"Augmented Reality and the IP Insights Behind it All," Speaker, IP Watchdog Webinar, March 2017.
Augmented Reality (AR) is a new and upcoming technology segment seeing steadily increasing patent filings. Generally, patent portfolios are distributed between high-tech companies like Microsoft, Samsung, Qualcomm and Alphabet, in addition to entertainment, consumer and electronics oriented companies like Sony, Nintendo and Disney. The differences in the focus of their AR portfolios can be quite subtle.
Speakers Gene Quinn, Patent Attorney and President of IP Watchdog, Kate Gaudry Ph.D., Kilpatrick Townsend Patent Attorney, and a panel of experts cover a wide-ranging conversation including:
- Patent challenges and strategies for building AR technologies in the post-Alice US
- The top global companies in the AR space and their patent portfolios
- Differences in the portfolio focus of competing organizations and industries
Did you know: The US has been the primary filing jurisdiction for AR and related technologies, but the application to grant ratio is less than 5%? This webinar teaches what to look for and what it all means for this exciting segment.
Friday, March 24, 2017
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.