How to Learn from the Intellectual Property Protection Strategies of Multinational Corporations

In the implementation of intellectual property protection strategy, multinational companies have many specific strategies that China telecom enterprises can learn from. -Effective organization and strict system Most multinational companies attach great importance to the management of intellectual property rights. An important performance is the intellectual property management department established as a senior management. For example, Bayer's top management is the comprehensive management committee, which is composed of professional committees responsible for all aspects of the company's management. One of the important special committees is the Patent Committee in charge of intellectual property management. This committee is composed of patent lawyers and experts from various scientific research departments. Its main task is to decide in what legal state technology will be put into the market according to the situation of market, management and scientific research and development. The top management organization of Rhone Planck Company in France consists of comprehensive management department and three professional management departments. The comprehensive management department consists of special affairs department, legal affairs department and trademark affairs department. The company also has an intellectual property organization, which is composed of personnel from patent, trademark, law, information and other departments, and regularly exchanges information to guide the work of various professional scientific research groups. Another performance in management is that multinational companies generally have strict internal systems to protect their intellectual property rights. Multinational companies attach great importance to the construction of internal systems and protect their intellectual property rights by signing various contracts with employees. Generally speaking, multinational companies will add intellectual property protection clauses to their employment contracts with employees. These terms generally contain two contents. One is to require employees to transfer the intellectual property rights of all research and development achievements during their tenure, and the other is to require employees not to disclose the inherent intellectual property rights of the company to any third party without the consent of the company. In addition, some contracts also contain clauses restricting horizontal competition. -Two Important Management Principles The French company Rhone Planck believes that the strategy of enterprise intellectual property rights is nothing more than three key points, namely, protecting the company's property rights, preventing others from infringing, and scientifically implementing the management and transfer of intellectual property rights. As a system, intellectual property rights must have its own characteristics. How to make full use of the intellectual property system to protect oneself and attack competitors is the starting point of intellectual property management of multinational corporations. Around this core, multinational companies have mastered many specific strategies. In short, these strategies mainly revolve around two basic principles. The first is the principle of efficiency. The acquisition of intellectual property requires a lot of resources, including the cost of innovation, application and maintenance. Therefore, intellectual property is a kind of property with huge operating cost. How to save money while protecting oneself and attacking competitors is a subject of scientific management of intellectual property rights. Around this problem, multinational companies have taken many measures based on efficiency. First, strictly screen technologies to save application and maintenance costs. For the technological achievements that have decided not to apply for patents, some methods are adopted. Both Toyota and IBM regularly publish technical bulletins, and regularly disclose the technological achievements that have not yet been patented. The main purpose of this is to destroy the possibility of competitors applying for patents without good interests. This not only protects the right to use this technology, but also avoids being restricted. At the same time, it also saves the cost of patent application. Multinational companies will also regularly evaluate the patents they have obtained and give up unnecessary patents in time. Hitachi reviews existing patents every year to save about 654.38+0.2 billion yen in patent fees every year. Some multinational companies also sell some unused patents at low prices, which are also difficult to transfer, so as to obtain benefits by transferring more patents as much as possible. In tort litigation, the principle of reconciliation is to save time and cost. For example, if Mitsubishi is sued for infringement, the company will first investigate whether there is any infringement. If there is infringement, they will negotiate with each other for mutual authorization with their own patents as a bargaining chip, thus reducing the time and capital investment required for a large number of infringement lawsuits. Most infringement lawsuits involving multinational corporations are settled through settlement. The other is the principle of "quality first". The so-called quality actually refers to the substantial effect of its intellectual property rights on the operating performance of multinational companies. For example, patents are divided into basic patents and peripheral patents, and the quality of basic patents is higher than that of peripheral patents. Multinational companies pay more attention to the role of basic patents and invest a lot of energy in basic scientific and technological research in order to obtain as many basic patents as possible. Of course, multinational companies are also constantly obtaining peripheral patents to prolong the life of basic patents and get as much profit as possible. But the facts show that if we don't pay attention to basic patents, we will inevitably suffer heavy losses in trade. Take the United States and Japan for example. Compared with important patents, the United States has 10454 1, while Japan has only 76984. Therefore, Japanese companies are often frustrated in patent litigation. In addition, some multinational companies often weave a tight patent network around a basic patent, which can also make huge profits without owning a large number of basic patents. For example, Qualcomm, USA, has got rich returns through only one patent of CDMA technology. In terms of trademarks, on the one hand, multinational companies are very cautious in choosing trademarks. Exxon spent $654.38 million+$00,000 to accept the trademark "Exxon" now in use. On the other hand, multinational companies often concentrate on using a trademark and invest huge sums of money to cultivate a trademark. Although the company may register some other trademarks, these trademarks are often defensive, seldom used or even never used. Therefore, multinational companies often have few trademarks. The market value of major trademarks of multinational companies is extremely high, often in billions or even billions of dollars.