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."

Patent War between Apple inc.co and Samsung Electronics Co.

Case Study:


Apple Inc V Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd was the first of a series of ongoing lawsuits between Apple in and Samsung Electronics regarding the design of smart phones and tablet Computers between Apple inc and Samsung Electronics CO,the companies made more than half of smart phones sold world wide as of July 2012. In spring 2011,Apple began litigating 19 ongoing cases in nine countries by October,the legal disputes expended to 10 countries.By July 2012,the two companies were still embroiled in more than 50 lawsuits around the globe, with billions of dollars in damages claimed between Samsung and Apple inc.While Apple won a ruling in its favour in United States,wher Samsung wons ruling in South Kore,Japan and in United Kingdom. On June 4 2013 Samsung won a limited ban fro the US international Trade Commission on sales of certain Apple products after the commission found Apple had violated a Samsung patent,but this was vetoed by US Trade Representative Micheal Froman.

Case Study (Competition between H inc and Alexandar and co)

In 2006 H inc had been established by John Smith.They launch an Electronic chip which was great wal mart.Their product become very successful with the passage of time.Product was very reliable.Their chip can perform many tasks at a time if any one want to store any type of data he can store it in that chip and chip can also capture the data and saved into it.Chip has a huge amount of storage and the one who want to retrieve the data can easily retrieve his or her data.Many government organization takes interest in this product especially the Education sector.

In 2007 December their product become more popular when Alaxandar and co signs a deal of 200$ million.Their product become very successful with the passage of time.The product was targeting their audience successfully and they were getting  alot of response for their product.
In 2008 Alexandar and co launches their product which was similar to electronic chip.They introduced electronic pen which can also store and capture the huge amount of data and this pen can also retrieve the data whenever user wants.Their product become more popular than electronic chip because their product can perform more tasks and their product is more reliable than electronic chip.
Their product capture all the market of domestic and international.
After that H inc held a petition in supreme court that Alexandar and
co had stolen their idea.And it was their idea of introducing any electronic device which can store the date and also retrieve data whenever user wants instead of any laptop or any tablet.
FBI cyber crime wing is investigating on this matter and the both companies have held patetion against each other that they have stolen their idea.
Supreme court has accepted their patetion and include some FBI  c specialist to check the ownership of the product and who had stolen the idea.

PATENT CASE BETWEEN JIT Inc. and MIT Inc.

JIT inc. held a patent (Patent no. 4563312) on a program that could encode and compress recorded speech on a computer. the application was very helpful for the security agencies in Pakistan and Pakistan's home land security agency contact JIT inc for this product. The product was very simple it encode the speech in digital 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. thanks to an accidential meeting with a investment manager,The CEO of JIT inc. raised some seed money and he won and introduction to the Ching Hong, the CEO of the venture capitalist firm, they succeed and they signed a deal of 2billion$ with them and after two year PPTO issued Patent #110 4563312, recognizing JIT inc product as novel, useful.

The product was targeting their audience successfully and they were getting  alot of response for their produc t.  After 5years a company named MIT inc. contacted JIT inc. to work together for a certain customers.The officals of MIT acknowledged the patent technology of JIT Inc but due to some reasons MIT refused to work on the project and they quit it..

After three years MIT Comes up with a product that could encode and decode the recorded and live speech on a computer. the share of the JIT Inc in the whole market was dropping down due to the new product and the people was considering the product as a customization of JIT inc's product.

JIT inc. looked into this matter and suspected MIT as a infringing on their product. on the other hand MIT inc documented a new patent for their product, a change of ownership of a product that was originally made by JIT inc. but now someone who just customized it was trying to become a owner of its. This become a headache of JIT inc and when they interrogate the matter they come to know that MIT inc was infringing their product.

JIT Inc filed a petition against MIT inc for infringing their product. Country's cyber crime court accept the petition and include some patent checker specialist to check the ownership of the product.  

CONCEPT NOTE

Assalam o alikum, my name is Ammar Ahmed. I am a student of computer science from DHA SUFFA UNIVERSITY, on the other side, I am also working in a research lab for android development softwares for Smartphones and tablets.

I have got an idea for an Android application for our own DHA Uni, so every student have updates to university news 24/7. If university announce some important news late at night, so everybody gets a  notification on their cell phones. NO need to get online all the time you have all access through your cell phones. Else latest update news, everything will be on application such as timetable, headlines, important news, assignment etc.

Else this, parents can also use his app for their children and get keep in touch with Uni activities.
After creating this aap on android we can further move to windows format aap and ios too. 

Concept Note : A worthy application

Dear Mr.Jason,

           I am Muhammad Haris currently doing BSCS from DHA SUFFA UNIVERSITY.I had learned many languages and worked on many projects.currently I am working on application at cubix Lab.I have created many apps for smartphones but this time I am doing some thing new , attractive and valuelabe.Its name is " Every one can develop ".Sounds intersting,Yes It is basically an app which creates thousands of different kind of apps.

           Now a days everyone knows andriod apps have boom in market.There are thousands of apps available in playstore and they are increasing day by day.But some games and apps like angrybirds,temple run,flappy bird etc are making such a ground breaking downloads records in market and it is obvious that it gives such a huge profit to the developer.

          So in short, By my creation I am giving the chance to those who have such good ideas, But unfortunately not having enough knowlegde and approach they are not able to convert or implement there views and ideas in reality.I will give them a platform where they can built and create apps easily.In this case I need some funding for this project which will cause it to reality.contact me on my email address for further details.

email : hafizmuhammadharis@gmail.com

Concept Note

Dear Sir/madam.
                 My name is osama arshad i am currenty doing bechlors in computer science.I had learned about how to develop smartphone's application and now I have been started working to develop an android application.The name of that application will be Namaz time.This application will help those people who live in those areas where there is no Masajid near there homes so they are unable to listen Azaan and this is why they dont offer prayers at time.This application will help them to offer prayers on time whenever the time of prayers starts the phone will start ringing and they can see on the screen  that of which time prayers time it is so they can perform it on time.
             I would like you to fund my application so then i can market my application in a proper way.People can get known to the application and get benefit as much as they can.If you are interested then contact me on my Email address.Thankyou.

Osama Arshad
Email: osamarshad.oa@gmail.com