Université de Poitiers, France EIPTN Poitiers 2018 & Dr Janice Denoncourt Université de Poitiers, France 8-10 November 2018   ©J Denoncourt 2018

A little about me... ©J Denoncourt 2017-2018 Dr Janice Denoncourt BA, LLB, LLM, PhD, SFHEA Senior Lecturer in Law Editor Nottingham Law Journal 2018 Vol.1 Solicitor (non-practising) Nottingham Law School Nottingham Trent University 50 Shakespeare Street Nottingham NG1 4FQ (Direct Tel:      +44 (0)115 848 2130 E-mail:         janice.denoncourt@ntu.ac.uk      Website:            www.ntu.ac.uk    orcid.org/0000-0003-2176-8935 Module Leader LLM Intellectual Property & Innovation Module Leader LLM Intellectual Property Sport & Commerce Module Leader LLM Competition and Intellectual Property Law Module Leader DL LLB Intellectual Property Director NLS IP Research Group https://www.ntu.ac.uk/research/groups-and-centres/groups/intellectual-property-research-group Author Intellectual Property, Finance and Corporate Governance https://www.routledge.com/Intellectual-Property-Finance-and-Corporate-Governance/Denoncourt/p/book/9781138186255 Author Q & A Intellectual Property 2016  https://www.routledge.com/QA-Intellectual-Property-Law/Denoncourt/p/book/9781138831001 Amazon Author page https://www.amazon.co.uk/Janice-Denoncourt/e/B001H6OH50/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1547034224&sr=8-1 European Intellectual Property Teachers’ Network (EIPTN) Committee www.euptn.eu ©J Denoncourt 2017-2018

Intellectual Property Research Group lead IP research within the East Midlands region and focusses on: IP law and practice IP law education IP commercialisation   www.ntu.ac.uk/ipresearch Intellectual Property Research Group IP law and practice IP law education IP commercialisation   www.ntu.ac.uk/ipresearch

Teaching IP to Entrepreneurs IP law has been introduced into Business Schools and entrepreneurship programs over the past decade. I teach IP on the MSc Entrepreneurship programme. Entrepreneurship is also expanding its influence to art and design, humanities and social sciences. This is shaping curricular reform and influencing collaborative research. There is a need to ‘re-think’ the curriculum to urgently address ‘predatory IP behaviour’ faced by entrepreneurs and SMEs.

Vital nexus between entrepreneurship and economic growth Incredibly important impact that entrepreneurial activity has prosperity, improvement in the quality of human life and the alleviation of poverty.

Revising the IP curriculum Create IP aware, robust students able to respond to predators and complete the business lifecycle Public Co. Large Private Co. SMEs Micro company Start-up Inventor/creator/entrepreneur ©J Denoncourt 2018

Data from EUIPO SME Scoreboard 2016 SMEs are the life blood of our economy as they represent about 99% of businesses in the EU. Any sound policy in favour of investment and growth based on IP therefore requires detailed knowledge of how SMEs stand towards innovation and IP. http://www.innovaccess.eu/sites/default/files/sme_scoreboard_study_2016_en.pdf

Microbusiness and SMEs rule the forest “SMEs are global drivers of technological innovation and economic development. Perhaps their importance has been eclipsed by the mega-multinational corporate entities. However, whereas the corporations might be conceptualized as towering sequoia trees, SMEs represent the deep, broad, fertile forest floor that nourishes, sustains and regenerates the global economic ecosystem.” Stanley P Kowalski, J.D., PhD. Franklin Pierce Law Centre, USA ©J Denoncourt 2017-2018

Skin in the Game: Equip students will skills to protect their IP in a predatory environment Internet domain names, confidentiality (or trade secrets) and trade marks are the top three protection measures that SMEs report as being important for a company. Predatory litigation No level playing field (David v Goliath battles) 9% of small companies feel they are the subject of “IP bullying”, where other firms threaten them unjustly with action over IP rights. A call for action on the part of IP educators. ©J Denoncourt 2017-2018

David versus Goliath “The interests of large national and multinational corporations often conflict with those of entrepreneurs. This becomes even clearer when one considers that some of the best ideas for new businesses are those which compete with established enterprises.” Clayton Christenson THE INNOVATOR’S DILEMMA Harper Business Essentials (1997).

High incidence of IPR infringements suffered by EU SMEs IPRs provide companies a competitive advantage only if they are properly enforced. Among the SMEs that have registered at least one IPR, 31% mentions having suffered from IPR infringement. T This proportion increases with the size of the SME, with medium-sized SMEs being affected most (39 %) and micro SMEs suffering least from IPR infringement (24 %).

5 types of SME IPRs most often infringed Trade marks (55 %) Patents (24 %) Designs (15 %) Copyright (14 %) Utility models (12 %). This data should inform IP curriculum development for entrepreneurs. Source: http://www.innovaccess.eu/sites/default/files/sme_scoreboard_study_2016_en.pdf

Remedies for IP infringement Most common means to solve IPR infringement conflicts Bilateral negotiations (43 %) Court procedures (35 %) Mediation (18 %) Arbitration (10 %) Request for the intervention of authorities (11 %) Another measure (18 %) Not fighting the infringement at all (12%) Data suggests that IP curriculum development for entrepreneurs must including dispute resolution and remedies. Source: http://www.innovaccess.eu/sites/default/files/sme_scoreboard_study_2016_en.pdf

Ignorance deprives entrepreneurs

Part 6 Chapter 20 Intellectual Property for Business Business Law 2017 Part 6 Chapter 20 Intellectual Property for Business By Dr J Denoncourt New edition to publish in 2019.

New IP education publication forthcoming in 2020 IP for Entrepreneurs By Dr J Denoncourt

Research context... IP, Finance and Corporate Governance 12 April 2018 ©J Denoncourt 2014-2018

IP, Finance and Corporate Governance Corporate governance needs to respond to society’s rising expectations of directors and boards as the impact of the global intellectual property ecosystem is felt. How can a responsible corporate culture of IP transparency be stimulated to create a rosy future to connect corporate communication with the desires of shareholders, investors and other stakeholders? The astonishing lack of material quantitative and qualitative information companies report about their IP assets makes it difficult for shareholders and other stakeholders to assess directors’ stewardship of those assets – a pressing corporate governance issue in the 21st century. This book advances IP reporting in alignment with the key corporate governance principles of transparency and disclosure. It analyses the juncture between the IP ecosystem; corporate finance and accounting for intangibles; and corporate governance. ©J Denoncourt 2014-2018

IP, Finance and Corporate Governance TABLE OF CONTENTS Part One The Corporate Intellectual Property Landscape 1 Corporate governance and IP assets 2 Corporate governance: the IP and patent ecosystem Part 2 The IP finance dimension: corporate governance and transparency 3 Bridging the gap between corporate finance and corporate governance Part 3 Accounting for IP: corporate IP assets and transparency 4 True and fair patent valuation: a corporate governance issue? Part 4 The Corporate Governance Dimension 5 Transparency in corporate IP asset reporting 6 International initiatives in corporate narrative IP asset disclosure 7 Substance and form: developing a normative practice for corporate narrative IP asset disclosures 8 A triage-style ‘materiality evaluation model’ for IP and patent disclosures 9 Corporate governance and IP value creation reporting: reflections, conclusions and recommendations Bibliography ©J Denoncourt 2014-2018

THANK YOU