|
Nowadays, new
economy companies are
getting a traditional
reality-check and end up
using old economy
methods: retrenchment,
reorganization, or
layoffs.
More are yet to
come.
A lot of these
startups did not focus
on generation of profits
coincident with major
expenditures, so when
financing dries up,
there are not a lot of
alternatives.
But is there a
silver lining in this
shakeout that
undoubtedly will whittle
down the number of
Dot.com's to a surviving
few.
The answer is
maybe, but one has to
look for the few
companies that truly
have meaningful
portfolios of
intellectual properties.
Since most do not
have any
brick-and-mortar assets
to salvage, the treasure
lies in their patents,
trade secrets,
copyrights, domain
names, trademarks, and
databases.
IP Portfolio
Traditionally,
ideas and methods were
not considered valuable
unless converted into
demonstrable working
devices.
However, early
developments in patent
law allowed an inventor
to obtain a patent for a
novel idea even the
concept was not actually
converted into a working
model.
Lately,
developments in patent
law expanded this
premise when the
business method of
implementing a system to
meet the tax code was
allowed as a patent
worthy of protection.
The proliferation
of business method
patents surged after the
1998 decision,
especially with
e-commerce taking on
bigger chunks of the
consumer's budget.
Many point to
Priceline.com's patent
on reverse selling
auction in the Internet
as an example of what
may be patentable,
notwithstanding the
recent business problems
of Priceline.com.
The value of
these patents is
apparent in the decision
of Barnes And Noble,
Inc. to modify their
website procedure when
challenged by Amazon.com,
Inc., the owner of the
"one click"
patent for finalizing an
Internet purchase.
Creating Dot.com Value
An ailing Dot.com
may have a valuable
portfolio of
intellectual properties.
Properly protected and
packaged, this portfolio
may open the door to
potential sale or at
minimum, partnering with
other companies.
In some cases,
the databases may also
be of value to other
companies willing to
abide with court imposed
restrictions on the use
of the data.
Patents
Patent assets
fall into three
categories, namely,
patents filed and
allowed, patents filed
and pending, and unfiled
patentable systems and
methods.
The category of
patents filed and
allowed may be of
considerable value,
especially if it is a
key patent in a hot
Internet space.
For example, a
patent for a search
engine or an adaptive
Internet personalization
software would be a
tremendous value to a
firm planning to build
one.
Furthermore, a
viable software firm may
want to package the
Dot.com tools with their
other software
offerings.
Filed
but pending patents are
equally valuable
depending on two
factors.
First, the patent
filing date is critical.
In a crowded
Internet space, several
of the same type of
patents may all be
pending, and one filed
earlier, if eventually
allowed, will be
effective retroactively
to the filing date.
Second, a pending
application may be
invalid because the
concepts and methods
belong to the public
domain or are obvious,
an acute problem with
Internet firms that
marketed their concepts
and published their
designs long before they
built the software to
implement them.
This concern
requires more
investigation.
The
frequently overlooked
category is unfiled
patentable systems and
methods.
Most of the
Dot.com founders know if
their systems, business
methods, or processes
are novel since they
generally know their
closest business
competitors.
A provisional
patent application may
be filed by just putting
together the
specifications of such
systems or processes,
with a minimum outlay of
cash.
A provisional
patent application must
subsequently be
converted to a standard
application within one
year, but even a
provisional but
strategic product
application could be of
considerable value when
scouting for partners or
buyers.
Copyrights and Trademarks
A concept reduced
into a tangible form is
copyrightable.
Web designs and
navigation patterns may
be tradable assets.
Although not
necessary, a
registration of
copyrightable material
with the U.S. Copyright
Office is a good
practice to minimize
subsequent legal issues.
A lot of Dot.coms
spent venture capital to
market their products
and services accompanied
with elaborate designs
for firm logos,
corporate symbols, and
other trademarks.
These assets must
be inventoried in order
to present its value
properly to interested
partners or buyers.
A recognizable
domain name may be worth
a significant amount by
itself.
For example, a
Massachusetts technology
company liquidated its
intellectual property
including the domain
name "planetrock.com"
for $28,000.
Pets.com of San
Francisco sold its web
addresses and related
trademarks, including
the "pets.com"
domain name for an
undisclosed amount to
Petsmart.com.
A London based
company, Boo.com, sold
its domain name and
other assets, including
its customer database to
Fashionmall.com
Databases
The value of
customers databases or
customer lists is
unsettled at the moment,
awaiting further
developments in landmark
court cases.
First, data bases
that include sensitive
customer information
such as social security
and credit card numbers
are not likely to be
worth much, to wit the
recent ruling of Federal
bankruptcy judge on
Toysmart.com attempts to
sell its confidentially
obtained customer list.
In a related
case, a bankrupt
furniture Internet
retailer, Living.com,
had to agree with the
state of Texas to allow
a court trustee to
remove credit card and
social security numbers
from its customer
database.
Online privacy is
currently an explosive
issue and unless data
was obtained with
explicit customer
consent to collect and
pass these data along,
these databases have
questionable open market
value. However, the situation may be less problematic if the ailing
dot.com is acquired, as
in the case of
Street.com acquiring
SmartPortfolio.com.
Bankruptcy
Internet
companies usually do not
have brick-and-mortar
assets, so most of these
firms will have to file
for a Chapter 7
bankruptcy instead of a
Chapter 11
reorganization.
And with funds
drying up fast, the
venture capitalists who
backed these ailing
Dot.coms will have to
move fast to file the
provisional patents,
register copyrights,
safeguard the trade
secrets, and present the
entire intellectual
property package as a
superb quality gem
available at a
discounted price.
For a fast-acting
treasure hunter, the
debris of the imploding
Dot.coms may yield a
treasure of strategic
intellectual properties
that can be picked up
quickly and cheaply.
State
St. Bank & Trust
Co. v. Signature
Fin. Group Inc.,
149 F.3d 1368 (Fed.Cir.
1998).
U.S. Patent 5,794,207
owned by Walker
Asset Management,
known as
"Reverse
Auction".
In Amazon.com
v.Barnesandnoble.com,
Inc., et al., 1999
U.S. Dist. LEXIS
18660 (W.P. Wash.
December 1, 1999),
the Court granted
Amazon a preliminary
injunction
protecting its
"one
click" patent
and ordered
Barnesandnoble.com
to cease using a
"single
action"
ordering system.
|