Patents vs. Trade Secrets: Do You Need a Patent, or is a Secret Good Enough?

IPWatchdog Unleashed

Content provided by Gene Quinn. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Gene Quinn or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

13d ago 55:03

MP3•Episode home

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we explore the age-old question about whether it is best to keep an innovation as a trade secret or whether it makes sense to seek patent protection. And while this question is not one that is new, it is a question that has been getting more attention in recent years. And what I mean by that is this—it is hard not to notice that U.S. patents have been under siege for some time now. This has driven innovators into trade secret protection and away from patent protection in at least some technology fields. So, it is against this backdrop of increasing interest in trade secrets instead of patents that we had a conversation about how to determine whether to keep an innovation as a trade secret or to plow forward to seek patent protection.
Joining moderator Gene Quinn for this conversation are Carlo Cotrone, who is the former Chief IP Officer for Techtronic Industries who also spent time in the oil and gas industry as lead IP counsel for Baker Hughes. Today, Carlo is the founder and principal consultant for Quartal IP. Also joining the conversation is a former law school mate of mine, Arash Behravesh, who is Enterprise Counsel for the Chemistry & Supplies Division at Agilent Technologies, and Bryan Walker, who is Senior IP Counsel at 3M, where he has responsibility for developing and managing international patent portfolios, trade secrets, generative AI and more.

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.
You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

60 episodes

#News Talk #News #Gene Quinn