What we do?

  • We help people act with insight.
  • We help companies grow from the inside.
  • We help employees turn into thinkers.

We ignite thought

If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.

--Thomas Jefferson
on Patents and Freedom of Ideas

The rush to create knowledge, improve skills and convert them into assets, preferably in the form of patents is palpably visible in those industry sectors where a company's competitive success depends heavily on the information and knowledge it possesses, whether it is in the skills of its employees or in the results of its research. This is especially true in industry sectors such as biotechnology where initial investments are high, required knowledge and skill levels are at the cutting edge, and the costs of copying by experts are low.

In this changing scenario traditional academic and business cultures have begun to accommodate each other in jointly creating intellectual property. Till recently the industry had little effect on the university system. However, following the remarkable post Bayh-Dole success of the U.S. since 1980 in promoting the utilization of inventions arising from government funded R&D many other countries have adopted similar strategies. As a consequence, in developed and in some developing countries, private sector funding of university research substantially exceeds that of government, usually in the approximate ratio of 2:1. Therefore, it is not surprising that industries which invest substantially in university R&D often seek returns on investment via multi-nation patent protection.

This has made it necessary that both academic and industry researchers understand the circumstances when protecting their research results through patents is crucial. Breakthrough R&D results by themselves are not enough; to serve society they must lead to commercially viable products and processes or find philanthropic hosts or find federal support.

The aim of these 8 lectures is to build awareness among academics, researchers, and students about the need to protect intellectual property rights in the modern global economy. The complete set of lectures is delivered over a period of three-days. Each lecture is of 90 minutes duration.

The lectures cover the following topics:
On innovation
A primer on intellectual property rights: Part I Copyright, trademark, trade secret
A primer on intellectual property rights: Part II Patent
A primer on intellectual property rights: Part III Patent prosecution
A primer on intellectual property rights: Part IV Infringement & litigation
A primer on intellectual property rights: Part V The 'Bayh-Dole' Acts
Surviving in the intellectual property maze – I
Surviving in the intellectual property maze – II

The lectures will be delivered by Professor Rajendra Bera, Chief mentor of Acadinnet.

The target audience is the community of scientists and engineers who are involved in innovative R&D which has commercialization potential.

Note: The duration of each lecture (including Q&A) is 90 minutes.

On innovation

In a competitive world where economic survival depends on being innovative, significant problems generally require beyond the state-of-the-art knowledge to find a solution. That is why competitive advantage devolves on societies which provide quality university education, foster well-complemented university-industry R&D collaborations, and are willing to welcome brains-in-circulation from anywhere in the world. Most people seem to forget that R&D and innovation are twin sisters.

A primer on intellectual property rights
Part I Copyright, trademark, trade secret

Some basic aspects of intellectual property rights related to copyright, trademark, and trade secret will be discussed. Patents will be discussed in the next lecture.

A primer on intellectual property rights
Part II Patent

This lecture will cover matters related to patentability, who can be named as an inventor in a patent, and ownership of patents. Important aspects related to the preparation of a patent application will also be discussed.

A primer on intellectual property rights
Part III Patent prosecution

Prosecution is the process by which a patent application is defended before the patent office before it takes a decision on the patent application. The process is both time consuming and rigorous. It typically consists of arguing in writing with an examiner about claims: over prior art, technical details, legal precedents, and claim language specifics. Important aspects related to patent prosecution will be discussed.

A primer on intellectual property rights
Part IV Infringement & litigation

Getting patents which will be found valid, enforceable and infringed when involved in patent infringement litigation are crucial. Infringed patents can be enforced through litigation; a patent is essentially the right to sue. Infringement and litigation is mainly about the power to regulate the manner in which goods and services are sold; it is not about the way people use those goods and services. Getting a patent and getting an enforceable patent are two different things. Important aspects related to infringement and litigation will be discussed.

A primer on intellectual property rights
Part V The 'Bayh-Dole' Acts

The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 enacted in the U.S. in 1980 has been emulated by several other countries. After years of expectation, India too introduced a similar bill titled "Protection and Utilization of Public Funded Intellectual Property Bill 2008" in the Rajya Sabha on December 15, 2008. We examine the possible impact of the bill should it become law in light of experiences in the U.S. and Japan.

Surviving in the intellectual property maze – I

Infringement and litigation are perhaps the most difficult and expensive aspects of defending a patent. What complicates litigation is that patents granted by a country, like its laws, have no extraterritorial effect; the grant of a patent does not over-ride any other legislation that might regulate the use of the invention. These facts make litigation particularly difficult when the invention and its use in multiple countries must be defended. In this lecture we look at the lessons learnt from litigation cases that involved communication technologies and how the patent system, especially in the U.S., has coped with them.

Surviving in the intellectual property maze – II

In this lecture we look at two infringement cases. The first is a patent infringement case where Gillette sued a competitor for infringing its patent on the Mach 3 razor. The case centered on the fine print of the sole independent claim. The second is a trademark infringement case where Google was sued by American Blind on the ground that Google's sale of American Blind's trademark as keywords for Internet advertising infringes American Blind's trademarks.

Chief Mentor's Corner
    Recent Publications by Acadinnet Chief Mentor
  1. Bera, Rajendra Kumar and Raj, Sunish, Disaster Management of Human Resources (May 19, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2971188
  2. Bera, Rajendra Kumar, The Polarizing World of the Millennials (February 18, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2919816
  3. Bera, R. K., Patent Examination Reforms (January 13, 2017), SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2898819
    1. * All SSRN publications of Dr. Bera can be accessed from http://ssrn.com/author=1752696
Chief Mentor's Corner
  1. Bera, R. K., Method and system for processing of allocation and deallocation requests in a computing environment, Patent No. US 8,195,802 (issued June 5, 2012).
  2. Bera, R. K., Method, apparatus and computer program product for network design and analysis, Patent No. US 8,176,108 (issued May 8, 2012).
  3. Bera, R. K., Listing and modifying groups of blocks in the editing of a document, Patent No. US 8,122,349 (issued February 21, 2012).
  4. Bera, R. K., Run-Time parallelization of loops in computer programs using bit vectors, Patent No. US 8,028,281 (issued September 27, 2011).
  5. Bera, R. K., Compiler optimization of source code by determination and utilization of the equivalence of algebraic expressions in the source code, Patent No. US 8,028,280 (issued September 27, 2011).
  6. Bera, R. K., Concurrent editing of a file by multiple authors, Patent No. US 7,954,043 (issued May 31, 2011).
  7. Bera, R. K., Restructuring computer programs, Patent No. US 7,934,205 (issued Apr 26, 2011).
  8. Bera, R. K., Method, system and program product for data searching, JP3832821 (B2), (issued October 11, 2006).