 |
 |
| Thought-provoking graphics for copyright owners 1 |
 |
| Thought-provoking graphics for copyright owners 1I |
 |
| Inngot: a spelling pun -- "inn-" from "innovation" and "ingot" derived from a gold seam? |
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Rating:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html
Posts
Comments
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Thou shalt not discriminate the Lego block over any other kind of product – GRUR speaks out on C-211/24](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWJYQUJNvYydrZcjwSHPuxd14xX3_48aBusHKBogY-Wg1BPSJSABbFFjmGiUV3aqG2npP9xYaIl1vtWK5AsqGOQPgRD2TWFLhyyc4xGm1fHDD-tt9kHcrSSgAyju2P9wSKz0VW6h7D5MD4Hxd9vREyxKYzlMRNXxxtxc3DiNsXppfVaxgSxAMV/s72-c/21742619125_7c9e53cd39_o.png)
![[Guest post] Comparison of wine and gin: the EUIPO’s unquestionable Similarity Tool](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNfTEBXiPVS0XjZi4mNE1OtXLxXiEp1PUgcUK7MMMXlfyTkO5SMXv-VCMXXNdS_F1XdMMxYca1VbBTGvvDeTVpo5x-5YwR7atQJmK3x32T8LACpf4308kht3nEtaxPwEPcGGrB0s5xjGktmQPOiVwPVLRO5JbW19qupc7xUtiVutvaWHow0OpBkA/s72-c/Picture%201.jpg)
![[Guest post] Muddying the waters of copyright – a rapid reaction to today’s IPEC decision which sees the sinking of the WaterRower’s claims for copyright protection](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7chFANC7ppmZl4_nlR6_hZEcg6cOhVEJNVXqki4p82BoVlcLFotuOXzHWYD5lKLiiK_kRoWeXmJjjaV2DpoKsAWq8U3LFioO5W_841a9gcfDIFjvZWcGqfnr0jWJNtyXptIYR_8bxCssaDkJ9KMokuSqy1g65Il7p2hPwo4MfRCEGoUPQJesvbg/s72-w400-c-h189/Screenshot%202024-11-11%20at%2018.20.45.png)
Well, I spent fully five minutes on the Inngot website and I established the following:
ReplyDelete(1) I still don't really know what they actually do
(2) None of them seem to have any technology background whatsoever
(3) There is an emphasis on "intangibles" which may be (i) irony or (ii) ironic
(4) Some CEO's tasked to set out a strategic vision may find Inngot's value-added service a vital benchmarking tool going forward. (See (3)(i), above)
The Inngot home page does have a link to businesslink.gov.uk which makes extensive references to "intangibles" and contains information which explains the significance of such assets and the way that their values ought to appear on balance sheets under the new accounting regulations.
ReplyDeleteHaving been peripherally involved in valuing IP [mainly on the technical input side], my impression is that it is as much an art as a science [confirmed by some of the info at businesslink.gov.uk]. Possession of a crystal ball would definitely be an asset, but failing this, you need input from people who have knowlege of the business and insight into the way that technology is likely to develop.
IP which might appear to be highly valuable today can be rendered worthless by developments in technology: Polaroid's patents were very effective in driving Kodak out of the instant picture market, but advances in digital photography would have have made them irrelevant by now had they still been in force. Likewise, ownership of the patents covering the MAC TV system looked set fair to be highly lucrative insofar as the EC had actually passed a directive requiring all new TVs to be fitted with a MAC decoder. Developments in Digital TV technology soon rendered MAC obsolete, and the directive was quietly withdrawn.
I'm very sorry if one of you didn't find the website self-explanatory. We've been through a round of SEO that has helped our Google rankings but may have obscured our purpose! We are working on it at present.
ReplyDelete(1) what we actually do is provide a system whereby innovative organisations can define their IP and intangibles, derive an indicative valuation for them (developed with Grant Thornton), and publicise what they've got. The key purpose is to enable them to be leveraged for fundraising, licensing and collaboration.
(2) I guess that depends what you mean by technology. We're not (primarily) scientists. But as a team we know a great deal about how to register assets. And one of our non-execs led the IP Wales initiative, so we know a bit about IP too.
(3) I get the joke, but there is absolutely no irony here. Intangible assets account for three-quarters of the value attributed to many quoted companies. The traversty in the current system is that many firms can't leverage this value without selling the business. That's one of the things we're working to address.
(4) a Dilbert fan perhaps? Me too.