#Standards helfen, Ergebnisse aus Forschungs- und Innovationsprozessen schneller zu marktfähigen Produkten und Dienstleistungen zu machen. Wie die Brücke erfolgreich geschlagen werden kann, erfahren Sie am 13. Juni live in Wien.💡🌍💫https://t.co/rupEcLC0qK#Bridgitpic.twitter.com/3vRVQjbWYq
It is impossible to overestimate the sensitivity of this topic but poke at it, we will. At the moment, the less written here; the better. Much of this domain is outside our wheelhouse; though it has settled on a few first principles regarding patents, trademarks and copyrights relevant to the user-interest we describe in our ABOUT.
Many large research universities have a watchdog guarding its intellectual property and trying to generate income from it, and; of course, for branding. We will dwell on salient characteristics of the intellectual property domain with which we reckon daily — highlighting the market actors and the standards they have agreed upon.
Additionally, technical standards developers are generally protected by copyright law, as the standards they create are typically considered original works of authorship that are subject to copyright protection. In the United States, the Copyright Act of 1976 provides copyright protection for original works of authorship, which includes technical standards. This means that the developers of technical standards have the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, and create derivative works based on their standards, and others must obtain permission or a license to use or reproduce the standards.
Some technical standards may be subject to certain exemptions or limitations under copyright law. In the United States, there is a doctrine called “fair use” that allows for limited use of copyrighted works for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, without the need for permission or a license from the copyright owner. Almost everything we do at Standards Michigan falls under the fair use doctrine. This is why we have no search feature and most pages are protected. If we err in this; let us know.
Patent Act: This is the primary federal law governing patents in the United States. It sets forth the requirements for obtaining a patent, the rights of patent owners, and the remedies available for infringement.
Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations: This contains the rules and procedures related to patents, including rules governing the filing and examination of patent applications.
America Invents Act: This is a major overhaul of the U.S. patent system that was enacted in 2011. It includes provisions such as the transition to a “first-inventor-to-file” system and the creation of new post-grant review procedures for challenging the validity of patents.
Manual of Patent Examining Procedure: This is a guidebook for patent examiners that provides detailed information on the rules and procedures for examining patent applications.
Vad är en standard? Syftet med standarder är att skapa enhetliga och transparenta rutiner som vi kan enas kring. Det ligger ju i allas intresse att höja kvaliteten, undvika missförstånd och slippa uppfinna hjulet på nytt varje gång. https://t.co/zKhgPXPdpWpic.twitter.com/oKejdKSm47
— Svenska institutet för standarder, SIS (@svenskstandard) July 15, 2019
The International Trade Administration (ITA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) is requesting public comments to gain insights on the current global artificial intelligence (AI) market. Responses will provide clarity about stakeholder concerns regarding international AI policies, regulations, and other measures which may impact U.S. exports of AI technologies. Additionally, the request for information (RFI) includes inquiries related to AI standards development. ANSI encourages relevant stakeholders to respond by ITA’s deadline of October 17, 2022.
“John Barleycorn” is a figure in English and Scottish folklore who represents the personification of barley and the alcoholic beverages made from it, such as beer and whiskey. In folklore, John Barleycorn is often depicted as a person who is subjected to various forms of mistreatment and violence, such as being crushed, ground, and fermented, before eventually being reborn in the form of alcoholic beverages.
The figure of John Barleycorn has been the subject of various poems, songs, and other works of literature throughout English and Scottish history. One of the most famous works about John Barleycorn is the traditional English folk song of the same name, which tells the story of John Barleycorn’s journey from a growing plant to a fully fermented alcoholic beverage. The song has been covered by many artists over the years, including the British group Traffic.
The legend of John Barleycorn is not widely known in the United States, but it does have some cultural resonance in certain regions and among certain groups of people. The legend is a traditional British folk song that tells the story of a man named John Barleycorn, who is personified as a personification of the cereal crop barley, which is used to make beer and other alcoholic beverages. Some breweries in the US have even named beers after John Barleycorn, as a nod to the traditional English roots of brewing. The legend of John Barleycorn also has some resonance in American literature and popular culture. The American author Jack London wrote a novel titled “John Barleycorn” in 1913, which was a semi-autobiographical account of his own struggles with alcoholism. The novel has since become a classic of American literature and is still widely read today.
The National Electrical Contractors Association best practice catalog features a suite of titles (National Electrical Installation Standards to meet the intent of the National Electrical Code (NEC); particularly where the NEC asserts that an installation be constructed in a “neat and workmanlike manner”. As anyone who has had to reckon with the subjectivity of the local electrical inspector knows, the determination of “neat and workmanlike” can be mighty subjective. The NECA documents are used by construction owners, specifiers, contractors and electricians to clearly illustrate the performance and workmanship standards essential for different types of electrical construction. Because the NEC is intended to be primarily a wiring safety standard, the NEIS suite is referenced throughout the National Electrical Code. Electrical shop foremen and front line electricians take note.
NECA 202 details procedures for the installation, testing, and documentation of electrical freeze protection and process heat tracing systems. Heat tracing cable types covered by this publication include: self-regulating, constant wattage, and zone heating cables and mineral insulated heating cables. 2 is approved as an American National Standard. The 2013 edition is the current edition and will likely need revisiting/revision/reaffirmation as an American national standard soon.
The technical literature that keeps pipes breaking and roofs failing is complicated space. A common conundrum in the construction industry is which discipline (architectural, mechanical or electrical) should specify application of this technology; especially in value-engineering negotiations when each discipline is trying to reduce its unit costs. Control and communication system add another layer of complexity. Several consensus standards occupy this technology; cross referencing one another and leaving gaps
There are codes and standards developed by ASTM International, the International Code Council and ASHRAE International that set the standard of care for pipe insulation for energy conservation purposes but we will deal with the interdependence of standard of care set by those documents in a separate post. Organizations such as FM Global typically derive their customer recommendations from consensus standards developers.
Because heat tracing is a cross-disciplinary technology we maintain it on the standing agenda of several colloquia: Power, Water, Bucolia, Snow & Ice and Mechanical See our CALENDAR for the next meeting; open to everyone. You may obtain an electronic copy of this standard from neis@necanet.org. Communicate directly with Aga Golriz, (301) 215-4549, Aga.golriz@necanet.org.
Participation by the public in reviewing other titles in the NEIS bibliography is welcomed and begins at the page linked below:
With some 36 million square feet under management — and one of the largest campuses in the United States exposed to extreme low temperatures — building industry professionals at the University of Michigan have some experience managing the competing requirements of safety and economy in heat tracing technology.
We do not advocate in this standard but we track it along with about 20 of the 21,000 ISO standards. We mention it now because in tracking live public consultation notices we see opportunities that may interest other parts of the education industry — notably academic units and business schools; as well as the many technology transfer units in many research universities charged with generating licensing revenue. The landing page for the US TAG is linked below:
You are encouraged to communicate directly with Dr. Brett Trusko, President and CEO, International Association of Innovation Professionals, 4422 Castlewood Street, Suite 200, Sugar Land, TX 77479; phone: 925.858.0905; e-mail: brett@iaoip.org. We also refer this standard to the standing agenda of our Global and Human Resource teleconferences. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Issue: [17-303]
Category: Academics, International
Contact: Mike Anthony (mike@standardsmichigan.com), Christine Fischer (chrisfis@umich.edu)
Recent communication from International Association of Innovation Professionals (IAOIP) indicates that it continues to welcome participation from the US education industry. There are many academic programs and faculty devoted to international studies and innovation that could offer students a front-row seat for the development of international technology policy.
We are happy to explain the opportunity to faculty and staff any day during our daily 11 AM online meetings. You may also communicate directly with Dr. Brett Trusko, President and CEO, International Association of Innovation Professionals, 4422 Castlewood Street, Suite 200, Sugar Land, TX 77479; phone: 925.858.0905; e-mail: brett@iaoip.org
The education industry — notably the academic segment of the higher education industry — is notably absent in US leadership positions in international standards. We have been in this space as a user interest for a long time (See ABOUT) and the shortage of education industry engagement (especially the user-interest) has not gone is unnoticed or written about.* While the majority of the 1800-odd colleges and universities have academic programs that claim leadership in international and/or innovation studies, only Georgia Tech and the University of Texas Medical Branch are US TAG administrators for the American National Standards Institute; the US member body to the Geneva Secretariats.
Université de Genève
Comments are due May 14th. To obtain a copy of the TAG application or to offer comments, please contact: Dr. Brett Trusko, President and CEO, International Association of Innovation Professionals, 4422 Castlewood Street, Suite 200, Sugar Land, TX 77479; phone: 925.858.0905; e-mail: brett@iaoip.org by May 14, 2018 (please copy jthompso@ansi.org).
Issue: [17-303]
Category: Academics, International
Contact: Mike Anthony (mike@standardsmichigan.com), Christine Fischer (chrisfis@umich.edu)
The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) has been informed that the American Society for Quality (ASQ), the current ANSI-accredited U.S. Technical Advisory Group Administrator (U.S. TAG) for the work of Technical Committee 279 of the International Organization for Standardization wishes to relinquish their role as U.S. TAG Administrator. The global Secretariat for TC 279 is the AFNOR Group — the national standardization body for France. The participating nations are shown in the map below:
(Click on Image for more information)
ISO/TC 279 operates under the following scope: Standardization of terminology tools and methods and interactions between relevant parties to enable innovation. From its Executive Summary:
“Yes we can innovate through standardisation. Standardization does not mean cloning. Standards on innovation management will allow organisations to share their best practices in innovation management. This will facilitate collaboration and also develop the capability to innovate and to bring innovations successfully to market. Today we face new challenges never met before by mankind: guaranteeing the sustainability of our activities in keeping our Earth habitable. Sustainable development (economic, ecologic, social sustainability) cannot be considered as ‘nice to have’, it is essential. It has to be viewed as a source of innovations, economic development and competiveness. It impacts innovation management and has to be taken into account at an early stage. Innovation is a key to global competitiveness and human or technological progress over the coming decades. Management Standards on innovation will break down the existing cultural, structural or organisational obstacles among/between organisations. These standards will provide best practices to support implementation of innovation policies as well in Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) as in worldwide groups including public institutions, universities, research centres or non-profit organisations. (Note in ISO, SME can mean Subject Matter Expert)
To achieve this goal the work will focus on a management system for innovation. To define this management system, experts will address: terminology, tools and methods such as but not limited to open innovation, design innovation, strategic intelligence, creativity management and also self-assessment of innovation management. Expectations for these standards are so high that there is no time to reinvent the wheel. TC 279 has to benefit from the previous work, including existing innovation literature, existing innovation standards, case studies, academic works, reports…) Summoning up the innovation community is a key factor. To make more and more stakeholders aware of this initiative communications action (communication kits, presence on social networks, press releases, events…) needs a special care.”
Organizations interested in serving as the U.S. TAG Administrator or participating on a U.S. TAG should contact ANSI’s ISO Team (isot@ansi.org)
Issue: [17-303]
Category: Academics, International
Contact: Mike Anthony (mike@standardsmichigan.com), Christine Fischer (chrisfis@umich.edu)
Thomas Jefferson was the leader in founding the United States Patent Office. Jefferson was a strong supporter of the patent system and believed that it was essential for promoting innovation and progress in the United States. As the first Secretary of State Jefferson was responsible for implementing the country’s patent system.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution reads as follows:
“The Congress shall have Power To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
In 1790, Jefferson drafted the first Patent Act, which established the procedures for applying for and granting patents. The act also created the United States Patent Office as a government agency to oversee the patent system. Jefferson appointed the first Patent Board, which was responsible for reviewing patent applications and making recommendations to the Secretary of State.
Jefferson was deeply involved in the early development of the Patent Office and was instrumental in shaping its policies and procedures. He believed that the patent system should be accessible to all inventors, regardless of their social or economic status, and he worked to streamline the patent application process to make it more efficient and user-friendly.
In recognition of his contributions to the development of the patent system, Jefferson is often referred to as the “Father of American Innovation.”
This clause grants Congress the authority to establish a system of patents and copyrights to protect the intellectual property of inventors and authors. The purpose of this system is to encourage innovation and creativity by providing inventors and authors with a temporary monopoly on their creations, allowing them to profit from their work and invest in future projects. The clause also emphasizes the importance of promoting the progress of science and the useful arts, reflecting the belief of the founders that the development of new technologies and inventions was essential for the growth and prosperity of the United States.
Over the years, the Patent Office has played a crucial role in the development of the United States as a technological leader, granting patents for inventions ranging from the telephone and the light bulb to the airplane and the computer. Today, the Patent Office is part of the United States Department of Commerce and is responsible for examining patent applications and issuing patents to inventors and companies.
Congratulations to the winners of this year’s National Patent Application Drafting Competition – Khailee, Bree, Rita, and Maria from @gwlaw, and thank you to all participants! Learn more about the competition: https://t.co/gB64fnXaM6pic.twitter.com/FWqak6Mr1m
Join us for our in-person event hosted by the Silicon Valley Chapter, #IP year-in-review on 1/18, 2023, from 4 – 5:30 PM ET in which leading experts will review key IP-related developments during the 2022 calendar year. Reserve your spot now: https://t.co/yVZSv28hb6. pic.twitter.com/nVEG2H5Pn4
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
