Podcasts about Patent

✅ Detox Chlorella: Hier klicken (Gutschein: Youtube) ✅ Detox Supplements: Hier klicken (10 % Rabatt: TAN34909) ✅ Komplettes Detox Protokoll (kostenlos): Hier klicken✨Mehr Infos zu Ralf Brosius: https://ralfbrosius.de & https://www.revoblend.com/✅ Neues Patent für Monsantos „Super-Brokkoli“ erteilt: Hier klicken✅ Die Wahrheit über Ackergifte: Hier klicken✅ Kleingärtner als Schwerkriminelle: 25.000 Euro Strafe für den Anbau alter Obst- und Gemüsesorten: Hier klickenInhaltsverzeichnis: 00:00 Intro 03:00 Brokkoli Patent: Ein Skandal, der uns alle betrifft 06:00 Monsanto und die Macht über unser Gemüse 09:00 Glyphosat: Das heimliche Gift in unserem Leben 12:00 Insektensterben: Wie uns die Landwirtschaft zerstört 15:00 Super Brokkoli: Wie Patente die Ernährung kontrollieren 18:00 Der Skandal um alte Tomatensorten und deren Verbot 21:00 Bio vs. konventionell: Was du wirklich essen solltest 23:00 Detox 27:00 Der versteckte Zusammenhang zwischen Ernährung und GesundheitAchtung betreffend Interviews, Nahrung, Geräten und Supplements:Vorliegend habe ich meine eigene Erfahrung und die von Interviewpartnern genannt. Das sind die Effekte, die ich bei mir gespürt habe. Diese können bei jedem unterschiedlich ausfallen. Natürlich kann kein Lebensmittel, keine Nahrungsergänzung oder Superfoods sowie Inspirationen aus diesem Podcast alleine für sich eine Heilwirkung erzielen oder versprechen. Die Aussagen der Interview-Gäste stehen für sich. Diese spiegeln nicht zwingend die Meinung des Herausgebers. Links mit * sind Affiliate-Links.

Sat, 13 Dec 2025 17:35:00 +0000 https://jungeanleger.podigee.io/2836-sportwoche-otv-spitzentennis-podcast-lilli-tagger-jungste-wta-finalistin-2025-mit-victoria-mboko-und-janice-tjen-ausgezeichnet c3f3eef89a8ed54143eb5c4c6145b92b Ende Woche 50/2025: Der Tennisweltverband ITF hat Lilli Tagger, jüngste WTA Finalistin 2025, mit Victoria Mboko und Janice Tjen ausgezeichnet. SportWoche ÖTV-Ö Top10: Anastasia Potapova, Julia Grabher, Sinja Kraus und Lili Tagger bei den Damen sowie Filip Misolic, Sebastian Ofner, Lukas Neumayer, Jurij Rodionov, Joel Schwärzler und Sandro Kopp bei den Herren sind WTA/ATP-übergreifend die Top10 aktuell. In welcher Reihenfolge, das wird im Podcast verraten. Presenter: mumak.me http://www.sportgeschichte.at/oetv Inside In, der ÖTV-Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/7KNsgeD8XyXTsAgCFKfI7Y https://www.oetv.at Thomas Schweda im Podcast: https://audio-cd.at/page/podcast/3521 Quelle Rankings: Live-Rankings von live-tennis.eu Die Marke, Patent, Rechte und das Archiv der SportWoche wurden 2017 von Christian Drastil Comm. erworben, Mehr unter http://www.sportgeschichte.at . Der neue SportWoche Podcast ist eingebettet in „ Wiener Börse, Sport, Musik (und mehr)“ auf http://www.audio-cd.at und erscheint, wie es in Name SportWoche auch drinsteckt, wöchentlich. Bewertungen bei Spotify oder Apple machen mir Freude: http://www.audio-cd.at/spotify , http://www.audio-cd.at/apple . Die SportWoche Podcasts und SportlerInnen sind weiters unterstützt by Instahelp: Psychologische Beratung online, ohne Wartezeit, vertraulich & anonym. Nimm dir Zeit für dich unter https://instahelp.me/de/ . Unter http://www.sportgeschichte.at/sportwochepodcast sieht man alle Folgen, auch nach Hörer:innen-Anzahl gerankt. Du möchtest deine Werbung in diesem und vielen anderen Podcasts schalten? Kein Problem!Für deinen Zugang zu zielgerichteter Podcast-Werbung, klicke hier.Audiomarktplatz.de - Geschichten, die bleiben - überall und jederzeit! 2836 full no Christian Drastil Comm. (Agentur für Investor Relations und Podcasts)

Chris Holman welcomes back Mikhail Murshak, Senior Attorney, Foster Swift, Lansing, MI, 5 offices across Michigan. This is part 1 of 2 for a discussion on Intellectual Property and where things stand in late 2025. You help both startups and established firms build IP portfolios — what are the most common mistakes you see early-stage companies make when they first think about patents or trademarks? Your experience spans industries from medical devices to aerospace to consumer products. How does IP strategy differ when you're working across such diverse sectors, and what universal principles apply in all cases? With the recent launch of your “IP Monday” blog and changing rules at the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, what trends should business owners watch now to avoid costly IP pitfalls? » Visit MBN website: www.michiganbusinessnetwork.com/ » Subscribe to MBN's YouTube: www.youtube.com/@MichiganbusinessnetworkMBN » Like MBN: www.facebook.com/mibiznetwork » Follow MBN: twitter.com/MIBizNetwork/ » MBN Instagram: www.instagram.com/mibiznetwork/

Für die Marine war es ein Schiff, für die Luftwaffe ein Flugzeug und Zuschauer dachten zuerst an eine fliegende Untertasse.

In this episode, I dive into Zootopia 2 and the absolutely unhinged fact that the entire plot revolves around a forged patent. Yes, a Disney movie about talking animals turns into a full-blown IP scandal involving a snake inventor, a corrupt businessman who steals her journal, rips out her real patent, forges his own, murders the witness (in a children's film!), frames the inventor, and builds a dynasty on the world's least plausible legal cover-up. I breaks down what the movie hilariously misunderstands about patents, why none of this could ever happen with a real patent, and why it still makes for the greatest animated patent thriller ever made!

Jeff is the founder of Intellectual Strategies, a law firm changing the way startups and scaling businesses access legal support through a “Fractional Legal Team” which gives innovators access to the right legal expertise from the right attorney at the right time, on a fractional basis and budget.Given his background, Jeff has a “superpower” to translate between technical, legal, and business topics with ease. He's also focused on bringing perspective and insight into every conversation. Admitted to practice in California, Utah, and before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, he's a true jack-of-all-trades—an inventor, a strategist, and an attorney who's helped founders tackle complex business and legal problems for over two decades.Jeff's work and passion spans business strategy, technology, intellectual property, and law. He's revolutionizing how companies access the legal support they need, empowering them to “Innovate with Confidence” while his team handles the complexities in the background. He's committed to innovative solutions and being a go-to resource for ambitious companies looking to thrive in today's fast-paced world.Jeff's Links:Website: https://www.intellectualstrategies.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/holman/Podcast: https://www.intellectualstrategies.com/podcastThe Impatient Entrepreneur's links:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheImpatientEntrepreneurPod⁠LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/theimpatiententrepreneurpod/⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theimpatiententrepreneurpod/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheImpatientEntrepreneurPod⁠Online: https://www.theimpatiententrepreneurpod.comConnect with us⁠⁠: https://www.theimpatiententrepreneurpod.com/contact⁠Kwedar & Co.'s links:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kwedarco⁠LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/kwedarco⁠Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kwedarco⁠YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@KwedarCo⁠Online: www.kwedarco.comConnect with us: https://www.kwedarco.com/book-consultation

He knew a secret about a 1975 computer that nobody should have known. He described a future of civil war and nuclear catastrophe. Then he disappeared. Who was John Titor?

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 478. Related: The Universal Principles of Liberty Announcing the Universal Principles of Liberty Fusillo on the Universal Principles of Liberty and Liberland KOL473 | The Universal Principles of Liberty, with Mark Maresca of The White Pillbox Selling Does Not Imply Ownership, and Vice-Versa: A Dissection, in Legal Foundations of a Free Society A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability and Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith, in Legal Foundations of a Free Society Disentangling Legal and Economic Concepts Dualism, Monism, Scientism, Causality, Teleology: Hoppe, Mises, Rothbard Libertarian Answer Man: Mind-Body Dualism, Self-Ownership, and Property Rights God as Slaveowner; Conversations with Murphy Mises on God KOL293 | Faith and Free Will, with Steve Mendelsohn  This is my appearance on Adam Haman's podcast and Youtube channel, Haman Nature (Haman Nature substack), Kinsella's Legal Treatise On Universal Principles Of Liberty | Hn 185 (recorded Nov. 9,  2025; released Dec. 9, 2025). https://youtu.be/tc-hdB_yiS4?si=icPwq5mSS6nDU8LP Adam's show notes: On this episode of Haman Nature, libertarian poker pro Adam Haman is joined once again by libertarian legal theorist (and patent attorney who despises IP) Stephan Kinsella about his new creation: The Universal Principles of Liberty. (apologies, folks - my mic was a bit wonky on this one) 00:00 -- Intro. Welcoming author, attorney, world-traveler, and all-around great guy Stephan Kinsella! 02:54 -- What are "The Universal Principles of Liberty", and why should we be excited by it? 11:40 -- What is a "person"? What is "property"? Why are these things so important to think about clearly? 34:24 -- This simple and elegant document can handle deep and complex issues. 47:54 -- When (and why) does selling not imply ownership, and vice-versa? What does "dualism" have to do with this? What's the confusion between economics and law when dealing with this stuff? 56:53 -- Outro. Go comment on TUPoL! (linked below) Thanks for watching Haman Nature!  Shownotes, links, grok summary, and transcript below. Shownotes (Grok) Haman Nature Podcast – Show Notes Guest: Stephan Kinsella Host: Adam Haman Episode Topic: The Universal Principles of Liberty – A New Foundation for Free Societies   0:00 – Opening Banter & Liberland Passport Shenanigans Stephan shows up in casual clothes after taking a suit-and-tie selfie… for his upcoming Liberland passport photo   Only a libertarian would put on half a suit to pretend to be a government just to get a passport   Stephan is heading to Prague in December 2025 for the signing and announcement of the Liberland Constitution 1:04 – Who is Stephan Kinsella? Patent attorney turned leading anarchist legal theorist   Author of Against Intellectual Property and Legal Foundations of a Free Society   Recent Vegas trip with Adam: helicopter into the Grand Canyon, Venetian St. Mark's Square (tacky but awesome) 2:59 – Introducing “The Universal Principles of Liberty” (TUPoL) A one-page, elegant, civil-law-style statement of libertarian metanorms   Not a constitution, not a detailed legal code – a foundational layer that private legal systems can build upon   Voluntary opt-in document: you must explicitly sign on to be bound   Purpose: foster conflict-free interaction through reason, experience, and ethics – no state decree, no majority vote 5:09 – Origin Story: From Liberland → Bir Tawil → Universal Principles Stephan helped draft Liberland's early (still statist) constitution but was uneasy as an anarchist   Long history of libertarian startup-country projects (Seasteading, Atlantis, Prospera, etc.)   Max (FreeMax) approached Stephan about Bir Tawil (unclaimed land between Egypt & Sudan) and wanted principles instead of a state   Co-drafters: Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Alessandro Fusillo, David Dürr, Pat Tinsley 9:16 – Why This Document Now? Refinement of 30+ years of libertarian legal theory (Rothbard, Hoppe, Kinsella)   Earlier concise restatement now in the Libertarian Party platform (plank 2.1/2.2)   Goal: a short, uncontroversial, legally precise statement that any free society can point to 11:40 – Key Features & Definitions “Person” = any sentient being capable of moral agency (includes possible AGI/aliens, excludes animals)   Rights are exclusively property rights in scarce physical resources (no “right to life,” no IP)   Self-ownership is primary and inalienable (the Walter Block voluntary-slavery debate settled against alienability)   Body rights can only be forfeited by committing aggression (proportional punishment/restoration justified) 20:01 – Freedom is a Consequence, Not a Primary Right No need for enumerated positive rights (speech, religion, warm baths)   All legitimate freedoms flow from property rights in body and external resources 23:25 – Why Self-Ownership is Inalienable (and Walter Block is wrong) Body ownership arises from direct embodiment/control, not homesteading   You can abandon or sell homesteaded external resources; you cannot abandon “you”   Contracts are title transfers, not enforceable promises 29:12 – Punishment, Outlaws, and Estoppel Aggressors implicitly consent to proportional defensive/enforcement force   No need for prior signed contract with an outlaw – committing aggression waives the right to complain 34:26 – Weapons of Mass Destruction Clause (Article 8) Indiscriminate devices that cannot be aimed solely at aggressors are legitimately restrictable   Practical insurance/neighborhood covenants would handle most cases anyway 37:39 – Evidentiary Standards Borrowed from Tradition Severe remedies require heightened standards (e.g., beyond reasonable doubt, jury nullification rights)   Roman & common law are largely libertarian and will serve as starting points 40:41 – Select Unjust Laws & Aspirational Closing Explicitly lists taxation, IP, conscription, etc. as unjust   Beautiful final paragraph: “We bow to no state… no power on earth will stop us” (mostly written by Max) 42:47 – Why Law Must Develop Organically (Quote from Stephan's blog) Detailed armchair legal codes are premature and counterproductive   Law evolves case-by-case through real disputes, custom, and decentralized courts 47:58 – Deep Dive: “Selling Does Not Imply Ownership” & Misesian Dualism Crucial distinction between possession/control (causal/economic) and legal ownership (normative)   Robinson Crusoe has possession but no ownership   Labor/services are not ownable – employment contracts are conditional title transfers of money, not sales of “labor”   Confusing the two realms leads to the fallacious justification for intellectual property 1:06:20 – Free Will, Compatibilism, and Scientism In the causal realm there is no free will (no downward causation)   In the teleological realm of human action we unavoidably treat people as purposeful choosers   Stephan's “Misesian compatibilism” – both views are correct in their respective domains 1:16:53 – Closing & Future Plans Stephan will push to have TUPoL incorporated into the final Liberland Constitution (to the extent compatible)   Next big project: new comprehensive book on IP/copyright titled Copy This Book   Where to find everything: stephankinsella.com | Universal Principles of Liberty poster & text freely available Links   The Universal Principles of Liberty full text & poster: https://www.stephankinsella.com/principles/   Stephan's blog announcement: https://stephankinsella.com/2025/08/announcing-the-universal-principles-of-liberty/   Adam's original Substack post: https://hamannature.substack.com/p/kinsellas-legal-treatise-on-universal Enjoy the episode and go read (and sign!) the Universal Principles of Liberty! Transcript (Youtube/Grok): Haman Nature Interview: Stephan Kinsella on The Universal Principles of Liberty (Corrected transcript – spelling, punctuation, minor grammar, no paraphrasing. Long speaking blocks broken into ≤10-sentence paragraphs. Topical headers with timestamps added.) Opening Banter & Liberland Passport Story [0:00] Adam Haman: Intro. Welcoming author, attorney, world-traveler, and all-around great guy Stephan Kinsella! [0:00] Stephan Kinsella: You forgot your cue. I told you to ask me about my adventure this morning and putting on a suit and tie. [0:06] Adam: I thought that was off because you, sir, are not wearing a suit and tie anymore. [0:11] Stephan: I know. So it wasn't for you. You know how people—well, I don't want to mess my shirt up. I can reuse it now. You know how it's probably common knowledge now that ever since the Zoom era, a lot of people were telecommuting and so they would put on a shirt and tie but they were wearing shorts underneath, right? [0:37] Stephan: So I did something this morning and I was thinking only a libertarian would do this. I put on a suit and tie to take a photo of myself because I need a passport photo. But I don't need a regular passport photo. I need a photo that I can use for my Liberland passport because I'm going to Prague in December for the signing and announcement of the Liberland Constitution. Formal Introduction [1:04] Adam: Hello and welcome to Haman Nature. I am Adam Haman and that fine fellow fiddling with his pipe on a Houston morning is one Stephan Kinsella. How you doing, sir? [1:15] Stephan: I'm in fine fettle. You're fine fettle and a fine fellow. [1:22] Adam: For those of you who just woke up underneath a rock, Stephan Kinsella is a legal theorist, one of our best, and also the author of this highly influential book here,

Joshua Goldberg, Co-Managing partner at Nath, Goldberg & Meyer – the #1 ranked patent law firm for biotech and pharmaceutical technologies joins Enterprise Radio.… Read more The post Why early-stage patent decisions can make or break future licensing deals appeared first on Top Entrepreneurs Podcast | Enterprise Podcast Network.

In this episode, we sit down with Caitlyn Krebs, Co-founder and CEO of Nalu Bio, to discuss how her company is leveraging generative AI to revolutionize drug discovery. Caitlyn shares how they are creating novel chemical entities five times faster than traditional methods to tackle massive unmet needs like endometriosis and post-surgical pain.We also dive deep into the business of biotech: the looming $250 billion "Patent Cliff" facing big pharma, the reality of the fundraising "rollercoaster," and why bringing innovation back to the US is critical for the industry's future.If you are interested in the intersection of AI and biology, the future of pain management, or the grit required to build a life sciences startup, you won't want to miss this conversation.⭐ Sponsored by Podcast10x - Podcasting agency for VCs - https://podcast10x.comKey Topics Covered:- The Next GLP-1? Why the endocannabinoid system is the largest regulator in the human body.- AI in Biotech: How Nalu Bio uses "digital twins" and virtual patients to de-risk drug development.- The $250B Opportunity: Understanding the massive patent cliff approaching the pharma industry.- Women's Health: Solving endometriosis with non-hormonal, non-opioid therapeutics.- Founder Resilience: Caitlyn's story of a lead investor walking away at the final document stage and how she bounced back.- Building Moats: How to protect IP and technology in a competitive market.Connect with Caitlyn & Nalu Bio:* Website: https://nalubio.com* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/caitlynkrebs* Email: caitlyn@nalubio.comVC10X website - https://VC10X.comDon't forget to LIKE, SUBSCRIBE, and turn on notifications for more deep dives into the future of technology and healthcare!#Biotech #AI #DrugDiscovery #Endometriosis #Startup #NaluBio #HealthTech #Entrepreneurship #GLP1 #Pharma

Sun, 07 Dec 2025 15:04:00 +0000 https://jungeanleger.podigee.io/2815-sportwoche-otv-spitzentennis-podcast-anastasia-potapova-ist-fur-flashscore-und-live-tennis-schon-aut-auf-der-wta-site-noch-nicht 1b96184d61b98c30a52e9b4746e942f4 Ende Woche 49/2025: Paukenschlag - der Österreichische Tennisverband bestätigte, dass die Anastasia Potapova, die aktuelle Nummer 50 der WTA-Weltrangliste mit Career High 21, die österreichische Staatsbürgerschaft erhalten hat und damit künftig für Österreich spielberechtigt ist. In Flashscore und Live-Tennis ist sie schon unter (AUT) gelistet, auf der offiziellen WTA-Site noch nicht. SportWoche ÖTV-Ö Top10: Anastasia Potapova, Julia Grabher, Sinja Kraus und Lili Tagger bei den Damen sowie Filip Misolic, Sebastian Ofner, Lukas Neumayer, Jurij Rodionov, Joel Schwärzler und Sandro Kopp bei den Herren sind WTA/ATP-übergreifend die Top10 aktuell. In welcher Reihenfolge, das wird im Podcast verraten. Presenter: mumak.me http://www.sportgeschichte.at/oetv Inside In, der ÖTV-Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/7KNsgeD8XyXTsAgCFKfI7Y https://www.oetv.at Thomas Schweda im Podcast: https://audio-cd.at/page/podcast/3521 Quelle Rankings: Live-Rankings von live-tennis.eu Die Marke, Patent, Rechte und das Archiv der SportWoche wurden 2017 von Christian Drastil Comm. erworben, Mehr unter http://www.sportgeschichte.at . Der neue SportWoche Podcast ist eingebettet in „ Wiener Börse, Sport, Musik (und mehr)“ auf http://www.audio-cd.at und erscheint, wie es in Name SportWoche auch drinsteckt, wöchentlich. Bewertungen bei Spotify oder Apple machen mir Freude: http://www.audio-cd.at/spotify , http://www.audio-cd.at/apple . Die SportWoche Podcasts und SportlerInnen sind weiters unterstützt by Instahelp: Psychologische Beratung online, ohne Wartezeit, vertraulich & anonym. Nimm dir Zeit für dich unter https://instahelp.me/de/ . Unter http://www.sportgeschichte.at/sportwochepodcast sieht man alle Folgen, auch nach Hörer:innen-Anzahl gerankt. Du möchtest deine Werbung in diesem und vielen anderen Podcasts schalten? Kein Problem!Für deinen Zugang zu zielgerichteter Podcast-Werbung, klicke hier.Audiomarktplatz.de - Geschichten, die bleiben - überall und jederzeit! 2815 full no Christian Drastil Comm. (Agentur für Investor Relations und Podcasts)

#rozwójosobisty #coaching #medytacja Postaw kawę twórcy: https://buycoffee.to/mediteuszROK MEDYTACJI 2026https://tiny.pl/0jpw17hwhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/2026-rok-medytacji-24-transformujace-podroze-w-glab-siebie/PODCHOINKOWCE 2026https://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/podchoinkowce/ROZWOJOWY KALENDARZ ADWENTOWYMEDITEUSZ / RATYŃSCY / GUChttps://rozwojowykalendarzadwentowy.pl/SZTUKA PEWNOŚCI SIEBIEhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/sztuka-pewnosci-siebie-odnajdz-zagubiona-zdolnosc/JESLI JESTES W PROJEKCIE ŻYCIE PRZECZYTAJ DZISIEJSZEGO MAILA !!!!METODA SILVY NA CODZIEŃhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/metoda-silvy-na-co-dzien/PREMIERA 25 XI 2025----------------------------------------------Nowe nagranie na buycoffee klikasz kawkę i leci do Ciebie nagraniefragment tuhttps://mediteusz.pl/audio/Czarodziej_zycia_001_wstep.mp3----------------------------------------------------MEDYTACJA OGRÓD ZDROWIA - POBIERZ MP3https://tiny.pl/d-3085hg------------------------------------------------WIELKA KSIĘGA AFIRMACJI https://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/wielka-ksiega-afrimacji/1000 AFIRMACJI + 2000 NAGRAŃ !!!!TYLKO 1250 SZT !--------------------------------------------------KSIĘGA DOBROSTANÓWhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/ksiega-dobrostanu/PRZEDSPRZEDAŻ - TYLKO 1111 szt -----------------------------------------------------------NOWA KSIĄŻKA PROF. KRÓLICKIEGOhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/feng-shui-niech-przestrzen-pracuje-dla-ciebie/PRZEDSPRZEDAŻ - 350 PIERWSZYCH Z DEDYKACJĄ AUTORA + DODATKI -----------------------------------------------------------SPOTKANIA Z WEWNĘTRZNYM DZIECKIEMhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/wewnetrzne-dzieckoPRZEDSPRZEDAŻ DO 23 II 2025 -------------------------------------------------SKLEP MEDITEUSZA Z NAGRANIAMI I KURSAMIhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl------------------------------------------------ILUSTROWANY MUDRARZ WSPÓŁCZESNYhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/ilustrowany-mudrarz-wspolczesny/ PAIERhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/ilustrowany-mudrarz-wspolczesny-ebook/ EBOOK------------------------------------------ŁUKASZ GOTOWICZOD CHAOSU DO ŚWIADOMOŚCI - JAK KREOWAĆ SWOJĄ RZECZYWISTOŚĆTU KLIKNIJ: https://tiny.pl/vx06f6f4 ---------------------------------------------METODA SILVY W ŚWIECIE PIENIĄDZA - TWOJE FINASE W DOBRYM STANIEhttps://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/metoda-silvy-w-swiecie-pieniadza-ksiazka-w-twardej-oprawie/----------------------------------------------MEDYTACJA DYNAMICZNA SILVY https://wiedza.mediteusz.pl/produkt/medytacja-dynamiczna-silvy-zapanuj-nad-zyciem-i-odzyskaj-zdrowie-ksiazka/SAMOKONTROLA UMYSŁU METODĄ SILVY KSIĄŻKA !https://samokontrolaumyslu.plCODZIENNIK MOTYWACYJNY #644 4 XII 2025 ZERWIJ Z DAWNYM SOBĄ - PATENT NA WZROST W ŻYCIU....Subskrybuj by być na bieżąco

Join us for a timely webinar examining the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) titled “Revision to Rules of Practice Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,” which proposes significant changes to how inter partes review (IPR) petitions are instituted. This session will present arguments from both sides while covering how the proposed rules aim to curb serial and duplicative challenges, shift institution discretion, and bolster patent­holder certainty, while also covering concerns about limiting access to review and adverse impacts on operating companies. With the official public comment deadline extended to December 2, 2025, this webinar aims to provide informative insight before the comment window closes. Don’t miss this chance to hear competing views on one of the most consequential patent-policy debates of the year. Featuring: Hon. Andrei Iancu, Partner, Sullivan & Cromwell LLPDavid Jones, Executive Director, High Tech Inventors AllianceJoseph Matal, Principal, Clear IP, LLCBrian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP(Moderator) Robert Rando, Partner, Patrick Doerr

Corey Salsberg, one of the leading voices on intellectual property policy in the United States, joins Clause 8 to discuss surviving the anti-pharma activism of the last administration, why he's encouraged by the current administration's approach to patent policy, and even the scientific possibility of “resurrecting the woolly mammoth.”As Global Head of IP at Novartis, Salsberg has a unique vantage point on how legal uncertainty affects the future of healthcare innovations. His work testifying before Congress has placed him at the center of the debate over the Supreme Court's Mayo, Myriad, and Alice decisions — rulings that he thinks have been followed by years of instability around Section 101, threatening investment in critical biotech and diagnostic breakthroughs.The conversation explores the political landscape surrounding the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), the persistence of myths like “patent thickets,” and the consequences of letting misinformation shape innovation policy. It also highlights what Congress can do to prevent the U.S. from falling behind in the race for gene and AI-driven therapeutics.Ultimately, Salsberg's perspective underscores how constructive, good-faith dialogue across industries remains essential to safeguarding innovation.

Mr. Beast Biography Flash a weekly Biography.Good evening, listeners. Here's your MrBeast update for the past few days.The YouTube megastar, whose real name is Jimmy Donaldson, has been absolutely everywhere lately. Most recently, the 27-year-old content creator launched Beast Land, a pop-up theme park in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, opening with over seven thousand people on day one. According to reports from his team, the launch was a logistical masterpiece—Donaldson personally appeared to meet fans, and they had to design an intricate system distributing 250 golden tickets just to manage the crowds wanting photos with him. It's the kind of spectacle only MrBeast could pull off.On the business front, trademark filings reveal Donaldson is expanding into fintech. According to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Beast Holdings LLC filed for a neobank application in October, indicating plans to launch financial services including short-term lending, investment management, and cryptocurrency exchange. It's another piece of his sprawling empire that already includes MrBeast Burger, his entertainment studio, and upcoming ventures.But here's where it gets interesting on the philanthropic side. The Rockefeller Foundation, one of America's oldest charities, announced a major strategic partnership with Beast Philanthropy. According to sources close to the deal, the two organizations are combining Donaldson's unmatched ability to capture youth attention with the foundation's 112 years of development expertise. They're planning a trip to Ghana next year to tackle child labor in cocoa farming, directly connecting to Donaldson's chocolate company Feastables, which aims to prove chocolate production can be profitable without child labor.Perhaps most revealing is Donaldson's recent candid admission about his finances. Despite being worth an estimated one billion dollars on paper, the YouTube star says he has very little personal cash because he reinvests nearly everything into content and philanthropy. In fact, he's reportedly borrowing money from his mom to pay for his upcoming wedding to author Thea Booysen, whom he proposed to on Christmas 2024. He spent roughly a quarter billion dollars on content this year alone.Looking ahead, Donaldson is launching the One Billion Acts of Kindness campaign, inviting creators worldwide to participate in what could be his most ambitious philanthropic initiative yet.Thanks for tuning in to this MrBeast edition. Please subscribe to never miss an update, and search the term "Biography Flash" for more great biographies.And that is it for today. Make sure you hit the subscribe button and never miss an update on Mr. Beast. Thanks for listening. This has been a Quiet Please production."Get the best deals https://amzn.to/4mMClBvThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Gemeinsam mit Philipp Wolf reite ich quer durch die Lebensmittel- und Getränkewelt. Wir besprechen welche Themen uns diesen Monat geprägt haben und geben unsere Meinung dazu Preis. Es erwarten euch lange Episoden mit viel Content für lange Auto- oder Bahnfahrten, die Begleitung beim Sport oder Spazieren. In unserer monatlichen Folge erfährst was die Branche bewegt: Wir sprechen über die Lebensmittelindustrie, E-Commerce, Quick Delivery, Gemeinschaftsverpflegung, Food-Start-ups, Innovationen, Digitalisierung/KI/Web3, Agrar, Investitionen/Insolvenzen/Exits aus der Branche.

Mon, 01 Dec 2025 16:25:00 +0000 https://jungeanleger.podigee.io/2799-sportwoche-otv-spitzentennis-podcast-sandro-kopp-karrierehoch-lilli-tagger-im-duell-um-die-grosse-chance-uberholt-worden 68556d9f17f0ef82fba73e5750b73ba6 Ende Woche 48/2025: Die Storyline hinter "Lilli Tagger gegen Emerson Jones (AUS) um eine historische 10-Wochen-Chance" (und welche Rolle Iva Jovic dabei spielt) geht weiter. Und: Gratulation an Sandro Kopp zu einem Karrierehoch. SportWoche ÖTV-Ö Top10: Julia Grabher, Sinja Kraus und Lili Tagger bei den Damen sowie Filip Misolic, Sebastian Ofner, Lukas Neumayer, Jurij Rodionov, Joel Schwärzler, Sandro Kopp und Neil Oberleitner bei den Herren sind WTA/ATP-übergreifend die Top10 aktuell. In welcher Reihenfolge, das wird im Podcast verraten. Presenter: mumak.me http://www.sportgeschichte.at/oetv Inside In, der ÖTV-Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/7KNsgeD8XyXTsAgCFKfI7Y https://www.oetv.at Thomas Schweda im Podcast: https://audio-cd.at/page/podcast/3521 Quelle Rankings: Live-Rankings von live-tennis.eu Die Marke, Patent, Rechte und das Archiv der SportWoche wurden 2017 von Christian Drastil Comm. erworben, Mehr unter http://www.sportgeschichte.at . Der neue SportWoche Podcast ist eingebettet in „ Wiener Börse, Sport, Musik (und mehr)“ auf http://www.audio-cd.at und erscheint, wie es in Name SportWoche auch drinsteckt, wöchentlich. Bewertungen bei Spotify oder Apple machen mir Freude: http://www.audio-cd.at/spotify , http://www.audio-cd.at/apple . Die SportWoche Podcasts und SportlerInnen sind weiters unterstützt by Instahelp: Psychologische Beratung online, ohne Wartezeit, vertraulich & anonym. Nimm dir Zeit für dich unter https://instahelp.me/de/ . Unter http://www.sportgeschichte.at/sportwochepodcast sieht man alle Folgen, auch nach Hörer:innen-Anzahl gerankt. Du möchtest deine Werbung in diesem und vielen anderen Podcasts schalten? Kein Problem!Für deinen Zugang zu zielgerichteter Podcast-Werbung, klicke hier.Audiomarktplatz.de - Geschichten, die bleiben - überall und jederzeit! 2799 full no Christian Drastil Comm. (Agentur für Investor Relations und Podcasts)

Trump strikes back! In this explosive Bonus Episode 226 of The Alan Sanders Show, dive into President Trump's executive order nullifying Biden's controversial autopen-signed directives. Ukraine corruption exposed: Zelensky's inner circle raided amid massive Energoatom scandal. Tesla's game-changing 4680 battery patent breakthrough promises cheaper EVs. Plus, Supremacy Clause showdown as Oregon's governor clashes with federal authority. And it is perfectly legal, both from US law and International Law to destroy Narco-terrorist threats. Unpack the headlines shaking America! Please take a moment to rate and review the show and then share the episode on social media. You can find me on Facebook, X, Instagram, GETTR,  TRUTH Social and YouTube by searching for The Alan Sanders Show. And, consider becoming a sponsor of the show by visiting my Patreon page!

How AI Is Democratizing Patent Protection: Insights from Ophir Katzir, Co-Founder & CEO of senseIPIn this episode of The Thoughtful Entrepreneur, host Josh Elledge sits down with Ophir Katzir, Co-Founder and CEO of senseIP, to explore how artificial intelligence is transforming the world of intellectual property (IP) and patent protection. With a background spanning volunteer firefighting, inventing, and startup leadership, Ophir brings a rare blend of resilience, technical expertise, and mission-driven innovation. This conversation offers a practical roadmap for inventors, founders, and enterprises ready to protect their ideas faster, more affordably, and more confidently using AI.How AI Is Reshaping Patent Protection for InnovatorsOphir begins by drawing parallels between firefighting and startups—two environments that demand calm decision-making under pressure, adaptability, and teamwork. Those same principles fuel senseIP's mission: breaking down traditional barriers in the patent system that have historically favored well-funded companies over individual inventors and early-stage founders.He explains why the legacy patent process is so intimidating: high attorney fees, complex legal language, lengthy timelines, and unpredictable costs tied to office actions. These hurdles often discourage innovators from filing at all. senseIP's AI-driven platform, guided by its conversational agent Leo, changes that. Inventors can start with a single sentence and receive instant clarity on patentability, prior art, freedom to operate, and whether their idea is truly novel.Finally, Ophir outlines how AI enables faster, more precise filings—along with ongoing support. From one-click provisional applications to automated handling of office actions, senseIP helps innovators protect their intellectual property without surprise bills or legal confusion. This shift democratizes access to patents and gives businesses of all sizes a smarter, more scalable way to manage their IP portfolios.About Ophir KatzirOphir Katzir is the Co-Founder and CEO of senseIP, a serial inventor, and a former volunteer firefighter whose resilience and problem-solving approach shape his leadership style. Passionate about democratizing innovation, Ophir blends deep technical expertise with a mission to make patent protection accessible, affordable, and transparent for everyone.Connect with Ophir on LinkedIn.About senseIPsenseIP is an AI-powered patent platform designed to simplify intellectual property protection for inventors, startups, and enterprises. Using conversational intelligence, automated prior art searches, and one-click provisional filing, senseIP removes cost and complexity while providing transparent, all-inclusive IP support.Links Mentioned in This EpisodesenseIP WebsiteOphir Katzir on LinkedInKey Episode Highlights:How firefighting shaped Ophir's resilience and decision-making in startupsThe high cost, complexity, and unpredictability of traditional patent filingsHow senseIP's AI agent Leo simplifies patentability assessment and filingThe importance of early IP protection in an era of rapid AI-driven innovationPractical steps for inventors to validate, refine, and secure their ideas with...

Mr. Beast Biography Flash a weekly Biography.Jimmy Donaldson, known worldwide as MrBeast, has been making major moves across multiple ventures as we head into the final month of 2025. According to Global Fintech Insider, the YouTube megastar filed a trademark application in October under Beast Holdings LLC for what appears to be a neobank targeting his 447 million subscribers. The filing with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office lists services for short-term cash advances, consumer lending, investment management, financial education, cryptocurrency exchange, and credit and debit card issuance. While trademark filings are preliminary steps and a significant distance from actual bank licensing, this move signals serious intentions to enter the financial services space, building on Donaldson's previous investments in fintech companies like Current and Bitski.On the philanthropy front, Beast Philanthropy announced a major strategic partnership with the Rockefeller Foundation on November 24th. This collaboration pairs Donaldson's unparalleled ability to engage youth audiences with the foundation's 112-year legacy of tackling global problems. The partnership focuses on inspiring younger generations, particularly Gen Z, to care about vulnerable populations worldwide. Notably, the two organizations plan to visit Ghana early next year to collaborate on development and community-led change initiatives. Through his snack company Feastables, Donaldson continues championing fair-trade chocolate production and fighting child labor on cacao farms, hoping to provide farmers with living wages while rallying consumers around ethical practices.Beyond these ventures, MrBeast's sprawling empire continues expanding. According to Business Insider reporting, the creator revealed ownership stakes in Beast Industries during a deposition, underscoring the scale of his business empire estimated at around five billion dollars. The company has been aggressively hiring new executives to strengthen content production and brand partnership capabilities.The partnership with Rockefeller Foundation represents perhaps the most significant development, signaling a maturation of Donaldson's approach to philanthropy. Rather than operating solo, he's deliberately seeking established expertise to ensure his charitable work creates lasting, measurable impact beyond viral moments.Thanks so much for tuning in to this episode. Please subscribe to never miss an update on MrBeast and search the term Biography Flash for more great biographies.And that is it for today. Make sure you hit the subscribe button and never miss an update on Mr. Beast. Thanks for listening. This has been a Quiet Please production."Get the best deals https://amzn.to/4mMClBvThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

I am Rolf Claessen and together with my co-host Ken Suzan I am welcoming you to episode 169 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann, co-founder of my patent law firm Michalski Hüttermann & Partner and a true expert on the Unified Patent Court. He has written several books about the new system and we talk about all the things that plaintiffs and defendants can learn from the first decisions of the court and what they mean for strategic decisions of the parties involved. But before we jump into this very interesting interview, I have news for you! The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is planning rule changes that would make it virtually impossible for third parties to challenge invalid patents before the patent office. Criticism has come from the EFF and other inventor rights advocates: the new rules would play into the hands of so-called non-practicing entities (NPEs), as those attacked would have few cost-effective ways to have questionable patents deleted. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports a new record in international patent applications: in 2024, around 3.7 million patent applications were filed worldwide – an increase of 4.9% over the previous year. The main drivers were Asian countries (China alone accounted for 1.8 million), while demand for trademark protection has stabilized after the pandemic decline. US rapper Eminem is taking legal action in Australia against a company that sells swimwear under the name “Swim Shady.” He believes this infringes on his famous “Slim Shady” brand. The case illustrates that even humorous allusions to well-known brand names can lead to legal conflicts. A new ruling by the Unified Patent Court (UPC) demonstrates its cross-border impact. In “Fujifilm v. Kodak,” the local chamber in Mannheim issued an injunction that extends to the UK despite Brexit. The UPC confirmed its jurisdiction over the UK parts of a European patent, as the defendant Kodak is based in a UPC member state. A dispute over standard patents is looming at the EU level: the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament voted to take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice. The reason for this is the Commission’s controversial withdrawal of a draft regulation on the licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Parliament President Roberta Metsola is to decide by mid-November whether to file the lawsuit. In trademark law, USPTO Director Squires reported on October 31, 2025, that a new unit (“Trademark Registration Protection Office”) had removed approximately 61,000 invalid trademark applications from the registries. This cleanup of the backlog relieved the examining authority and accelerated the processing of legitimate applications. Now let's jump into the interview with Aloys Hüttermann: The Unified Patent Court Comes of Age – Insights from Prof. Aloys Hüttermann The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has moved from a long-discussed project to a living, breathing court system that already shapes patent enforcement in Europe. In a recent IP Fridays interview, Prof. Aloys Hüttermann – founder and equity partner at Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner and one of the earliest commentators on the UPC – shared his experiences from the first years of practice, as well as his view on how the UPC fits into the global patent litigation landscape. This article summarises the key points of that conversation and is meant as an accessible overview for in-house counsel, patent attorneys and business leaders who want to understand what the UPC means for their strategy. How Prof. Hüttermann Became “Mr. UPC” Prof. Hüttermann has been closely involved with the UPC for more than a decade. When it became clear, around 13 years ago, that the European project of a unified patent court and a unitary patent was finally going to happen, he recognised that this would fundamentally change patent enforcement in Europe. He started to follow the legislative and political developments in detail and went beyond mere observation. As author and editor of several books and a major commentary on the UPC, he helped shape the discussion around the new system. His first book on the UPC appeared in 2016 – years before the court finally opened its doors in 2023. What fascinated him from the beginning was the unique opportunity to witness the creation of an entirely new court system, to analyse how it would be built and, where possible, to contribute to its understanding and development. It was clear to him that this system would be a “game changer” for European patent enforcement. UPC in the Global Triangle: Europe, the US and China In practice, most international patent disputes revolve around three major regions: the UPC territory in Europe, the United States and China. Each of these regions has its own procedural culture, cost structure and strategic impact. From a territorial perspective, the UPC is particularly attractive because it can, under the right conditions, grant pan-European injunctions that cover a broad range of EU Member States with a single decision. This consolidation of enforcement is something national courts in Europe simply cannot offer. From a cost perspective, the UPC is significantly cheaper than US litigation, especially if one compares the cost of one UPC action with a bundle of separate national cases in large European markets. When viewed against the territorial reach and procedural speed, the “bang for the buck” is very compelling. China is again a different story. The sheer volume of cases there is enormous, with tens of thousands of patent infringement cases per year. Chinese courts are known for their speed; first-instance decisions within about a year are common. In this respect they resemble the UPC more than the US does. The UPC also aims at a roughly 12 to 15 month time frame for first-instance cases where validity is at issue. The US, by contrast, features extensive discovery, occasionally jury trials and often longer timelines. The procedural culture is very different. The UPC, like Chinese courts, operates without discovery in the US sense, which makes proceedings more focused on the written record and expert evidence that the parties present, and less on pre-trial disclosure battles. Whether a company chooses to litigate in the US, the UPC, China, or some combination of these forums will depend on where the key markets and assets are. However, in Prof. Hüttermann's view, once Europe is an important market, it is hard to justify ignoring the UPC. He expects the court's caseload and influence to grow strongly over the coming years. A Landmark UPC Case: Syngenta v. Sumitomo A particularly important case in which Prof. Hüttermann was involved is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo matter, concerning a composition patent. This case has become a landmark in UPC practice for several reasons. First, the Court of Appeal clarified a central point about the reach of UPC injunctions. It made clear that once infringement is established in one Member State, this will usually be sufficient to justify a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That confirmation gave patent owners confidence that the UPC can in fact deliver broad, cross-border relief in one go. Second, the facts of the case raised novel issues about evidence and territorial reach. The allegedly infringing product had been analysed based on a sample from the Czech Republic, which is not part of the UPC system. Later, the same product with the same name was marketed in Bulgaria, which is within UPC territory. The Court of Appeal held that the earlier analysis of the Czech sample could be relied on for enforcement in Bulgaria. This showed that evidence from outside the UPC territory can be sufficient, as long as it is properly linked to the products marketed within the UPC. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to state its view on inventive step. It confirmed that combining prior-art documents requires a “pointer”, in line with the EPO's problem-solution approach. The mere theoretical possibility of extracting a certain piece of information from a document does not suffice to justify an inventive-step attack. This is one of several decisions where the UPC has shown a strong alignment with EPO case law on substantive patentability. For Prof. Hüttermann personally, the case was also a lesson in oral advocacy before the UPC. During the two appeal hearings, the presiding judge asked unexpected questions that required quick and creative responses while the hearing continued. His practical takeaway is that parties should appear with a small, well-coordinated team: large enough to allow someone to work on a tricky question in the background, but small enough to remain agile. Two or three lawyers seem ideal; beyond that, coordination becomes difficult and “too many cooks spoil the broth”. A Game-Changing CJEU Decision: Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux Surprisingly, one of the most important developments for European patent litigation in the past year did not come from the UPC at all, but from the Court of Justice of the European Union. In Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux, the CJEU revisited the rules on cross-border jurisdiction under the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia). Previously, under what practitioners often referred to as the GAT/LuK regime, a court in one EU country was largely prevented from granting relief for alleged infringement in another country if the validity of the foreign patent was contested there. This significantly limited the possibilities for cross-border injunctions. In Bosch, the CJEU changed course. Without going into all procedural details, the essence is that courts in the EU now have broader powers to grant cross-border relief when certain conditions are met, particularly when at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state. The concept of an “anchor defendant” plays a central role: if you sue one group company in its home forum, other group companies in other countries, including outside the EU, can be drawn into the case. This has already had practical consequences. German courts, for example, have issued pan-European injunctions covering around twenty countries in pharmaceutical cases. There are even attempts to sue European companies for infringement of US patents based on acts in the US, using the logic of Bosch as a starting point. How far courts will ultimately go remains to be seen, but the potential is enormous. For the UPC, this development is highly relevant. The UPC operates in the same jurisdictional environment as national courts, and many defendants in UPC cases will be domiciled in UPC countries. This increases the likelihood that the UPC, too, can leverage the broadened possibilities for cross-border relief. In addition, we have already seen UPC decisions that include non-EU countries such as the UK within the scope of injunctions, in certain constellations. The interaction between UPC practice and the Bosch jurisprudence of the CJEU is only beginning to unfold. Does the UPC Follow EPO Case Law? A key concern for many patent owners and practitioners is whether the UPC will follow the EPO's Boards of Appeal or develop its own, possibly divergent, case law on validity. On procedural matters, the UPC is naturally different from the EPO. It has its own rules of procedure, its own timelines and its own tools, such as “front-loaded” pleadings and tight limits on late-filed material. On substantive law, however, Prof. Hüttermann's conclusion is clear: there is “nothing new under the sun”. The UPC's approach to novelty, inventive step and added matter is very close to that of the EPO. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears frequently in UPC decisions. Intermediate generalisations are treated with the same suspicion as at the EPO. In at least one case, the UPC revoked a patent for added matter even though the EPO had granted it in exactly that form. The alignment is not accidental. The UPC only deals with European patents granted by the EPO; it does not hear cases on purely national patents. If the UPC were more generous than the EPO, many patents would never reach it. If it were systematically stricter, patentees would be more tempted to opt out of the system. In practice, the UPC tends to apply the EPO's standards and, where anything differs, it is usually a matter of factual appreciation rather than a different legal test. For practitioners, this has a very practical implication: if you want to predict how the UPC will decide on validity, the best starting point is to ask how the EPO would analyse the case. The UPC may not always reach the same result in parallel EPO opposition proceedings, but the conceptual framework is largely the same. Trends in UPC Practice: PIs, Equivalents and Division-Specific Styles Even in its early years, certain trends and differences between UPC divisions can be observed. On preliminary injunctions, the local division in Düsseldorf has taken a particularly proactive role. It has been responsible for most of the ex parte PIs granted so far and applies a rather strict notion of urgency, often considering one month after knowledge of the infringement as still acceptable, but treating longer delays with scepticism. Other divisions tend to see two months as still compatible with urgency, and they are much more cautious with ex parte measures. Munich, by contrast, has indicated a strong preference for inter partes PI proceedings and appears reluctant to grant ex parte relief at all. A judge from Munich has even described the main action as the “fast” procedure and the inter partes PI as the “very fast” one, leaving little room for an even faster ex parte track. There are also differences in how divisions handle amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. Munich has suggested that if a patentee needs to rely on claim amendments or auxiliary requests in a PI, the request is unlikely to succeed. Other divisions have been more open to considering auxiliary requests. The doctrine of equivalents is another area where practice is not yet harmonised. The Hague division has explicitly applied a test taken from Dutch law in at least one case and found infringement by equivalence. However, the Court of Appeal has not yet endorsed a specific test, and in another recent Hague case the same division did not apply that Dutch-law test again. The Mannheim division has openly called for the development of an autonomous, pan-European equivalence test, but has not yet fixed such a test in a concrete decision. This is clearly an area to watch. Interim conferences are commonly used in most divisions to clarify issues early on, but Düsseldorf often dispenses with them to save time. In practice, interim conferences can be very helpful for narrowing down the issues, though parties should not expect to be able to predict the final decision from what is discussed there. Sometimes topics that dominate the interim conference play little or no role in the main oral hearing. A Front-Loaded System and Typical Strategic Mistakes UPC proceedings are highly front-loaded and very fast. A defendant usually has three months from service of the statement of claim to file a full statement of defence and any counterclaim for revocation. This is manageable, but only if the time is used wisely. One common strategic problem is that parties lose time at the beginning and only develop a clear strategy late in the three-month period. According to Prof. Hüttermann, it is crucial to have a firm strategy within the first two or three weeks and then execute it consistently. Constantly changing direction is a recipe for failure in such a compressed system. Another characteristic is the strict attitude towards late-filed material. It is difficult to introduce new documents or new inventive-step attacks later in the procedure. In some cases even alternative combinations of already-filed prior-art documents have been viewed as “new” attacks and rejected as late. At the appeal stage, the Court of Appeal has even considered new arguments based on different parts of a book already in the file as potentially late-filed. This does not mean that parties should flood the court with dozens of alternative attacks in the initial brief. In one revocation action, a plaintiff filed about fifty different inventive-step attacks, only to be told by the court that this was not acceptable and that the attacks had to be reduced and structured. The UPC is not a body conducting ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case actively and to ask parties to focus on the most relevant issues. Evidence Gathering, Protective Letters and the Defendant's Perspective The UPC provides powerful tools for both sides. Evidence inspection is becoming more common, not only at trade fairs but also at company premises. This can be a valuable tool for patentees, but it also poses a serious risk for defendants who may suddenly face court-ordered inspections. From the perspective of potential defendants, protective letters are an important instrument, especially in divisions like Düsseldorf where ex parte PIs are possible. A well-written protective letter, filed in advance, can significantly reduce the risk of a surprise injunction. The court fees are moderate, but the content of the protective letter must be carefully prepared; a poor submission can cause more harm than good. Despite the strong tools available to patentees, Prof. Hüttermann does not view the UPC as unfair to defendants. If a defendant files a solid revocation counterclaim, the pressure shifts to the patentee, who then has only two months to reply, prepare all auxiliary requests and adapt the enforcement strategy. This is even more demanding than at the EPO, because the patentee must not only respond to validity attacks but also ensure that any amended claims still capture the allegedly infringing product. It is entirely possible to secure the survival of a patent with an auxiliary request that no longer covers the defendant's product. In that scenario, the patentee has “won” on validity but lost the infringement case. Managing this tension under tight time limits is a key challenge of UPC practice. The Future Role of the UPC and How to Prepare Today the UPC hears a few hundred cases per year, compared with several thousand patent cases in the US and tens of thousands in China. Nevertheless, both the court itself and experienced practitioners see significant growth potential. Prof. Hüttermann expects case numbers to multiply in the medium term. Whether the UPC will become the first choice forum in global disputes or remain one pillar in parallel proceedings alongside the US and China will depend on the strategies of large patentees and the evolution of case law. However, the court is well equipped: it covers a large, economically important territory, is comparatively cost-effective and offers fast procedures with robust remedies. For companies that may end up before the UPC, preparation is essential. On the offensive side, that means building strong evidence and legal arguments before filing, being ready to proceed quickly and structured, and understanding the specific styles of the relevant divisions. On the defensive side, it may mean filing protective letters in risk-exposed markets, preparing internal processes for rapid reaction if a statement of claim arrives, and taking inspection requests seriously. Conclusion The Unified Patent Court has quickly moved from theory to practice. It offers pan-European relief, fast and front-loaded procedures, and a substantive approach that closely mirrors the EPO's case law. At the same time, national and EU-level developments like the Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision are reshaping the jurisdictional framework in which the UPC operates, opening the door for far-reaching cross-border injunctions. For patent owners and potential defendants alike, the message is clear: the UPC is here to stay and will become more important year by year. Those who invest the time to understand its dynamics now – including its alignment with the EPO, the differences between divisions, and the strategic implications of its procedures – will be in a much better position when the first UPC dispute lands on their desk. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Rolf Claessen:Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann. He is founder and equity partner of my firm, Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner. More importantly for today's interview, he has written several books about the Unified Patent Court. The first one already came out in 2016. He is co-editor and author of one of the leading commentaries on the UPC and has gained substantial experience in UPC cases so far – one of them even together with me. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays again, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you for inviting me, it's an honour. How did you get so deeply involved in the UPC? Rolf Claessen:Before we dive into the details, how did you end up so deeply involved in the Unified Patent Court? And what personally fascinates you about this court? Aloys Hüttermann:This goes back quite a while – roughly 13 years. At that time it became clear that, after several failed attempts, Europe would really get a pan-European court and a pan-European patent, and that this time it was serious. I thought: this is going to be the future. That interested me a lot, both intellectually and practically. A completely new system was being built. You could watch how it evolved – and, if possible, even help shape it a bit. It was also obvious to me that this would be a complete game changer. Nobody expected that it would take until 2023 before the system actually started operating, but now it is here. I became heavily interested early on. As you mentioned, my first book on the UPC was published in 2016, in the expectation that the system would start soon. It took a bit longer, but now we finally have it. UPC vs. US and China – speed, cost and impact Rolf Claessen:Before we go deeper into the UPC, let's zoom out. If you compare litigation before the UPC with patent litigation in the US and in China – in terms of speed, cost and the impact of decisions – what are the key differences that a business leader should understand? Aloys Hüttermann:If you look at the three big regions – the UPC territory in Europe, the US and China – these are the major economic areas for many technology companies. One important point is territorial reach. In the UPC, if the conditions are met, you can get pan-European injunctions that cover many EU Member States in one go. We will talk about this later in more detail. On costs there is a huge difference between the US and the UPC. The UPC is much cheaper than US litigation, especially once you look at the number of countries you can cover with one case if the patent has been validated widely. China is different again. The number of patent infringement cases there is enormous. I have seen statistics of around 40,000 infringement cases per year in China. That is huge – compared with roughly 164 UPC infringement cases in the first year and maybe around 200 in the current year. On speed, Chinese courts are known to be very fast. You often get a first-instance decision in about a year. The UPC is comparable: if there is a counterclaim for revocation, you are looking at something like 12 to 15 months for a first-instance decision. The US can be slower, and the procedure is very different. You have full discovery, you may have juries. None of that exists at the UPC. From that perspective, Chinese and UPC proceedings are more similar to each other than either is to the US. The UPC is still a young court. We have to see how influential its case law will be worldwide in the long run. What we already see, at least in Germany, is a clear trend away from purely national patent litigation and towards the UPC. That is inside Europe. The global impact will develop over time. When is the UPC the most powerful tool? Rolf Claessen:Let's take the perspective of a global company. It has significant sales in Europe and in the US and production or key suppliers in China. In which situations would you say the UPC is your most powerful tool? And when might the US or China be the more strategic battleground? Aloys Hüttermann:To be honest, I would almost always consider bringing a case before the UPC. The “bang for the buck” is very good. The UPC is rather fast. That alone already gives you leverage in negotiations. The threat of a quick, wide-reaching injunction is a strong negotiation tool. Whether you litigate in the US instead of the UPC, or in addition, or whether you also go to China – that depends heavily on the individual case: where the products are sold, where the key markets are, where the defendant has assets, and so on. But in my view, once you have substantial sales in Europe, you should seriously consider the UPC. And for that reason alone I expect case numbers at the UPC to increase significantly in the coming years. A landmark UPC case: Syngenta vs. Sumitomo (composition patent) Rolf Claessen:You have already been involved in several UPC cases – and one of them together with me, which was great fun. Looking at the last 12 to 18 months, is there a case, decision or development that you find particularly noteworthy – something that really changed how you think about UPC litigation or how companies should prepare? Aloys Hüttermann:The most important UPC case I have been involved in so far is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo case on a composition patent. It has become a real landmark and was even mentioned in the UPC's annual report. It is important for several reasons. First, it was one of the first cases in which the Court of Appeal said very clearly: if you have established infringement in one Member State, that will usually be enough for a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That is a powerful statement about the reach of UPC relief. Second, the facts were interesting. The patent concerned a composition. We had analysed a sample that had been obtained in the Czech Republic, which is not a UPC country. Later, the same product was marketed under the same name in Bulgaria, which is in the UPC. The question was whether the analysis of the Czech sample could be used as a basis for enforcement in Bulgaria. The Court of Appeal said yes, that was sufficient. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to say something about inventive step. It more or less confirmed that the UPC's approach is very close to the EPO's problem-solution approach. It emphasised that, if you want to combine prior-art documents, you need a “pointer” to do so. The mere theoretical possibility that a skilled person could dig a particular piece of information out of a document is not enough. For me personally, the most memorable aspect of this case was not the outcome – that was largely in line with what we had expected – but the oral hearings at the appeal stage. We had two hearings. In both, the presiding judge asked us a question that we had not anticipated at all. And then you have about 20 minutes to come up with a convincing answer while the hearing continues. We managed it, but it made me think a lot about how you should prepare for oral hearings at the UPC. My conclusion is: you should go in with a team, but not too big. In German we say, “Zu viele Köche verderben den Brei” – too many cooks spoil the broth. Two or three people seems ideal. One of them can work quietly on such a surprise question at the side, while the others continue arguing the case. In the end the case went very well for us, so I can speak about it quite calmly now. But in the moment your heart rate definitely goes up. The CJEU's Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision – a real game changer Rolf Claessen:You also mentioned another development that is not even a UPC case, but still very important for European patent litigation. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes. In my view, the most important case of the last twelve months is not a UPC decision but a judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU): Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. This is going to be a real game changer for European IP law, and I am sure we have not seen the end of its effects yet. One example: someone has recently sued BMW before the Landgericht München I, a German court, for infringement of a US patent based on acts in the US. The argument is that this could be backed by the logic of Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. We do not know yet what the court will do with that, but the fact that people are trying this shows how far-reaching the decision might be. Within the UPC we have already seen injunctions being issued for countries outside the UPC territory and even outside the EU, for example including the UK. So you see how these developments start to interact. Rolf Claessen:For listeners who have not followed the case so closely: in very simple terms, the CJEU opened the door for courts in one EU country to rule on patent infringement that took place in other countries as well, right? Aloys Hüttermann:Exactly. Before Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux we had what was often called the GAT/LuK regime. The basic idea was: if you sue someone in, say, Germany for infringement of a European patent, and you also ask for an injunction for France, and the defendant then challenges the validity of the patent in France, the German court cannot grant you an injunction covering France. The Bosch decision changed that. The legal basis is the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia), which deals with jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters in the EU. It is not specific to IP; it applies to civil cases generally, but it does have some provisions that are relevant for patents. In Bosch, a Swedish court asked the CJEU for guidance on cross-border injunctions. The CJEU more or less overturned its old GAT/LuK case law. Now, in principle, if the defendant is domiciled in a particular Member State, the courts of that state can also grant cross-border relief for other countries, under certain conditions. We will not go into all the details here – that could fill a whole separate IP Fridays episode – but one important concept is the “anchor defendant”. If you sue a group of companies and at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state, then other group companies in other countries – even outside the EU, for example in Hong Kong – can be drawn into the case and affected by the decision. This is not limited to the UPC, but of course it is highly relevant for UPC litigation. Statistically it increases the chances that at least one defendant will be domiciled in a UPC country, simply because there are many of them. And we have already seen courts like the Landgericht München I grant pan-European injunctions for around 20 countries in a pharmaceutical case. Rolf Claessen:Just to clarify: does it have to be the headquarters of the defendant in that country, or is any registered office enough? Aloys Hüttermann:That is one of the open points. If the headquarters are in Europe, then it is clear that subsidiaries outside Europe can be affected as well. If the group's headquarters are outside Europe and only a subsidiary is here, the situation is less clear and we will have to see what the courts make of it. Does the UPC follow EPO case law? Rolf Claessen:Many patent owners and in-house counsel wonder: does the UPC largely follow the case law of the EPO Boards of Appeal, or is it starting to develop its own distinct line? What is your impression so far – both on substantive issues like novelty and inventive step, and on procedural questions? Aloys Hüttermann:On procedure the UPC is, of course, very different. It has its own procedural rules and they are not the same as at the EPO. If we look at patent validity, however, my impression is that there is “nothing new under the sun” – that was the title of a recent talk I gave and will give again in Hamburg. Substantively, the case law of the UPC and the EPO is very similar. For inventive step, people sometimes say the UPC does not use the classical problem-solution approach but a more “holistic” approach – whatever that is supposed to mean. In practice, in both systems you read and interpret prior-art documents and decide what they really disclose. In my view, the “error bar” that comes from two courts simply reading a document slightly differently is much larger than any systematic difference in legal approach. If you look at other grounds, such as novelty and added matter, the UPC even follows the EPO almost verbatim. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears all over UPC decisions, even if the EPO case numbers are not always cited. The same is true for novelty. So the rule-based, almost “Hilbertian” EPO approach is very much present at the UPC. There is also a structural reason for that. All patents that the UPC currently deals with have been granted by the EPO. The UPC does not handle patents granted only by national offices. If the UPC wanted to deviate from EPO case law and be more generous, then many patents would never reach the UPC in the first place. The most generous approach you can have is the one used by the granting authority – the EPO. So if the UPC wants to be different, it can only be stricter, not more lenient. And there is little incentive to be systematically stricter, because that would reduce the number of patents that are attractive to enforce before the UPC. Patent owners might simply opt out. Rolf Claessen:We also talked about added matter and a recent case where the Court of Appeal was even stricter than the EPO. That probably gives US patent practitioners a massive headache. They already struggle with added-matter rules in Europe, and now the UPC might be even tougher. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, especially on added matter. I once spoke with a US practitioner who said, “We hope the UPC will move away from intermediate generalisations.” There is no chance of that. We already have cases where the Court of Appeal confirmed that intermediate generalisations are not allowed, in full alignment with the EPO. You mentioned a recent case where a patent was revoked for added matter, even though it had been granted by the EPO in exactly that form. This shows quite nicely what to expect. If you want to predict how the UPC will handle a revocation action, the best starting point is to ask: “What would the EPO do?” Of course, there will still be cases where the UPC finds an invention to be inventive while the EPO, in parallel opposition proceedings, does not – or vice versa. But those are differences in the appreciation of the facts and the prior art, which you will always have. The underlying legal approach is essentially the same. Rolf Claessen:So you do not see a real example yet where the UPC has taken a totally different route from the EPO on validity? Aloys Hüttermann:No, not really. If I had to estimate how the UPC will decide, I would always start from what I think the EPO would have done. Trends in UPC practice: PIs, equivalents, interim conferences Rolf Claessen:If you look across the different UPC divisions and cases: what trends do you see in practice? For example regarding timelines, preliminary injunctions, how validity attacks are handled, and how UPC cases interact with EPO oppositions or national proceedings? Aloys Hüttermann:If you take the most active divisions – essentially the big four in Germany and the local division in The Hague – they all try to be very careful and diligent in their decisions. But you can already see some differences in practice. For preliminary injunctions there is a clear distinction between the local division in Düsseldorf and most other divisions. Düsseldorf considers one month after knowledge of the infringement as still sufficiently urgent. If you wait longer, it is usually considered too late. In many other divisions, two months is still viewed as fine. Düsseldorf has also been the division that issued most of the ex parte preliminary injunctions so far. Apart from one special outlier where a standing judge from Brussels was temporarily sitting in Milan, Düsseldorf is basically the only one. Other divisions have been much more reluctant. At a conference, Judge Pichlmaier from the Munich division once said that he could hardly imagine a situation where his division would grant an ex parte PI. In his words, the UPC has two types of procedure: one that is fast – the normal main action – and one that is very fast – the inter partes PI procedure. But you do not really have an “ultra-fast” ex parte track, at least not in his division. Another difference relates to amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. In one recent case in Munich the court said more or less that if you have to amend your patent or rely on auxiliary requests in a PI, you lose. Other divisions have been more flexible and have allowed auxiliary requests. Equivalence is another area where we do not have a unified line yet. So far, only the Hague division has clearly found infringement under the doctrine of equivalents and explicitly used a test taken from Dutch law. Whether that test will be approved by the Court of Appeal is completely open – the first case settled, so the Court of Appeal never ruled on it, and a second one is still very recent. Interestingly, there was another Hague decision a few weeks ago where equivalence was on the table, but the division did not apply that Dutch-law test. We do not know yet why. The Mannheim division has written in one decision that it would be desirable to develop an autonomous pan-European test for equivalence, instead of just importing the German, UK or Dutch criteria. But they did not formulate such a test in that case because it was not necessary for the decision. So we will have to see how that evolves. On timelines, one practical difference is that Düsseldorf usually does not hold an interim conference. That saves them some time. Most other divisions do hold interim conferences. Personally, I like the idea because it can help clarify issues. But you cannot safely read the final outcome from these conferences. I have also seen cases where questions raised at the interim conference did not play any role in the main oral hearing. So they are useful for clarification, but not as a crystal ball. Front-loaded proceedings and typical strategic mistakes Rolf Claessen:If you look at the behaviour of parties so far – both patentees and defendants – what are the most common strategic mistakes you see in UPC litigation? And what would a well-prepared company do differently before the first statement of claim is ever filed? Aloys Hüttermann:You know you do not really want me to answer that question… Rolf Claessen:I do! Aloys Hüttermann:All right. The biggest mistake, of course, is that they do not hire me. That is the main problem. Seriously, it is difficult to judge parties' behaviour from the outside. You rarely know the full picture. There may be national proceedings, licensing discussions, settlement talks, and so on in the background. That can limit what a party can do at the UPC. So instead of criticising, I prefer to say what is a good idea at the UPC. The system is very front-loaded and very fast. If you are sued, you have three months to file your statement of defence and your counterclaim for revocation. In my view, three months are manageable – but only if you use the time wisely and do not waste it on things that are not essential. If you receive a statement of claim, you have to act immediately. You should have a clear strategy within maybe two or three weeks and then implement it. If you change your strategy every few weeks, chances are high that you will fail. Another point is that everything is front-loaded. It is very hard to introduce new documents or new attacks later. Some divisions have been a bit generous in individual cases, but the general line is strict. We have seen, for example, that even if you filed a book in first instance, you may not be allowed to rely on a different chapter from the same book for a new inventive-step attack at the appeal stage. That can be regarded as late-filed, because you could have done it earlier. There is also case law saying that if you first argue inventive step as “D1 plus D2”, and later want to argue “D2 plus D1”, that can already be considered a new, late attack. On the other hand, we had a revocation action where the plaintiff filed about 50 different inventive-step attacks in the initial brief. The division then said: this does not work. Please cut them down or put them in a clear hierarchy. In the end, not all of them were considered. The UPC does not conduct an ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case and to tell the parties to limit themselves in the interest of a fair and efficient procedure. Rolf Claessen:I have the feeling that the EPO is also becoming more front-loaded – if you want to rely on documents later, you should file them early. But it sounds like the UPC is even more extreme in that regard. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, that is true. Protective letters, inspections and the defendant's perspective Rolf Claessen:Suppose someone from a company is listening now and thinks: “We might be exposed at the UPC,” or, “We should maybe use the UPC offensively against competitors.” What would you consider sensible first steps before any concrete dispute arises? And looking three to five years ahead, how central do you expect the UPC to become in global patent litigation compared to the US and China? Aloys Hüttermann:Let me start with the second part. I expect the UPC to become significantly more important. If we have around 200 cases this year, that is a good start, but it is still very small compared to, say, 4,000 to 5,000 patent cases per year in the US and 40,000 or so in China. Even François Bürgin and Klaus Grabinski, in interviews, have said that they are happy with the case load, but the potential is much larger. In my view, it is almost inevitable that we will see four or five times as many UPC cases in the not-too-distant future. As numbers grow, the influence of the UPC will grow as well. Whether, in five or ten years, companies will treat the UPC as their first choice forum – or whether they will usually run it in parallel with US litigation in major disputes – remains to be seen. The UPC would be well equipped for that: the territory it covers is large, Europe is still an important economy, and the UPC procedure is very attractive from a company's perspective. On sensible first steps: if you are worried about being sued, a protective letter can make a lot of sense – especially in divisions like Düsseldorf, where ex parte PIs are possible in principle. A protective letter is not very expensive in terms of court fees. There is also an internal system that ensures the court reads it before deciding on urgent measures. Of course, the content must have a certain quality; a poor protective letter can even backfire. If you are planning to sue someone before the UPC, you should be extremely well prepared when you file. You should already have all important documents and evidence at hand. As we discussed, it is hard to introduce new material later. One tool that is becoming more and more popular is inspection – not just at trade fairs, where we already saw cases very early, but also at company premises. Our firm has already handled such an inspection case. That is something you should keep in mind on both sides: it is a powerful evidence-gathering tool, but also a serious risk if you are on the receiving end. From the defendant's perspective, I do not think the UPC is unfair. If you do your job properly and put a solid revocation counterclaim on the table, then the patentee has only two months to prepare a full reply and all auxiliary requests. And there is a twist that makes life even harder for the patentee than at the EPO. At the EPO the question is mainly: do my auxiliary requests overcome the objections and are they patentable? At the UPC there is an additional layer: do I still have infringement under the amended claims? You may save your patent with an auxiliary request that no longer reads on the defendant's product. That is great for validity, but you have just lost the infringement case. You have kept the patent but lost the battle. And all of this under very tight time limits. That creates considerable pressure on both sides. How to contact Prof. Hüttermann Rolf Claessen:Thank you very much for this really great interview, Aloys. Inside our firm you have a nickname: “the walking encyclopedia of the Unified Patent Court” – because you have written so many books about it and have dealt with the UPC for such a long time. What is the best way for listeners to get in touch with you? Aloys Hüttermann:The easiest way is by email. You can simply write to me, and that is usually the best way to contact me. As you may have noticed, I also like to speak. I am a frequent speaker at conferences. If you happen to be at one of the conferences where I am on the programme – for example, next week in Hamburg – feel free to come up to me and ask me anything in person. But email is probably the most reliable first step. Rolf Claessen:Perfect. Thank you very much, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you. It was a pleasure to be on IP Fridays again. Some of your long-time listeners may remember that a few years ago – when you were not yet part of our firm – we already did an episode on the UPC, back when everything was still very speculative. It is great to be back now that the system is actually in place and working. Rolf Claessen:I am very happy to have you back on the show.

Szerda este első alkalommal vettük fel élőben a Tyúkólt, ráadásul egy nagyon különleges vetítéssel egybekötve! Az eseményen a közönség előbb megnézhette Podhradská Lea Apám lánya című filmjét (ami elnyerte a legjobb magyar dokumentumfilm díját a 22. Verzió Emberi Jogi Dokumentumfilm Fesztiválon), ezt követően pedig a rendezővel és meghívott vendégeinkkel beszélgettünk a film kapcsán nők elleni erőszakról, társadalmi előítéletekről, és a hallgatás okairól. Többek között. Miért beszélgettünk erről? A magyar férfiak alig több mint tizede gondolja azt, hogy a féltékenykedés is a párkapcsolati erőszak része. A bántalmazás társadalmi megítélése visszás és a fizikai agressziót sem tartják az emberek minden esetben erőszaknak. Ezeket a sokkoló tényeket eddig főleg a bántalmazott nőket támogató szervezetek tapasztalataiból tudtuk, nemrég viszont megjelent a PATENT Egyesület és a 21 Kutatóközpont közös kutatása, ami rámutat arra, hogy az egyes esetek mögött társadalmi mintázat húzódik meg, és valóban rendszerszintű a probléma. Kevesen bíznak az igazságszolgáltatás erejében, a legtöbben pedig úgy vélik, a családnak kellene segítenie. Csakhogy a család nem mindig segít. Erről, és még sokkal többről mesél az Apám lánya című film is (itt megnézhetitek az előzetesét), amelyben a rendező saját, több évtizede eltűnt nővérét, Denit keresi. A történet húsba vágóan érzékletes módon mutatja be nemcsak a bántalmazás, hanem a környezet közönyének hatásait is. Ezt az epizódot a filmvetítés után vettük fel, a rendezővel, valamint Les Krisztinával a PATENT Egyesület, és Kiss Katával a 21 Kutatóközpont szakértőjével beszélgettünk. Mielőtt elkezded hallgatni szólunk, hogy az adás több helyen is spoileres!!4! A filmet december 4-étől a magyar mozikban is vetítik majd, mi mindenképpen nagyon ajánljuk. Bővebben: 00:56 - Különleges ez az adás, nem nekünk kellett megnyomni a gombot! 03:28 - Miért nem elég a tapasztalati tudás, ha erőszakról van szó? Miért kellenek a számok? Mit lehet elérni a kutatással? 07:02 - Magyarországon a nők elleni erőszakot pillanatok alatt relativizálják. 10:40 - A társadalom szerint a családtól remélhetnek segítséget az érintettek. 15:15 - Ezeket a traumákat gyakorlatilag lehetetlen feldolgozni. És a viselkedésminták a családon belül újra is termelhetik magukat. 25:27 - Pozitív eredménynek számít, hogy Magyarországon majdnem mindenki elismeri, hogy a fizikai bántalmazás erőszaknak számít. 29:56 - A féltékenykedés megítélése sokkal visszásabb. A popkultúrában ráadásul sokszor úgy ábrázolják, hogy ennek helye van és romantikus. 34:21 - A film jelenetei, a beszélgetések iszonyú megterhelők, de Lea rengeteg dolgot kivágott az interjúkból, hogy emészthető legyen a végeredmény. 39:21 - Judit Hermann szerint a traumában a legsúlyosabb a hallgatás, a titok és a szégyen. 41:40 - Az áldozatoknak teljesen irreálisnak tűnő megküzdési stratégiákat kell választaniuk, hogy átvészeljék a legnehezebb időszakokat. Ez Deni esetében sincs másképp és a film meg is mutatja, hogyan alakul a személyisége ennek mentén. 44:45 - Deni elmesélte a történetét, de ezzel azokról is mesél, akik már nem tudnak megszólalni. Ez az adás két nappal a Néma Tanúk Felvonulás után jelenik meg, ahol olyan nők történeteit olvassák fel, akiket családon belüli vagy párkapcsolati erőszak során öltek meg. 46:00 - Nem tudunk semmi olyat mondani, ami pikk-pakk megoldaná a problémát. De igyekszünk hangot adni és felületet ahhoz, hogy ez a téma megjelenjen és az áldozatokhoz is eljussanak az olyan szervezetek, akik segíthetnek nekik. Ezúton is nagyon köszönjük, hogy ott voltatok velünk, hogy hallgattok minket, hogy időről időre írtok nekünk. Olvasnivaló: A PATENT és a 21 Kutatóközpont hivatkozott kutatásának összefoglalója itt érhető el. A PATENT Egyesület oldalát itt találod. A PATENT és a 21 Kutatóközpont közös kutatása a reproduktív jogok megítéléséről 2024-ben készült. Erről is beszélünk a podcastban, elolvasni pedig itt tudod az összefoglalót. Podcastunk kéthetente jelentkezik új adással, meghallgatható a 444 Spotify- és Apple-csatornáján is. Korábbi adásaink itt találhatók. Javaslataid, ötleteid, meglátásaid a tyukol@444.hu címre várjuk. Illusztráció: Kiss Bence/444See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Legginsy i sweter damski oversize to mój niezawodny patent na zimową stylizację. Jako miłośniczka nonszalanckich fasonów i wygody sięgam po ten duet od lat, dostosowując ulubione swetry do zmieniających się trendów z pomocą prostych trików. Kluczowy w tym przypadku jest wybór ponadczasowych fasonów wysokiej jakości swetrów z wełny, które są inwestycją na lata, a nie sezonowym kaprysem. Jakich zasad trzymam się, stylizując legginsy do swetra, a jakie nowe elementy wprowadzę w życie w tym roku? Autorka: Ewelina Kołodziej Artykuł przeczytasz pod linkiem: https://www.vogue.pl/a/legginsy-i-sweter-stylizacje-zima-2025-2026

At the Via Licensing Alliance's Bridge Summit 2025 in San Francisco, Clause 8 host Eli Mazour sat down with two leaders who ushered in the modern age of patent pools: Garrard Beeney, founder of Sullivan & Cromwell's IP practice, and John Sideris, Principal Licensing Counsel at Philips.Their conversation traces the evolution of patent pools — from the early days of MPEG LA and antitrust uncertainty to today's complex, global licensing ecosystem.Garrard Beeney recalls how early skepticism toward joint licensing eventually gave way to an appreciation of how collaboration between innovators can expand access, reduce friction, and drive technological growth. He warns, however, that increasing regulatory interference — particularly in Europe — risks undermining a system that largely works.John Sideris brings the perspective of a major technology innovator. He discusses how Philips built a licensing culture that values both innovation and fairness, explaining why patent pools remain one of the most efficient and balanced ways to manage IP rights. He also shares a rare insider view into how companies factor intellectual property costs into product development — and why responsible licensing keeps the innovation cycle healthy.Together, their insights offer a window into how markets, not mandates, can sustain innovation — and why listening across the licensor-licensee divide remains essential for the future of IP.

Neumann, Andreas www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Studio 9

Dive into the high-stakes world of firearm innovation with hosts Mark Kelley from Kelley Defense and Rick Hogg from War HOGG Tactical on the latest episode of the On The Range Podcast. Recorded live amid the adrenaline-fueled action of the CANCON Range event by Recoil Magazine, special guest Lawrence—President of Rare Breed Triggers—pulls back the curtain on his groundbreaking work developing forced reset triggers (FRT). From engineering the game-changing FRT-15 to navigating fierce court battles against rival companies over patented force reset trigger technology, Lawrence shares insider stories on legal fights, innovation hurdles, and the tactical edge these triggers bring to competitive shooting and self-defense. Perfect for fans of AR-15 upgrades, trigger mechanics, and 2A advocacy, this episode unpacks the drama behind rapid-fire tech that's reshaping the industry. Catch it now on the On The Range Podcast and arm yourself with knowledge! ForceResetTriggers RareBreedTriggers FRT15 PatentBattles CANCONRecoil AR15Triggers TacticalInnovation

Today, I'm joined by Shahab Elmi, co-founder & CEO of Cymbiotika. With 100M+ packets sold in its first six years, Cymbiotika is bringing transparency to the supplement industry with liposomal formulations and rigorous third-party testing. In this episode, we discuss building a supplement brand focused on efficacy over marketing. We also cover: Liposomal delivery as a differentiator Why churn reveals true product efficacy Avoiding the wellness DTC race to the bottom    Subscribe to the podcast → insider.fitt.co/podcast   Subscribe to our newsletter → insider.fitt.co/subscribe   Follow us on LinkedIn → linkedin.com/company/fittinsider    Cymbiotika's Website: www.cymbiotika.com  Cymbiotika's Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cymbiotika/  - The Fitt Insider Podcast is brought to you by EGYM. Visit EGYM.com to learn more about its smart fitness ecosystem for fitness and health facilities. Fitt Talent: https://talent.fitt.co/  Consulting: https://consulting.fitt.co/  Investments: https://capital.fitt.co/   Chapters:  (00:00) Introduction  (01:15) Shahab's background and Cymbiotika's origin story  (02:00) The problem with the supplement industry  (02:45) Why transparency and testing matter  (04:15) Churn rate as the ultimate success metric  (05:45) Organic celebrity endorsements vs paid sponsorships  (09:00) Liposomal delivery technology explained  (12:30) Manufacturing in-house vs outsourcing  (16:00) The DTC race to the bottom  (18:30) Building trust through radical transparency  (20:30) Competing on efficacy, not marketing spend  (23:00) Taking on industry fraud and fake claims  (24:30) Announcing multiple third-party clinical trials  (26:50) Patent enforcement and liposome validation  (27:35) Product roadmap (29:25) Conclusion  

In this episode of the LYB Podcast, host Deepi Sidhu speaks with Simon Foster, Industry Marketing Manager at LyondellBasell, about the North America launch of the Purell polymer portfolio. Already trusted in Europe, the Purell portfolio includes medical-grade polyolefins designed for use in applications such as medical devices and pharmaceutical packaging. Simon shares how Purell supports industry needs for consistency, reliability and regulatory readiness — backed by the Purell Service Concept, which includes traceability systems, change notification policies and documentation aligned with global standards. If you're working in healthcare manufacturing — or want to learn how LYB is enabling material innovation — this episode offers insights into a milestone launch that expands local access to proven solutions. Connect with us on social media: LinkedIn: LyondellBasell Facebook: LyondellBasell Instagram: LyondellBasell X: @LyondellBasell Disclaimer Purell is a trademark owned and/or used by the LyondellBasell family of companies and is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Before using a product sold by a company of the LyondellBasell family of companies, users should make their own independent determination that the product is suitable for the intended use and can be used safely and legally.   LYONDELLBASELL MAKES NO WARRANTY; EXPRESS OR IMPLIED (INCLUDING ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR ANY WARRANTY) OTHER THAN AS SEPARATELY AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES IN A CONTRACT. LyondellBasell prohibits or restricts the use of its products in certain applications.  For further information on restrictions or prohibitions of use, please contact a LyondellBasell representative. Users should review the applicable Safety Data Sheet before handling the product. Forward-looking statements The statements in this podcast relating to matters that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions of management of LYB, which are believed to be reasonable at the time made and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. When used in this podcast, the words “estimate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “should,” “will,” “expect,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Actual results could differ materially based on factors including, but not limited to, market conditions, the business cyclicality of the chemical, polymers and refining industries; the availability, cost and price volatility of raw materials and utilities, particularly the cost of oil, natural gas, and associated natural gas liquids; our ability to successfully implement initiatives identified pursuant to our Value Enhancement Program and generate anticipated earnings; competitive product and pricing pressures; labor conditions; our ability to attract and retain key personnel; operating interruptions (including leaks, explosions, fires, weather-related incidents, mechanical failure, unscheduled downtime, supplier disruptions, labor shortages, strikes, work stoppages or other labor difficulties, transportation interruptions, spills and releases and other environmental risks); the supply/demand balances for our and our joint ventures' products, and the related effects of industry production capacities and operating rates; our ability to manage costs; future financial and operating results; benefits and synergies of any proposed transactions; receipt of required regulatory approvals and the satisfaction of closing conditions for our proposed transactions; final investment decision and the construction and operation of any proposed facilities described; our ability to align our assets and expand our core; legal and environmental proceedings; tax rulings, consequences or proceedings; technological developments, and our ability to develop new products and process technologies; our ability to meet our sustainability goals, including the ability to operate safely, increase production of recycled and renewable-based polymers to meet our targets and forecasts, and reduce our emissions and achieve net zero emissions by the time set in our goals; our ability to procure energy from renewable sources; our ability to build a profitable Circular and Low Carbon Solutions business; the continued operation of and successful shutdown and closure of the Houston Refinery, including within the expected time frame; potential governmental regulatory actions; political unrest and terrorist acts; risks and uncertainties posed by international operations, including foreign currency fluctuations; and our ability to comply with debt covenants and to repay our debt. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements can be found in the Risk Factors section of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, which can be found at www.lyb.com on the Investor Relations page and on the Securities and Exchange Commission's website at www.sec.gov.There is no assurance that any of the actions, events, or results of the forward-looking statements will occur, or if any of them do, what impact they will have on our results of operations or financial condition. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they were made and are based on the estimates and opinions of management of LYB at the time the statements are made. LYB does not assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements should circumstances or management's estimates or opinions change, except as required by law. This podcast contains time-sensitive information that is accurate only as of the date hereof. Information contained in this release is unaudited and is subject to change. We undertake no obligation to update the information presented herein, except as required by law. Our reported emissions and expected reductions are based on a combination of measured and estimated data and are based on industry standards and best practices, including the Greenhouse Gas Protocol and guidance from the American Petroleum Institute. Emissions reported are estimates only, and data is subject to change as methods, data quality, and technology improvements occur. Our goals to reduce emissions are good-faith efforts based on current relevant data and methodology, which could be changed or refined as we evolve our approach to identifying, measuring, and addressing emissions.    

The best biotech and pharmaceutical innovations mean nothing if they can't be protected—and protected fast. Our next guest, Josh Goldberg, is solving this challenge as co-managing partner at Nath, Goldberg & Meyer, the #1 ranked patent law firm for biotech and pharmaceutical technologies. With nearly three decades of IP law experience and a unique background as a lab researcher, Josh brings an insider's understanding of how innovation actually happens. He's helped industry leaders like Amgen, Takeda, and GlaxoSmithKline turn breakthrough treatments into patent-protected portfolios—often in under a year instead of the typical four-year timeline. Driven by a passion for focus and strategic IP timing, Josh shares his pioneering approach to biotech and pharmaceutical patent prosecution. Join us to discover how smart IP strategy drives licensing power, regulatory success, and company valuation. Let's go!Episode Highlights:Focus drives success – Companies fail by trying to do everything at once; staying deliberate and focused is key to making real impactOne-year patent timelines vs. four years – Josh uses USPTO's Track 1 program to secure patents in record time, improving fundraising and M&A positioningClient-centered approach wins – Listening to unique client needs instead of one-size-fits-all strategies earned the firm its #1 rankingDiagnostic patents are back – New USPTO Director signals the patent office is "open for business" again after a decade of restrictionsScientist turned patent attorney – Josh's lab background gives him insider understanding of how innovation actually happensAbout our Guest: Joshua is the patent attorney innovation-driven pharmaceutical companies call when they need to turn complicated technologies into protected assets in record time.As co-managing partner at Nath, Goldberg & Meyer—the #1 ranked patent law firm for biotech and pharmaceutical technologies in both 2024 and 2025—Joshua leads IP efforts across industries like biotech, pharma, agriculture, renewable energy, and advanced materials. Whether it's a blockbuster acne treatment like DUAC, a vitamin D analog lotion like Sorilux, OTC solutions like Salonpas and Germagic, or a leading drug used to reduce stomach acid and treat conditions like GERD, ulcers, and heartburn—like Protonix—Joshua helps turn high-stakes R&D into patent-protected portfolios, often in under a year instead of the typical four-year timeline.Though his climate and agricultre IP expertise has made him famous as the “green patent guy,” Joshua moves between disciplines skillfully and has helped industry leaders like Amgen, Takeda, Guilford Pharmaceuticals, Mayne, and Stiefel Laboratories (which was acquired by GlaxoSmithKline) build pharma portfolios that hold up under investor, acquirer, and FDA scrutiny.His journey didn't begin in IP law, but in the lab, researching experimental pharmaceutical delivery systems. It gave him an edge most attorneys don't have: understanding how innovation actually happens, and how to protect it without slowing a business down. Links Supporting This Episode: Nath, Goldberg & Meyer Website: CLICK HEREJoshua Goldberg LinkedIn page: CLICK HERENath, Goldberg & Meyer LinkedIn: CLICK HEREMike Biselli LinkedIn page: CLICK HEREMike Biselli Twitter page:...

Jackie Samuelson, founder of Alpha Lady LLC, discusses why she started her company, her personal reason for inventing a new nursing cover, whether tariffs are affecting her business, and her experience pitching the "sharks" on the ABC television program "Shark Tank."

Bears and phishing and crazy old men. All the new you love form Japan. Send us a voice message https://www.speakpipe.com/ChunkMcBeefChest Linktree https://linktr.ee/chunkmcbeefchest

It's been quite the year for Obsidian Entertainment. Following three major releases in one year with Avowed, Grounded 2 (Early Access), and The Outer Worlds 2. Obsidian finds itself discussing their future and relevance in a world where "Microsoft Gaming" exists. Cog and Hoeg discuss the significance of revisiting the Pillars of Eternity universe with their latest turn based announcement. What does the future also hold for this studio? In addition to all the latest news in the world of Xbox! Please keep in mind that our timestamps are approximate, and will often be slightly off due to dynamic ad placement. 0:00:00 - Intro0:02:50 - Health Is Wealth0:05:01 - Does Cog Really Hate Exclusives?0:17:14 - Xbox Hybrid Future?0:33:59 - Cancelling Game Pass Ultimate?0:40:32 - Destiny 2 New Renegades expansion0:49:39 - Nintendo's Patent in Palworld Dispute is Being Re-examined1:03:54 - Devs believe Steam has a monopoly on PC games?1:14:03 - Consumers spend more on remakes than remasters1:22:42 - Battlefield 6 Has Reportedly Sold Over 10 Million Copies1:31:21 - Arc Raiders early success & roadmap1:40:33 - Black Ops 7 ROG Xbox Ally X Support1:44:22 - Expedition 33 & Final Fantasy VII Remake event1:52:52 - What We Are Playing2:11:36 - Obsidian announces Pillars of Eternity Turn-Based Mode & talks future2:42:41 - Xbox Q1 hardware sales down2:54:20 - Xbox - Ex-Boxer commercial Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Episode 271Special Guest:Philip Millerhttps://www.instagram.com/millermadeworkshop/https://www.youtube.com/@MillerMadeWorkshop Sponsor:Gorilla GlueA trusted brand with decades of experience! From glue, to woodfiller, to workshop floor kits, they have everything you need for your next project. Check out their new products along with great deals on all your trusted favorites at: www.gorillatough.comWTB WoodworkingCheck out WTBwoodworking.com for all your woodworking needs! In store specials, Giveaways, custom wood milling, and more!Huntingdon Valley PA Store now open!Enter the giveaway by going to:https://www.wtbwoodworking.com/giveaway Sign up for Patreon for Early access, and special Patreon-only content:https://www.patreon.com/anotherwoodshoppodcastPATREON GIVEAWAY!Donate to Maker's For St. JudeEvery $5 earns you an extra entry in the Patreon Giveaway (Paid Patrons Only)http://fundraising.stjude.org/goto/anotherwoodshoppodcast Whats on our bench:

In this episode of The Game Deflators, John and Ryan welcome special guest Barry Carenza from PM Studios! Barry dives into the exciting lineup of upcoming titles from PM Studios and gives listeners a behind-the-scenes look at how ESRB ratings are set up for video games—yes, there's more to it than just slapping a letter on the box. The trio then tackles the latest legal drama surrounding Palworld, including updates on the Nintendo JPO patent denial and what it could mean for the game's future. In a surprising twist, they discuss the bombshell news of Halo making its way to the PS5—could this be the beginning of a new era in cross-platform gaming? To wrap things up, the crew takes a nostalgic trip back to the 16-bit hardwood with a review of NBA Jam for the SNES. Is it still "on fire" after all these years? 00:00 Introduction to the Gameplayers Podcast 02:30 Recent Game Pickups and Personal Updates 07:57 Current Gaming Experiences and Reviews 12:49 The ESRB Rating Process Explained 19:17 Behind the Scenes in Game Development 25:53 Navigating Game Quests and Challenges 31:17 Looking Ahead: Future Gaming Plans 32:31 Nintendo's Legal Struggles with Pal World 39:15 The Impact of Competition on Game Development 44:16 The Patent Office and Legal Maneuvering 54:13 The Evolution of Console Wars 01:00:15 Microsoft and Sony: A New Era of Cooperation 01:08:21 The Future of Gaming Resolutions 01:11:23 The Xbox Performance Dilemma 01:13:34 Physical vs Digital: The Game Ownership Debate 01:20:53 NBA Jam: A Classic Revisited Want more Game Deflators content? Find us at www.thegamedeflators.com     Find us on Social Media Twitter @GameDeflators Instagram @TheGameDeflators Facebook @TheGameDeflators YouTube @The Game Deflators   Permission for intro and outro music provided by Matthew Huffaker http://www.youtube.com/user/teknoaxe 2_25_18 

Daniel, Dave, Eric and Marty reflect on recent reviews of the M5, some new patents, and outcomes from the two day developer conference. New M5 Vision Pro Apple's Vision Pro with M5 is better than the first, but still awfully lonelyhttps://www.theverge.com/tech/807963/apple-vision-pro-m5-review-specs-release-dateVideo: Testing the New M5 Apple Vision Prohttps://www.macrumors.com/2025/10/30/m5-vision-pro-review/Apple Vision Pro M5 review: A better beta is still a betahttps://www.engadget.com/ar-vr/apple-vision-pro-m5-review-a-better-beta-is-still-a-beta-130000284.htmlApple has improved the Vision Pro, but its days could be numberedhttps://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/mobile/wearables/apple-vision-pro-m5-review-singapore-price-buySamsung XR reviewSamsung Galaxy XR review: This Apple Vision Pro challenger is cheaper, lighter and buggierhttps://www.tomsguide.com/computing/augmented-reality/galaxy-xr-review SAMSUNG & GOOGLE SHOW OFF THEIR ANSWER TO THE APPLE VISION PROhttps://www.slashgear.com/2014442/google-samsung-galaxy-xr-reveal-price/ Side-by-side comparisonsM5 Apple Vision Pro vs. Samsung Galaxy XR: Processing power vs. Alhttps://appleinsider.com/inside/apple-vision-pro/vs/m5-apple-vision-pro-vs-samsung-galaxy-xr-processing-power-vs-ai Samsung Galaxy XR Beats Vision Pro Display at Half Pricehttps://virtual.reality.news/news/samsung-galaxy-xr-beats-vision-pro-display-at-half-price/ PatentsApple Reinvents Gesture Input for AR/VR with Sensor-Based Pose Detectionhttps://x.com/PatentlyApple/status/1983874991570743520Apple files patent that details Nose-Bridge Eye-Tracking System for Smartglasseshttps://x.com/PatentlyApple/status/1983851822717800641 Apple wins Patent for Supplemental Mirror System that could Boost Immersion in Future Apple Headsetshttps://x.com/PatentlyApple/status/1983557913475252709How to downgradeHOW TO DOWNGRADE VISION PROhttps://justin.searls.co/posts/how-to-downgrade-vision-pro-dfu-mode/ 2 day developer programTwo Day Developer Program by Apple Held During the M5 Vision Pro Launch Weekhttps://www.ilounge.com/news/two-day-developer-program-by-apple-held-during-the-m5-vision-pro-launch-week Headband jokersAl jokers take Vision Pro's new headband to wild extremeshttps://www.cultofmac.com/news/vision-pro-dual-knit-band-goes-wild Small TouchWhat's your favorite "small touch" or hidden detail you've discovered while using the Vision Pro?https://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1on42dv/whats_your_favorite_small_touch_or_hidden_detail/ 256GB returned and got 1TBhttps://www.reddit.com/r/VisionPro/comments/1om8jvl/256gb_returned_and_got_1tb APPS Thanks to Matt for Test Flight of Wyld Stylus https://testflight.apple.com/join/UjyBzzsn Swiss Alpine Questhttps://apps.apple.com/us/app/swiss-alpine-quest/id675471153Finalist Daily Plannerhttps://apps.apple.com/us/app/finalist-daily-planner/id6447014685?platform=vision Website: ThePodTalk.NetEmail: ThePodTalkNetwork@gmail.com YouTube: YouTube.com/@VisionProFiles

DPS Gaming Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBGYnElxgf6v24IahArK6XgCheck out Gaming Forte:https://www.youtube.com/gaming_fortehttps://twitter.com/gaming_forte​Check out SloMoBackSlap:https://twitch.tv/slomobackslaphttps://twitter.com/slomobackslaphttps://www.tiktok.com/@UCClIAvHh1FKUQcdwgQH82Qw

 In this episode of Small Biz Florida, we sit down with Arthur Watson, founder of Top Tool USA, during the 2025 FloridaMakes MakeMore Manufacturing Summit in Orlando. Arthur shares his powerful journey from construction inspector to inventor, describing how a recurring workplace hazard, lifting 240-pound manhole covers, sparked the creation of a patented safety tool now positioned to revolutionize the utility and construction industry. With help from the Florida SBDC, Arthur transitioned from a great idea to a business-ready product. He explains the steps behind his invention, the critical role of SBDC mentorship, and his goals for scaling Top Tool USA through licensing or manufacturing partnerships. This podcast episode was recorded live at the MakeMore Manufacturing Summit hosted at the Embassy Suites Downtown Orlando. This podcast is made possible by the Florida SBDC Network and sponsored by Florida First Capital. Connect with Our Guest: https://toptoolusa.com/

OA1203 - Happy Halloween! We take shelter from a year of ghoulish legal news in the COURTHOUSE OF HORROR, a cabinet of macabre legal curiosities including: “SO I TRADEMARKED AN AXE MURDERER”: The historic Lizzie Borden House takes a whack at a nearby coffee shop “THE BONE DETECTOR”: Recent patent bar survivor Jenessa Seymour brings us the unbelievable story of the spookiest--and silliest!--lie detector ever registered by the US Patent & Trademark Office “ATTACK OF THE TORTIOUS CLOWNS”: Can you sue a haunted house for your fright-related injuries?  “THE GREENBRIER GHOST”: The bizarre tale of how a victim's testimony from beyond the grave helped to convict her killer in an 1896 West Virginia murder trial “CANDYMAN 5: SUMMARY JUDGMENT”: In a tasty conclusion to last year's Halloween footnote on consumers disappointed with the spookiness of their seasonal treats, a Florida federal judge finds as a matter of law that there is no wrong way to make a Reese's. Finally, we close on a serious note with Jenessa's guide to how every registered voter can do their part next week to change the plot of our ongoing American horror story. Order in Ghost Adventures LLC v. Miss Lizzie's Coffee, LLC, No. 23-2000 (1st  Cir.)(Selya, J.)(11/15/2024) “Federal Judge Known for Polysyllabic Prose Dies at 90,” Trip Gabriel, The New York Times, (3/21/2025) “Would You Confess Your Criminal Misdeeds to This Skeleton?,” Cara Giaimo, Atlas Obscura (5/16/2017) “Apparatus for Obtaining Criminal Confessions and Photographically Recording Them,” Patent #1749090, H.A. Shelby (filed 8/10/1927) “The Greenbrier Ghost Reexamined,” Greenbrier Historical Society, Arabeth Balseko (1/20/2022) Summary judgment order in Munoz v. Six Flags St. Louis LLC (10/12/2022)(Wallach, J.) Order granting motion to dismiss in Vidal et al v. The Hershey Company, FLSD No. 24-60831 (9/19/2025)(Damian, J.) “Your Cheat Sheet To The 2025 General Elections,” Daniel Nichanian, Bolts (10/1/2025) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Live Now! Arc Raiders Surges, Nintendo Patent Purges, Outer Worlds 2, Escape From Duckov, The best gaming podcast #551https://youtube.com/live/wfUpNRHCmQcArc Raiders blasts onto Steam with breakout numbers while Nintendo catches some heat over a head-scratching week. We unpack The Outer Worlds 2's launch vibes—Game Pass buzz, early impressions, and what's next—then quack our way through the surprise sensation Escape From Duckov and why it's pecking at the big boys. Plus quick hits, spicy takes, and your mailbag in the back half.

Check out our Patreon for a daily Lawrence Select™ Meme: https://www.patreon.com/insidegamesYTJoin the Inside Games notification Discord server for alerts when we publish new videos: http://discord.gg/ArvphbMPFJHosted by:Lawrence: http://twitch.tv/sirlarr | Bruce: http://twitch.tv/brucegreene Edited by: Shooklyn: https://linktr.ee/ShooklynSources --https://www.ign.com/articles/fortnite-sidekicks-are-here-epic-confirms-you-can-customize-the-appearance-of-your-pet-just-once-and-its-permanenthttps://www.epicgames.com/help/en-US/fortnite-battle-royale-c-202300000001636/gameplay-c-202300000001721/how-do-i-customize-the-appearance-of-my-sidekick-a202300000021343https://www.epicgames.com/help/en-US/fortnite-battle-royale-c-202300000001636/gameplay-c-202300000001721/how-do-i-customize-the-appearance-of-my-sidekick-a202300000021343https://www.reddit.com/r/FortNiteBR/comments/1okk24y/comment/nmbdws5/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_buttonhttps://www.reddit.com/r/FortNiteBR/comments/1okk24y/comment/nmbpiqu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_buttonhttps://www.rockpapershotgun.com/amazon-have-reportedly-cancelled-their-lord-of-the-rings-mmo-againhttps://www.newworld.com/en-gb/news/articles/update-on-new-worldhttps://www.ign.com/articles/mmo-new-world-enters-maintenance-mode-as-amazon-cuts-14000-jobs-but-whats-happening-with-its-lord-of-the-rings-mmohttps://www.change.org/p/reinstate-ags-new-world-aeternum-team?cs_tk=A-UAbO118d4nRqtmC2kAAHicq64FAAF1APk0NTA1OTk3OTkxYjdkNWE5ZGRkOTQyMjQ2ODBkMjkwMWZlYWU4OGRlN2NkMDk2Y2M1N2E1M2I0ZDVmM2I1NDZi&utm_campaign=d8ca4022446a43d1ad1af47892f1fcf3&utm_content=20250430_supporter_milestone_5000_v1&utm_medium=email&utm_source=633943_supporter_milestone_5000&utm_term=itblhttps://www.reddit.com/r/MMORPG/comments/1okullc/new_world_players_on_steam_fell_from_41k_on/https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/take-twos-ceo-doesnt-think-a-grand-theft-auto-built-with-ai-would-be-very-good/https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/nintendo-has-been-denied-a-patent-in-japan-for-a-pokemon-like-capturing-mechanic/https://gamesfray.com/japan-patent-office-rejects-nintendo-application-relevant-to-palworld-dispute-cites-games-like-ark-as-prior-art-after-third-party-submissionMusic —Switch It Up - Silent Partner https://youtu.be/r_HRbXhOir8Funk Down - MK2 https://youtu.be/SPN_Ssgqlzc

Abu⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and Obssa continue their read-through of ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Exhalation⁠⁠⁠ by Ted Chiang. They dive into the fifth short story in the collection, Dacey's Patent Automatic Nanny, and explore the challenges of raising children in a technological world. Get bonus content and helpful reading materials: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/scifibookclubpod⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Keep the conversation going in our free Discord: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://discord.gg/bVrhwWm7j4⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Watch the video version of this episode: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.youtube.com/@loreparty⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Keep up with this season's reading schedule: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://tinyurl.com/sfbc-season3⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Refah için Hukuk'un bu bölümünde Daha İyi Yargı Derneği Başkanı Mehmet Gün, 7 Eylül'de Resmi Gazete'de 2026 – 2028 yılları için yayımlanan Orta Vadeli Program'ı (OVP) Gamze Elvan'a değerlendiriyor. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Dr. Thomas Brewer, a nutritional blood microscopist, discuss the powerful insights your blood can reveal about your health and wellness. Dr. Brewer explains the difference between live and dry blood microscopy and how looking at your blood in real time can uncover everything from nutrient absorption issues to stress markers, immune system activity, and the presence of toxins or pathogens. He also shares practical guidance on how often to test, what to watch for, and how lifestyle choices—from diet to supplements—show up in your blood. Learn more at https://www.drthomasbrewer.com.Bio:Dr. Brewer obtained his PhD in inorganic chemistry from Michigan State University in 1992. He worked in both industry and the national laboratory system as a senior research scientist for over a decade before starting his own consulting business.Dr. Brewer's research expertise in the disciplines of heterogeneous catalysis, waste remediation, and metal oxides resulted in the granting of one U.S. Patent, sixteen invention disclosures, and numerous papers and journal articles. His main strength is the ability to explain both complex and fundamental scientific phenomena in a simple and straightforward manner.He lectures on the importance of enzymes, macronutrients (proteins, carbohydrates, and fat sources), micronutrients (vitamins and mineral sources), the root cause of disease and illness, and how one can heal oneself from any health issue using fundamental principles.Laura is a Celebrity Psychic who has been featured by Buzzfeed, The Weakest Link, Beast Games, NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, the CW, Motherboard by Vice Magazine and the #1” Ron Burgundy Podcast” with Will Ferrell. Laura Powers is a clairvoyant, psychic medium, writer, actress, producer, writer, and speaker who helps other receive guidance and communicate with loved ones. Laura travels nationally and internationally for clients, events, television appearances, and speaking engagements. She is also the author of 7 books on the psychic realm and 1 book on podcasting. Laura also works as a psychic, entertainer, and creative entrepreneur.For more information about Laura and her work, you can go to her website www.healingpowers.net or find her on X @thatlaurapowers, on Facebook at @realhealingpowers and @mllelaura, and on Instagram, TikTok and Insight Timer @laurapowers44.

What happens when the USPTO lets artificial intelligence join the patent process? In this episode, I breaks down the brand-new Automated Search Pilot Program, a six-month experiment where AI runs a pre-exam prior art search before a human examiner even touches your application. I explains what it is, how to join, who it helps (and who it doesn't), and why it might just change the way patents get examined, all with some healthy skepticism about letting robots near our inventions.   Connect with Adam Diament E-mail: adiament@nolanheimann.com   Website: https://www.nolanheimann.com/legal-team/adam-diament   Phone/Text: (424)281-0162   YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5cTADZzJfPoyQMjnW-rtRw   Instagram:  https://www.instagram.com/trademarkpatentlaw/   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-diament-j-d-ph-d-180a005/   Amazon Book Page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B005SV2RZC/allbooks?ingress=0&visitId=831aff71-513b-4158-ad73-386ede491e93  

Ford Raptor T1 updates, Jeep Gladiator 4xe is dead, bad credit for new trucks, new Wrangler color, Hurricane-powered Dodge drag truck, Cobb Tuning news, Ford patent, recalls, and St. Bonaventure's parish festival. The Truck Show Podcast is brought to you in partnership with AMSOIL, Kershaw Knives, and OVR Mag.

Walmart has announced they will be removing certain additives and chemicals from their store brand products, signaling a significant health minded shift driven in part by MAHA's advocacy. Author and blogger Vani Hari, known as the “Food Babe,” joins the Rundown to discuss the potential ripple effects of Walmart's decision across the food industry, the history of additives and chemicals in the American food supply, and the growing consumer demand for cleaner, more natural products. An AI-generated actress, named Tilly Norwood, is causing an uproar in Hollywood. She's the creation of the UK-based artificial intelligence production studio named Particle 6, and allegedly has talent agencies interested in her. Patent law expert John Rizvi joins the Rundown to discuss the rise of Tilly Norwood, concerns that AI is stealing copyrighted material from humans, and how this rapidly evolving technology may impact the entertainment industry. Plus, commentary from Kennedy, host of the Kennedy Saves the World podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Pokémon Sleep is bringing Natu and Xatu to the game with a new berry burst event. A new Pokémon Center opens in Japan next month. Pokémon and Nintendo got a patent approved that they filed back in 2023 and most of the internet didn't read it, so we do for you. Pokémon GO announced another Tour in February of 2026. LA will host a Pokémon TCG event this weekend that is free to the public. TIMESTAMPS00:00:00-Introduction00:03:35-Pokémon Sleep News00:18:20-Free Cherish Ball Slowpoke00:24:40-Pokémon Patent About Summons00:52:40-Pokémon GO News01:08:50-LA TCG Event01:20:30-CreditsLINKS

Husband-and-wife team William Firth Wells and Mildred Weeks Wells conducted research that had the potential to make a big difference in the safety of indoor air. But it didn’t really have a significant impact on public health. Research: Associated Press. “Super-Oyster Is On its Way to Dinner Table Bigger and Better Bivalve Sports Pedigree.” 3/13/1927. https://www.loc.gov/resource/sn84020064/1927-03-13/ed-1/?sp=14 “Brought Back to Texas.” The Houston Semi-Weekly Post. 12/26/1889. https://www.newspapers.com/image/1196039760/ Decatur Daily Review. “Scientists Fight Flu Germs with Violet Ray.” 7/30/1936. https://www.newspapers.com/image/94335504/ Evening Star. “Scientific Trap-shooter.” 6/26/1937. https://www.loc.gov/resource/sn83045462/1937-06-26/ed-1/?sp=7&q=William+Firth+Wells&r=0.668,0.557,0.438,0.158,0 Fair, Gordon M. and William Weeks Wells. “Method and Apparatus for Preventing Infection.” U.S. Patent 2,198,867. https://ppubs.uspto.gov/api/pdf/downloadPdf/2198867 Hall, Dominic. “New Center for the History of Medicine Artifact - Wells Air Centrifuge.” Harvard Countway Library. https://countway.harvard.edu/news/new-center-history-medicine-artifact-wells-air-centrifuge “Incubator Is Now Oyster Nurse.” Washington Times. 10/1/1925. https://www.loc.gov/resource/sn84026749/1925-10-01/ed-1/?sp=12 Lewis, Carol Sutton. “Mildred Weeks Wells’s Work on Airborne Transmission Could Have Saved Many Lives—If the Scientific Establishment Listened.” Lost Women of Science Podcast. Scientific American. 5/22/2025. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-public-health-researcher-and-her-engineer-husband-found-how-diseases-can/ Library and Archives Team. “William Firth Wells and Mildred Weeks Wells.” Washington College. https://www.washcoll.edu/people_departments/offices/miller-library/archives-special-collections/archives-blog/Wells%20papers.php Molenti, Megan. “The 60-Year-Old Scientific Screwup That Helped Covid Kill.” Wired. 5/13/2021. https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwup-that-helped-covid-kill/ Perkins JE, Bahlke AM, Silverman HF. Effect of Ultra-violet Irradiation of Classrooms on Spread of Measles in Large Rural Central Schools Preliminary Report. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1947 May;37(5):529-37. PMID: 18016521; PMCID: PMC1623610. Randall, Katherine and Ewing, E. Thomas and Marr, Linsey and Jimenez, Jose and Bourouiba, Lydia, How Did We Get Here: What Are Droplets and Aerosols and How Far Do They Go? A Historical Perspective on the Transmission of Respiratory Infectious Diseases (April 15, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3829873 Riley, Richard L. “What Nobody Needs to Know About Airborne Infection.” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. Volume 163, Issue 1. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/10.1164/ajrccm.163.1.hh11-00 Simon, Clea. “Did a socially awkward scientist set back airborne disease control?” The Harvard Gazette. 3/7/2025. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/03/did-a-socially-awkward-scientist-set-back-airborne-disease-control/ “Texas State News.” McKinney Weekly Democrat-Gazette. 4/17/1890. https://www.newspapers.com/image/65385350/ WELLS MW, HOLLA WA. VENTILATION IN THE FLOW OF MEASLES AND CHICKENPOX THROUGH A COMMUNITY: Progress Report, Jan. 1, 1946 to June 15, 1949, Airborne Infection Study, Westchester County Department of Health. JAMA. 1950;142(17):1337–1344. doi:10.1001/jama.1950.02910350007004 WELLS MW. VENTILATION IN THE SPREAD OF CHICKENPOX AND MEASLES WITHIN SCHOOL ROOMS. JAMA. 1945;129(3):197–200. doi:10.1001/jama.1945.02860370019006 WELLS WF, WELLS MW. AIR-BORNE INFECTION. JAMA. 1936;107(21):1698–1703. doi:10.1001/jama.1936.02770470016004 WELLS WF, WELLS MW. AIR-BORNE INFECTION: SANITARY CONTROL. JAMA. 1936;107(22):1805–1809. doi:10.1001/jama.1936.02770480037010 Wells, W F, and M W Wells. “Measurement of Sanitary Ventilation.” American journal of public health and the nation's health vol. 28,3 (1938): 343-50. doi:10.2105/ajph.28.3.343 Wells, William Firth and Gordon Maskew Fair. Viability of B. coli Exposed to Ultra-Violet Radiation in Air.Science82,280-281(1935).DOI:10.1126/science.82.2125.280.b Wells, William Firth and Mildred Weeks Wells. Measurement of Sanitary Ventilation American Journal of Public Health and the Nations Health 28, 343_350, https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.28.3.343 Zimmer, Carl. “Air-Borne: The Hidden History of the Life We Breathe.” Dutton. 2025. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.