<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Intellectual Property Expert Group (ipeg)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:49:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Independent Invention</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=921</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=921#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 22:48:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Patent Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[French Patent Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[German Patent Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Trolls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK patent litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[independent invention]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is “independent invention” a cure against trolls in that it can be argued that infringement cannot be established in case of an “independent invention”? No it is not. A  lot of confusion, misunderstandings, half-truths, nonsensical quasi-lawerly talk exists around the term &#8220;independent invention&#8220;. The term is often &#8220;spittered&#8221; about as means against patent infringement actions [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=921</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Sun Tzu Would Outflank Patent Trolls</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=902</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=902#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Patent Trolls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Troll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sun Tzu]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=902</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The debate about patent trolls or NPEs is not slowing down and more voices are heard every time about how patent trolls can or should be addressed. David Wanetick of IncreMental Advantage has very specific advice to companies dealing with trolls. He suggest diverse tactics &#8211; inspired by Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese military strategist [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=902</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent Lull</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=890</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=890#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:41:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[European Patent Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cross border injunction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sisvel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=890</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Entering the new year we thought it time for some intellectual reflection on the current stage of patent litigation in Europe. Those reflections come from a idiot savant, as we are out of patent litigation in Europe for some time now and much what is being brought up may also have to do with being [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=890</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Year End’s Wishes for 2010</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=882</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=882#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 03:03:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Patent Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CAFC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Broker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Swedish Piracy Bureau]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=882</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[2010 fast approaching it’s a good time to reflect on the past year and come with some good intentions for the New Year. Almost a decade ago we were hyped by fear of a Millennium Bug as a potential apocalypse of the Internet and IT systems. Google was still in its infancy and the social [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=882</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent Cliffs and lessons from 60 years pharmaceutical innovation</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=859</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=859#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 02:15:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Management]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=859</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Every now and then the ipeg blog pays attention to innovation. Although some of our readers think this is not something for a patent blog (we recently were commented by a known blogger in the US that ipeg could not be counted among the top ten patent blogs as we publish not solely on patents [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=859</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FRANDly EU decision in Rambus case</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=847</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=847#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 07:32:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Licensing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DDR RAM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FRAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JDEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rambus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent European Commission decision on Rambus’ alleged antitrust behavior provides interesting insights in what royalty rates offered by Rambus can be regarded as “fair”, “reasonable” and “non-discriminatory”. The antitrust proceedings dealt with the licensing behavior of Rambus Inc. after the adoption of the DDR RAM industry standard by JEDEC. To implement the instructions of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=847</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Copenhagen Climate Conference and Patents</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=838</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=838#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:30:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Patent Policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=838</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week, 34000 people gather in Copenhagen to meet delegates from every corner of the world and to negotiate pressing climate issues. So what have patents to do with this? The conference builds on the discussions and agreements established in Rio de Janeiro (1992), Kyoto (1997), Hague (2000) and Bali (2007). If previous climate meetings [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=838</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent Brokers and their Headaches</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=826</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=826#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:33:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Management]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=826</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Assume you are a patent broker. You are being approached by a party who is extremely enthusiastic about his patent, it’s the invention that will change the world, where anyone has been waiting for or that multiple parties use (read: infringe). However he tried to sell himself but he either did not get any bid, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=826</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>China drafts all-out national standards IPR policy</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=819</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=819#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=819</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[China’s standard setting organization (Standardization Administration of China, or SAC) posted a draft new patent regulation (“Regulations for the Administration of the Formulation and Revision of Patent-Involving National Standards (Interim) (Exposure Draft)”. Industry concerns, mostly from outside China have been expressed. Especially the provisions of the articles 8, 9 and 13 cause concerns that companies [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=819</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IP Rankings, Credential or Kiss of Death?</title>
		<link>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=795</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=795#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ipeg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Patent Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP Rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The World's Leading IP Strategists]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?p=795</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
In the IP Legal World Top Ten Lists are a staple of a culture obsessed with ranking. The IP legal world (patent attorneys, IP trial lawyers and their European counterparts) are used to do whatever it takes to show up on Top Lists of Best This And That, simply to stay competitive, to be known [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipeg.eu/blog/?feed=rss2&amp;p=795</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
