The C.H.I.E.F.S. Story - We the people (IP)

“We the people,” is recognized universally as the introduction to the preamble of the American Constitution. What is far less known, and more importantly not appreciated, is Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 in the same document.

It reads, “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.”

Bottom line, the US was created by and through the protection of intellectual property (IP). No other country can claim this inalienable right although many may have subsequently passed legislation to protect inventors. Add to this the imperatives enshrined in the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 that ensures IP developed using government funding MUST be commercialized (I encourage you to read Kyle Briggs, “Capstone Agency” LinkedIn posts).

However, this is only half of the meaning of having rights enshrined in your founding document. The other is that commercialization is inherent in EVERY American endeavor.

IP is an element of C.H.I.E.F.S. that flows through both Priorities and Functions. And, it is composed of a number of Criteria collectively worth 13 of the total 50 points. Effectively over 25% of a C.H.I.E.F.S. Tool? score can be attained through effective IP.

In addition to the experiences covered in “The C.H.I.E.F.S. Story – Introduction”, another one that is definitely unique for Canadians is what I learned face-to-face from my IP mentor while working in Los Angeles. This included patent design, structure, and most importantly defensibility. It also covered the interconnection between IP and business development through the impact of a Freedom to Operate statement.

One problem I see consistently is that most patents are not nearly as strong as the inventors and authors think. In addition to the ability to defend, structure and clarity are just as important. Naturally, even the weakest patents still adhere to the three core attributes; having utility, being novel, and are non-obvious.

The Tool provides the first indication of any IP shortcomings. However, it is in the C.H.I.E.F.S. Outcomes? where concrete recommendations for remediation will be found. That’s where a number of IP items can be further expanded and solutions proposed. Some are likely to be quite easily applied while others may require reengaging with your IP legal counsel.

In certain instances there may be government funding available to help address identified shortcomings. However, it is most important to understand that the correction of this critical Factor (AND Priority) should also strengthen the pitch for investment funds the company is currently raising. It likewise contributes to the long term IP goal of protecting the asset and reinforcing potential commercial success.

Lastly Charles Plant, a friend and colleague, has a slightly different take on the importance of patents in his Scaleup Math blog where he rightly identifies that patents on their own are only part of the solution. Although he doesn’t differentiate for health innovations, I consider that for this particular sector they, along with the rest of a strong IP portfolio, are mandatory.

You can catch up on the latest C.H.I.E.F.S. LinkedIn blogs here and for more information, or to a request C.H.I.E.F.S. Tools? report, please contact Dan Wasserman directly at [email protected].

?