Tag: Intending
Ethereum’s Centralization Endgame Makes The Case For Building On Bitcoin
Avrilar Sponsors Blockchain Domains for Metaverse Education Platforms Through NexBloc
Cryptocurrency Patent Examples from Top Companies
Cryptocurrency was first invented in 2008 with the release of Bitcoin, the first public digital currency characterized by decentralized control, user anonymity, and verification that includes record-keeping using network technology and blockchain ledgers. Although the terms “cryptocurrency” and “Bitcoin” are often used interchangeably, today there are over a thousand different types of cryptocurrencies with a […]
The post Cryptocurrency Patent Examples from Top Companies appeared first on The Rapacke Law Group.
Need of Cybersecurity in Metaverse
From Bitcoin to ETFs, Ethereum to DeFi, Staking to Arbitrage, and now from NFTs to Metaverse, the world of Blockchain and cryptocurrencies seems to be on steroids! With the rise of Blockchain and subsequently cryptocurrency, NFTs, and Metaverse, innovation in the space has been the only constant. However, digital innovation has always had two sides, […]
The post Need of Cybersecurity in Metaverse appeared first on Quillhash Blog.
Raising the Bar Has Not Reduced the Patent Acceptance Rate in Australia
Data on patent acceptances into 2021 confirms that the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (‘RtB Act’), which came into effect on 15 April 2013, has had a minimal impact on the rate of patent application acceptance in Australia – and to the extent that an effect is present, it does not run in the direction that might be expected! Here, I define ‘rate of acceptance’ as the proportion of examined applications that go on to be accepted for grant. Between 2009 and 2013, the rate at which applications subject to the former (i.e. pre-RtB) provisions were accepted rose from 69% to 72%. In comparison, the acceptance rate of post-RtB applications has stabilised at around 75% in each year between 2017 and 2021.
Some people may have anticipated that, in raising the standard of inventive step and introducing stricter requirements for enablement and support of claims, the RtB reforms would result in fewer applications being accepted. I was not one of those people, and I expect that neither were most other patent attorneys. Those of us who work on behalf of patent applicants are well-aware that, firstly, most of those applicants are seeking patent protection in other jurisdictions that have high standards of patentability, and are not wasting time and money on equivalent Australian applications for inventions that do not meet those standards. And, secondly, encountering a higher bar to acceptance does not necessarily mean abandoning the application altogether; often it may simply mean settling for a more limited scope of protection.
Perhaps more surprisingly, however, raising standards of patentability has not resulted in applicants making more rounds of amendment to their applications in order to achieve acceptance. In fact, if anything applications examined under the post-RtB provisions have been, on average, subject to fewer amendments in examination than pre-RtB applications.
Interestingly, in the transition between the two legal regimes, the earliest applications to be examined under the provisions of the RtB Act had acceptance rates in excess of 90%, while acceptance rates of the last applications to be examined under the former provisions fell to below 50%. These effects are most likely attributable to the respective applicants’ strategies in pursuing early examination of post-RtB applications, and in persisting to the bitter end with some pre-RtB applications.
Another interesting observation is that expedited examination has become increasingly popular in the years since the RtB reforms commenced, rising from just under 6% of all cases in 2014/15 to over 8% in 2020/21. In particular, expedited examination under the Global Patent Prosecution Highway (GPPH) program rose from just 2.7% of cases in 2013/14 to 5.1% in 2019/20. In fact, GPPH requests were the majority of all expedited examination requests in every post-RtB year except for the first (2013/14).
Finally, the most recent data confirms (once again) that the duration of patent prosecution (i.e. from examination request through to acceptance, in successful cases) has reduced significantly – from a median of over 600 days, to a little more than 400 days – since commencement of the RtB reforms. This has been due, in almost exactly equal parts, to the tighter time constraints imposed on applicants, and to reductions in Patent Office delays in commencing examination after a request has been filed.
Read more »Did the Pandemic Affect 2020 Australian PCT Filings?
As I reported back in January, there were some indications of weakening patent filings by Australian applicants in 2020. Domestic applicants filed 10% fewer Australian standard applications than in 2019. And while provisional filings overall fell by only 2%, those prepared with professional assistance – which involve greater expense, but are also far more likely to provide a sound basis for valuable future patent rights – fell by nearly 5%. While perhaps not the sole factor, it is logical to assume that the business impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was somewhat influential in this decline. Of course, Australian application numbers are not the only indicator of filing activity. Each year, Australian residents file over 1,500 international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), representing potential future filings not only in Australia, but also in any of the other 152 (as at the time of writing) contracting states. So it is also interesting to know whether there was a corresponding decline in PCT filings by Australian residents in 2020.
The short answer is, possibly, but not as large as the decline in standard application filings. While it is almost certain that some PCT applications filed in 2020 have yet to be published, and are therefore not visible, the worst-case decline in international filings by Australian residents is around 6%. However, once all applications are published and available to be counted, there may be closer to 2% fewer PCT applications filed by Australians in 2020 as compared with 2019. This would be consistent with a similar decline in the previous year, and with the recent trend in provisional filings, which predate the pandemic.
Furthermore, the pattern of PCT filings across 2020 was much the same as in previous years, with no indication of applicant behaviour being influenced by the progress of the pandemic.
Read more »How Nature Captures and Stores Carbon [Webinar]
Windlab
The Case for Windlab
. | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
Revenue | $ 24,515,379 | $ 18,101,100 | $ 10,012,006 |
Expenses | -$ 10,098,372 | -$ 13,023,113 | -$ 8,524,804 |
Profit before income tax | $ 14,417,007 | $ 5,077,987 | $ 1,487,202 |
Income tax | -$ 4,912,534 | -$ 1,779,491 | $ 14,687 |
Profit | $ 9,504,473 | $ 3,298,496 | $ 1,501,889 |
Equity at the start of the year | $ 13,404,230 | $ 9,207,680 | $ 7,699,065 |
ROE | 71% | 36% | 20% |
Average | 42% | ||
The company is able to achieve this sort of ROE as windfarm developments are sold once all approvals and agreements signed but before construction begins, meaning developing multi-million dollar projects does not require significant capital. For example, take the site of the Coonooer bridge wind farm, a 19.8 megawatt wind farm in North Western Victoria with a total development cost of $48.6 million. After identifying the site with Windscape, Windlab spent only $300,000 in acquiring the land, then spent $2.2 million or research and planning applications for a total investment of only $2.5 million. Windlab then sold 96.5% of the equity in the Coonoer Bridge to Eurus Energy for just over $4.7 million who then funded the construction of the site with help from grants from the state government. In total, Windlab walked away from this transaction with over $4.7 million in cash and a remaining 3.5% stake in the project, a return of over 111% on the initial investment.
Valuation
- 640 megawatts of approved potential capacity across multiple projects in South Africa. (While South African Renewable Energy projects have been on hiatus, it does seem the projects are about to get up and running again after a recent change of government
- 250 megawatt project in Northern Queensland that Windlab is intending to submit a development application for in 2019
- 230 megawatt project in Vedigre USA that Windlab no longer has control over, but is eligible for up to $4.6 million in success payments if the project reaches financial close.
Project | Value |
Lakeland | $ 10,200,000.00 |
East African projects | $ 42,300,000.00 |
Greenwich | $ 2,800,000.00 |
Other projects | $ 15,000,000.00 |
Total | $ 70,300,000.00 |
Book value | $ 9,690,000.00 |
three years of annual costs | $ 19,200,000.00 |
tax on projected profit | $ 12,423,000.00 |
Value after tax | $ 38,677,000.00 |
Area | Value |
Development Projects | $ 38,677,000.00 |
Operating wind farms | $ 52,770,000.00 |
Asset Management business | $ 8,500,000.00 |
Windscape software | $ 10,000,000.00 |
Cash | $ 14,622,414.00 |
Liabilities | -$ 10,755,130.00 |
Total | $ 113,814,284.00 |
Shares outstanding (diluted) | 73848070 |
Price | $ 1.54 |