guidance System (APGS) similar to our product as we look into matter the whole components use in their product is similar to ours, except the sensors.

Now La Venidoro has filed a petition for the owner of the product, against both the companies, for violation of NDA against the Leddar tech company that they have copied our product and against Ford motor company also in using their product without any NDA and checking the market. Please check the patent under the US law and authenticate the ownership of the product.

Unprofessionalism (Need of NDA).

JIT inc. held a patent on a program that could encode,decode and compress recorded speech on a computer. the application was very helpful for the security agencies and home land security agency contact JIT inc for this product. The product was very simple it encode and decode the speech in digital form/speech form and that was the main reason that Security agencies in the country takes interest in it. JIT inc. thought to produce this application on mass level so that they can expand their bussiness around the world so they starts to seek investor for its grow.

As JIT inc is a new bussiness company when their product create a hipe in the international and national markets many tech related companies contacted them to work together. but JIT wants expands their business on its own and for that they want some investor who can invest on their product.

they met a managing director of some Avengleous company they presented their idea but they reject it because of the lack of interest. but, they come up with their own product with very similiar to that JIT inc produce but with some customizations.

Now,  after their product and the share of JIT inc dropping down quickly but they could not any thing because they didn't sign any NDA with that company and down they are just vanishing from the market..

Case: Wireless Power got stolen!

This is Farhaj Ahmed, I am owner of Power mat Wireless Technologies which is a developer of   wireless power solutions for consumers, OEM and public places. This company has 157 locations worldwide locations. Our vision is of a world where people never run out of power. We strive to harness the laws of physics to make power wireless, and to deploy a global network to make wireless power ubiquitous. Together with Duracell (and its parent, Procter & Gamble) we created ‘Duracell Power mat’, a business dedicated to bringing our wireless charging technology to consumers; we partnered with General Motors to add wireless power to cars; we work with AT&T and dozens of OEMs to embed wireless charging into handsets; and we partnered Starbucks to design wireless power for public venues.

In 2009, Our Company’s has started the work on the innovative wireless charger for Smart Phone based on inductive charging. In 2010, we have sent our Concept Note to Apple and Samsung with the Non-Disclosure Agreement to get investment for the completion of this innovative charger. By getting positive response from them, this product got patent with our company’s name under PN-2019 from the UK patent and Trademark Office.

Before the launch in 2012, Qualcomm Corporation which is an American global semiconductor company that designs, manufactures and markets digital wireless telecommunication products and services has launched it worldwide by using the same inductive charging technology.

Our Company has decided to file a petition against Samsung for the violation of Non-disclosure agreement as it has been investigated that they have revealed our idea and gave our research work to the QUALCOMM Corporation.

This is to request you to accept the petition under the US Act Law and reconsider the patent checker specialist to authenticate the ownership of the product.

Name:Shaikh Farhaj Ahmed

Id:cs122042

Would you like to Steal our Idea? An interesting case study of patent infringement and NDA violation

 In 2003 I [Salman Khan] had an idea of creating a device which would enable people to control all their electronic devices by hands and fingers. I started researching if no such product exists and came to a conclusion that no such product exist and neither is any one working on such an idea . After Getting the NDA signed I shared my idea with a friend Fahad which was my team mate in another project we had been working on. We together started working on the idea and in 2005 we [Salman Khan, Fahad ajab khan] founded a company called LEAP Inc. We started making prototype and submitted an application to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to patent our product, in July, 2006 we made the first working prototype and in Dec, 2006 our product got patent on our name we got the patient no# PN-1330 and recognition of innovation as novel from the US Patent and Trademark Office.

                We presented our prototype in the 22^nd international technology fair held in Hong Kong(2007) where we got an award for the Innovative Product of the year and 50$ thousand . We started improving our product and haired some software engineers to help develop some application for our product. In June 2007 we got a mail from HP (Hewlett-Packard) that they are interested in working with us in the development of this new technology and they want to know more about out our product. We sent them a concept note and asked them to sign the NDA in order to discuss the technicality of the product. They called us to the Head Office of HP after HP signing the NDA and us disclosing the technicality of our product they agreed to invest in the development of our technology and we signed a memorandum of understanding to work as a Joint venture. The joint venture agreement we agreed upon was that we’ll develop the product and work for the advancement of the product and HP will help us in marketing and mass production of the product and both the parties will have 50% ownership of the product.

In Jan, 2008 we signet the final agreement with HP and got an investment of 5$ Million and we came up with the final product the LEAP MOTION DEVICE in Aug, 2008. And we started its mass production and made it available to the researchers and developers in Sept, 2008 and for the general public in Jan, 2009.

The computer industry became our major consumer and we made a compact version for the HP-Laptops. The business of HP boasted and they experienced a 53% growth in their revenue, we signed a project with NASA to provide then leap motion solutions and we joined hands with a computer scientist and inventor Doc. Zardari and started working on making our device ubiquitous, we came up with an idea to make our leap motion device wearable and we made our very first prototype in Fab, 2010.

In March 2010 when going through a tech magazine Doc Zardari found that one of the employee Yousaf raza gelani which had recently left the company was at the 25^th International Technology fair presenting a similar wearable device they had been working on and calling it p3c Armband. He came to me and we investigated the device and we found out that it was a copy of the prototype we just made with slight modifications.

We immediately filed a case against him calming that he has violated the NDA and production and selling of the device will be breaching out patent technology because he had signed a calibration agreement with Fujistsu Inc. and had plans of producing the device in large quantity.

In August, 2010 a ten day jury trial began, the firm they brought against us was the Bangali Baba Layers Firm. Who were very expert in patent and NDA infringement cases they brought important expertise in patent litigation. The jury found out that there were important points missing in the NDA which was signed among both the parties. After a 10 day trail the jury concluded that the device which Yousaf raza gelani had was not infringing our patent because the patent we had registered was a device with connects to another device and it was not wearable and no point about wearable devices had been mentioned. And allowed Yousaf Raza gelani to freely develop and distribute his product.

The case cost us around 14.8$ Million. In January 2011 we launched our device the Myo band which dominated the market the their shares went down after launching another version of your product in August 2011 the gaming industry became our major consumer and almost all the games now use our technology , In the end we won but from the case we got some good lessons.

And now all the leading companies use our technology, almost every new game coming over use our device. Every new Hp laptop uses a piece of hardware which is manufactured by Leap Inc.

  

Case Study: Violation of Non-Disclosure Agreement

Asalam-u-Alaikum. If you set aside the politics of the Mark Belly case, which is really tough to do at a place like Daily Blog, what Belly did is a run-of-a-mill violation of a non-disclosure agreement.

I, Ahmed Owais Khan, is the owner of “Edges and Curves”. Edges and Curves Inc. is a privately owned multinational computer technology company based in Round Wings, Texas, United States, that develops, sells, repairs and supports computers and related products and services.

Belly was employed on 20^th of July 2006 as a laptop designer. An NDA was signed under the heading of the Designs of the laptop on 26th of July between Mark Belly and E&C.

During the same time frame, a former MS Officer, Alexander Sterling named after Jeffery Sterling, offered Mark to work for them on a new invention of their product. Sterling’s innovative product is the tablet for graphic designers.

Mark Belly continued to work for both the companies for the period of 3 years from July 2006 to August 2009.

Before the launch, I was very clear about the shape of the tablet. The curves and edged design was my idea and so the logo. Mark working for E&C steal the idea and designed the product for Sterling.

In connection with his employment, the indictment alleges that Mark, signed various security, secrecy and non-disclosure agreements in which he agreed never to disclose classified information to unauthorized persons, acknowledged that classified information and model was the property of the E&C, and also acknowledged that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information could constitute a criminal offense.

“The indictment unsealed today alleges that Mark Belly violated his oath to protect classified information”, said Assistant Attorney General Alan. “Those who violate the law, and the trust placed in them by the Edges and Curves to keep their model information secure, must be held accountable.”

The U.S. Attorney Mac Hume said, “The law does not allow one person to unilaterally decide to disclose that information to someone not cleared to receive it. Those who handle classified information know the law and must be held accountable when they break it.”

Case Study:

                I, Usama Ejaz, am the owner of the “Dhump & co.” Dhump & co. is an IT company who develops different softwares and hardwares related to Computer systems.

                7 years ago our company started work on gaming tablets. The gaming-tablets were completed after a year as “D-Games”. These tablets covered the market since then. It used graphic cards from NVidia and processors made by Intel. We held patent #4772 2378 on the technology used in it. These are the hardcore gaming tablet which supports multi touch, full screen, 3- axis gyro, removable gaming gears, dynamic effects and with different specs regarding graphics and processors etc.

                In the development of the tablets Intel and NVidia also collaborated. We had separate NDA’s with each Intel and NVidia regarding the product.

                Now in 2013 Razer USA Inc. had launched ‘Project Fiona’ gaming tablets, which includes Intel processors and approximately same technology as of ‘D-Games’ including gyro and user interface.

                First of all we are going to file a petition against Intel for Violation of Non-disclosure agreement as per our information it is our believe that Intel transferred our information to ‘Razer Inc.’

                And Secondly we are going to file against the Razaer Inc for infringing their product and Design. Please accept the petition and include some patent checker specialist to check the ownership of the product. 

The Rift !!

In the year 2012 Acorp started their first business venture. This venture was about Virtual Reality Gaming called the ‘The Rift’. The Rift worked by placing a head gear on the user which was virtual reality. The user would be able to move the character of the game by rotating their heads and a myo band to detect the movement of your hands. In order to raise funds for the project the company had many investors who like the idea and most of the funds were generated from Kickstarter.

The company was formed by three individuals namely Arham, Osama and Shahan. The Rift has been tested on F.E.A.R, Bishock, Doom 3 and Roller Coaster tycoon. These tests were conducted by the general audience at several gaming conventions. The Rift is widely appreciated and has a positive response.

The Plan to launch The Rift is in the year 2015 but the developers have noticed that the user is unable to play due to longer periods due to severe nausea and disorientation. This could be because that the technology is new and people are not used to it or simply the mind is not strong enough to handle the VR technology.

The developers are facing a huge dilemma as in order to give returns to the investors they need to take The Rift commercial but they are also afraid that if they launch this in the market before coming up with a solution things might get backfired.

The developers are also considering of selling the product to a third party but can’t reach a unanimous decision due to the effort it took to breathe life to this project.

CONCEPT NOTE.

After analyzing and keenly observing the information about your agency and the types of projects you support, I must seek your co-operation in the project I intend to start.

R. Is a group of computer science students who not only aim to achieve something in their field, but also plan to utilize this time and energy on things that would make a difference and serve humanity.

What is the purpose of writing to you? Keeping in view the need to get better crops and therefore, a healthy life of the countrymen, we have decided to develop a device 'SC-SH', that says 'save crops, serve humanity.'

What would this device do? How will it 'serve humanity' like the name claims? Let us now brief you about the characteristics. We intend to make such a device that when used in fields, will detect the hindrances that would cause the crops to get unhygienic. Hindrances may include detection of presence of birds from some specific distance or arrival of natural calamities before time.

 In particular, there would be levels according to the severity if hindrance and will acknowledge the caretaker of what steps he needs to take in order to save his field.

The benefits, we suppose, are in-numerous as if one overcomes his hunger with quality eatables that will contribute in improvement of his learning, observation, and lifestyle in a positive manner.

We want your company to invest for our cause and encourage us to take this initiative.

Below is the contact information of our company.

Case Requirement

I think most of the students missed my basic requirement while writing the case i.e.

•  you are the product owner (product could be Mayo Band or Leap Motion device etc)
•  secondly you have to be in some company or partnership situation (whatever you like)
•  and you are going to make venture, mergers or selling your product/company ownership to someone (are just of the situations you may choose anyone for your case).

I hope now you would have some better understanding about the 'case' writing.

wassalam
Rauf 

MO Inc and LP.co Patent case

In 2008, Mo Inc lunched an Electronic Devices called myo armband that allowed the user to control any physical or software devices using his arm muscle movement. The devices had two component first was the support software attached with a sensor using cables and the second was the armband with 8 advanced EMG sensors and 9-axis IMU. The support software is installed in that digital devices the user wants to control and attached it with a sensor(detect arm muscle motion) using cable. The armband sense gesture and motion controls to seamlessly interpret what your hands and fingers are doing and transmits that information over to sensor to communicate with your favorite digital devices.

In 2010, MO Inc succeed in signing a deal of 56.2 million $ with Michael orlando the CEO of Techcom that allowed them to mass produced their product and expand their business world wide. With in 3 month USPTO issued patent #1 019 769 recognizing MO Inc innovation useful and non obvious.

The product successfully targeted many government and private company that took interest in the product. Armband replaced analog controller from the game, disable people started using myo armband for communication as it was easy to understand and use, military were using the armband to control UMV drones and ground vehicle, and people were using in their daily life like controlling T.V or computer or music player etc.

After 1 and half year LP.co lunched its new product Leap motion that supports hands and finger motion as inputs, analogous to a mouse. The performance of Leap motion was the same of  myo armband but it had only component the device it self and cheaper than myo armband. The MO Inc market drop down because of the new product and lost dozen of market share.

MO Inc suspected that LP.co was infringing on their product and started looking in to the matter. MO Inc suspected that LP.co product was entirely running on a modified copy version of their myo armband support software.MO Ic filed a petition against LP.co for using their software without their permission. US patent country court accepted the petition and specialist programmer were called to check the owner ship of support software program.

 

Case Study: Patent Troll

The term Patent Troll is used for a company which has no products and little infrastructure that amass patents with the intention of prosecuting offending companies. In this case study, I will be discussing a company NTP Inc., which is now called as Patent Troll by many because of its actions in the past.

NTP, Inc. is a Virginia-based patent holding company founded in 1992 by the late inventor Thomas J. Campana Jr. and Donald E. Stout. The company's primary asset is a portfolio of 50 US patent and additional pending US and international patent applications. These patents and patent applications disclose inventions in the fields of wireless email and RF Antenna design. The named inventors include Andrew Andros and Thomas Campana.

At that time, NTP’s had 7 system patents and 6 method apparatus patents. But their weak spot was that their Patents were in the US not extend internationally.

In the Late 90’s, Research in Motion (RIM) introduced Blackberry in the market and stole the show. At the moment RIM had sales that was considered to infringe upon NTP’s patents. NTP thought of making quick dollar and contacted RIM and offered to license their patent, but RIM didn’t respond.

There were two types of claims made by NTP:

1)    Method patent
Method claims referred to the way RIM ran its email system. The Blackberry handsets were sold by RIM in the U.S., so the system apparatus patent law applied to RIM. The court held that RIM used NTP’s patented system in the U.S

2)    System and Apparatus patents

Apparatus claims referred to the software and hardware of the Blackberry. The method claims were rejected by the U.S. court since the relay utilization occurred in Canada.

Case Study: Violating a Non-Disclosure Agreement

In December of 2010, a former CIA officer, Jeffrey Alexander Sterling was charged in a 10-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury.

-charges that mostly focused on violating his NDA.

The indictment charges Sterling with six counts of unauthorized disclosure of national defense information, and one count each of unlawful retention of national defense information, mail fraud, unauthorized conveyance of government property and obstruction of justice.

According to the indictment, Sterling was employed by the CIA from May 1993 to January 2002.  From November 1998 through May 2000, he was assigned to a classified clandestine operational program designed to conduct intelligence activities related to the weapons capabilities of certain countries. During that same time frame, he was also the operations officer assigned to handle a human asset associated with that program. According to the indictment, Sterling was reassigned in May 2000, at which time he was no longer authorized to receive or possess classified documents concerning the program or the individual.

In connection with his employment, the indictment alleges that Sterling, who is a lawyer, signed various security, secrecy and non-disclosure agreements in which he agreed never to disclose classified information to unauthorized persons, acknowledged that classified information was the property of the CIA, and also acknowledged that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information could constitute a criminal offense. According to the indictment, these agreements also set forth the proper procedures to follow if Sterling had concerns that the CIA had engaged in any "unlawful or improper" conduct that implicated classified information.  These procedures permit such concerns to be addressed while still protecting the classified nature of the information.  The media, according to the indictment, was not an authorized party to receive such classified information under such circumstances.

The indictment alleges that Sterling, in retaliation for the CIA’s refusal to settle on terms favorable to him in the civil and administrative claims he was pursuing against the CIA, engaged in a scheme to disclose information concerning the classified operational program and the human asset – first, in connection with a possible newspaper story to be written by an author employed by a national newspaper in early 2003 and, later, in connection with a book published by the author in January 2006.

"The indictment unsealed today alleges that Jeffrey Sterling violated his oath to protect classified information and then obstructed an investigation into his actions. Through his alleged actions, Sterling placed at risk our national security and the life of an individual working on a classified mission," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer. "Those who violate the law, and the trust placed in them by the U.S. government to keep our national security information secure, must be held accountable."

"Our national security requires that sensitive information be protected," said U.S. Attorney MacBride. "The law does not allow one person to unilaterally decide to disclose that information to someone not cleared to receive it. Those who handle classified information know the law and must be held accountable when they break it."