The University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, through its Batten Institute, released a briefing in April of this year covering the status of innovation in “green technology” as expressed in global patenting activity. The analysis defines “green technology” or “greentech” as “products and services that reduce energy and material consumption, waste and pollution.” According to the authors, the patents studied utilized the World Intellectual Property Organization’s classification system for alternative energy and covers the sectors of “solar, wind, geothermal, biofuel, biomass, fuel cell, hydro, synthetic gas, integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), man-made waste, mechanical power from muscle energy, natural heat and waste heat.”

In a recent post by attorney Eric Lane on the business blog CleanTechies, results of the latest Clean Energy Patent Growth Index (CEPGI) are highlighted. The CEPGI, put out quarterly by the Cleantech Group at the law firm of Heslin Rothenberg Farley & Mesiti P.C., has been tracking innovation activity in the clean tech industry since 2002, as measured by granted U.S. patents in the field.

Even after U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh ordered Samsung to pay Apple approximately $1 billion in damages this past August, industry insiders insisted that there would be several more chapters in the pair's infamous infringement dispute. However, now that Koh has dismissed a number of intervening motions, the smartphone patent wars may be at least one step closer to their conclusion.

After four decades of negotiations, Europe made its most definitive attempt to establish a unified patent system to date with a signed proposal which will go into effect in early 2014. According to The Economist, 38 countries, including all 27 European Union members, have pledged support for a system that will automatically honor intellectual property rights across 25 nations, establish a new regulatory court and do away with linguistic barriers that so often compromised efficiency.

In the Association of University Technology Managers annual survey of patent licensing activity, analysts once again attempted to quantify the economic impact of member institution innovation. In this year's edition, however, several new questions provided researchers with novel insights.

Earlier this week, the Authors Guild celebrated its 100th anniversary in coordination with the Copyright Matters lecture series hosted by the U.S. Copyright Office. The event commemorated a number of important achievements, but conversation inevitably shifted to how the professional organization can survive and thrive in the digital era.

Consumer electronics have always been a big draw during the holiday shopping season, and the deep discounts offered on Black Friday and Cyber Monday have only extended this trend. But as stores compete and consumers delight, few may be aware of the foundational role patent licensing strategies play in this seasonal phenomenon.

One of the America Invents Act's most significant provisions may not go into effect until March, but when it does, a flurry of activity could follow shortly thereafter. When the U.S. patent system officially completes its transition to a first to file framework, the speed with which inventors assess and commercialize inventions could take greater precedence than ever before.

The U.S. federal government invests approximately $147 billion in research and development each year, with nearly $90 billion allocated to institutions of higher learning. But according to Darrell West, director of governance studies for the Brookings Institute, this funding generates only a "very small" return on investment when weighed in terms of patent licensing fees.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently released its Fiscal Year 2012 Performance and Accountability Report, chronicling a year filled with legislative and procedural changes. After an initial review of the figures, PatentlyO's Dennis Crouch categorized the findings as encouraging news for patent quality.