The Silicon Valley Chapter of LES is hosting a free webinar
titled, IP Valuation in Special Situations: Closing the Intangible Value Gap
in M&A Deal Making on Tuesday, June 24 at 9:00 am to 10:30 pm Pacific
Time. The notice concerning the
webinar states: |
“Efrat [Kasznik] will present four unique
strategies for integrating IP assets in M&A deal pricing without
disrupting deal workflows, while addressing the needs of both sellers and
buyers. Topics to be covered include:
Make connections to help discover and drive
deals. Engage 75+ registered participants —innovators,
investors, IP management experts from startups and established SV
organizations, and many more. Online via Zoom” The Registration Link is, here. |
IP finance
"Where money issues meet IP rights". This weblog looks at financial issues for intellectual property rights: securitisation and collateral, IP valuation for acquisition and balance sheet purposes, tax and R&D breaks, film and product finance, calculating quantum of damages--anything that happens where IP meets money.
Friday, 20 June 2025
Free LES Webinar on IP Valuation in M&A Deal Making
Thursday, 29 May 2025
FBI Reports Hacker Group After US Law Firms (Again)
The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Cyber Division (Internet Crime Complaint Center) has issued a warning that certain malicious cyber actors are targeting law firms. Law firms are a ripe target for valuable information concerning clients, including intellectual property. The warning states, in part:
The cyber threat actor Silent Ransom Group (SRG), also known
as Luna Moth, Chatty Spider, and UNC3753, is targeting law firms using
information technology (IT) themed social engineering calls, and callback
phishing emails, to gain remote access to systems or devices and steal
sensitive data to extort the victims. While SRG has historically victimized
companies in many sectors, starting Spring 2023, the group has consistently
targeted US-based law firms, likely due to the highly sensitive nature of legal
industry data. . . .
As of March 2025, SRG was observed changing their tactics to
calling individuals and posing as an employee from their company’s IT
department. SRG will then direct the employee to join a remote access session,
either through an email sent to them, or navigating to a web page. Once the
employee grants access to their device, they are told that work needs to be
done overnight. Once in the victim’s device, a typical SRG attack involves
minimal privilege escalation and quickly pivots to data exfiltration conducted
through “WinSCP” (Windows Secure Copy) or a hidden or renamed version of
“Rclone.” If the compromised device does not have administrative privileges,
WinSCP portable is used to exfiltrate victim data. Although this tactic has
only been observed recently, it has been highly effective and resulted in
multiple compromises. Similar to their phishing emails posing as a company with
a subscription, once SRG exfiltrates data, they extort the victim by sending
them a ransom email threatening to sell or post the data online. SRG will also
call employees at a victim company to pressure them into engaging in ransom
negotiations. SRG has developed a publicly available site to post victim data,
however, they are inconsistent in their use of the site, and do not always
follow through on posting victim data.
Wednesday, 28 May 2025
Governmental Best Practices Report on AI Data Security
U.S., UK, Australian and New Zealand government cybersecurity related agencies have recently released a joint report titled, “AI Data Security Best Practices for Securing Data Used to Train & Operate AI Systems.” The report provides advice for addressing potential threats to AI data security. Notably, for the U.S., the report provides minimum security standards that may be applicable in subsequent litigation and important in drafting contracts concerning AI use and adoption. The report states:
Data security is of paramount importance when developing and
operating AI systems. As organizations in various sectors rely more and more on
AI-driven outcomes, data security becomes crucial for maintaining accuracy,
reliability, and integrity. The guidance provided in this CSI outlines a robust
approach to securing AI data and addressing the risks associated with the data
supply chain, malicious data, and data drift. Data security is an ever-evolving
field, and continuous vigilance and adaptation are key to staying ahead of
emerging threats and vulnerabilities. The best practices presented here
encourage the highest standards of data security in AI while helping ensure the
accuracy and integrity of AI-driven outcomes. By adopting these best practices
and risk mitigation strategies, organizations can fortify their AI systems
against potential threats and safeguard sensitive, proprietary, and mission
critical data used in the development and operation of their AI systems.
Thursday, 22 May 2025
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Revokes Harvard's Ability to Enroll Foreign Students
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security press release states:
Harvard University Loses Student and Exchange Visitor
Program Certification for Pro-Terrorist Conduct
Harvard is being held accountable for collaboration with
the CCP, fostering violence, antisemitism, and pro-terrorist conduct from
students on its campus.
WASHINGTON – Today, Homeland Security Secretary
Kristi Noem ordered DHS to terminate the Harvard University’s Student
and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification.
This means Harvard can no longer enroll foreign
students and existing foreign students must transfer or lose their legal
status.
Harvard’s leadership has created an unsafe campus environment
by permitting anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators to harass and physically
assault individuals, including many Jewish students, and otherwise obstruct its
once-venerable learning environment. Many of these agitators are foreign
students. Harvard’s leadership further facilitated, and engaged in coordinated
activity with the CCP, including hosting and training members of a CCP
paramilitary group complicit in the Uyghur genocide.
“This administration is holding Harvard accountable for
fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese
Communist Party on its campus,” said Secretary Noem. “It
is a privilege, not a right, for universities to enroll foreign students and
benefit from their higher tuition payments to help pad their
multibillion-dollar endowments. Harvard had plenty of opportunity to do the
right thing. It refused. They have lost their Student and Exchange Visitor
Program certification as a result of their failure to adhere to the law. Let
this serve as a warning to all universities and academic institutions across
the country.”
On
April 16, 2025, Secretary Noem demanded Harvard provide information about
the criminality and misconduct of foreign students on its campus. Secretary
Noem warned refusal to comply with this lawful order would result in SEVP
termination.
This action comes after DHS terminated $2.7
million in DHS grants for Harvard last month.
Harvard University brazenly refused to provide the required
information requested and ignored a follow up request from the Department’s
Office of General Council. Secretary Noem is following through on her promise
to protect students and prohibit terrorist sympathizers from receiving benefits
from the U.S. government.
Facts about Harvard’s toxic campus climate:
- A joint-government task force found that
Harvard has failed to confront pervasive race discrimination and
anti-Semitic harassment plaguing its campus.
- Jewish students on campus were subject to pervasive
insults, physical assault, and intimidation, with no
meaningful response from Harvard’s leadership.
- A protester charged for his role in the assault of a
Jewish student on campus was chosen by the Harvard Divinity School to
be the Class Marshal for commencement.
- Harvard’s
own 2025 internal study on anti-Semitism revealed that almost 60%
of Jewish students reported experiencing “discrimination, stereotyping, or
negative bias on campus due to [their] views on current events.”
- In one instance, a Jewish student speaker at a
conference had planned to tell the story of his Holocaust survivor
grandfather finding refuge in Israel. Organizers told the student the
story was not “tasteful” and laughed
at him when he expressed his confusion. They said the story would have
justified oppression.
- Meanwhile, Pro-Hamas student groups that promoted
antisemitism after the October 7 attacks remained
recognized and funded.
Instead of protecting its students, Harvard has let crime
rates skyrocket, enacted racist DEI practices, and accepted boatloads of cash
from foreign governments and donors.
- Crime rates at Harvard increased by 55%
from 2022 to 2023.
o From
2022 to 2023 aggravated assaults increased 295% and robberies increased 560%
- Harvard has adopted race-conscious
hiring policies, potentially in violation of civil rights law.
- Harvard Received $151 Million From Foreign
Governments Since January 2020 — making up more than 13 percent of the
total $1.1
billion received from foreign donors over the same period.
- Harvard hosted
and trained members of the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps
(XPCC), a CCP paramilitary group complicit in the Uyghur genocide,
even after its 2020 designation on the U.S. Treasury’s Specially
Designated Nationals List, with engagements continuing as recently as
2024.
- Harvard researchers collaborated
with China-based academics on projects funded by an Iranian government
agent and partnered with Chinese universities tied to military
advancements, including aerospace and optics research, using U.S.
Department of Defense funds.
- Harvard partnered
with individuals linked to China’s defense-industrial base, including
conducting robotics research with military applications.
U.S. Budget: Artificial Intelligence and University Endowments
The U.S. budget reconciliation bill is moving through the U.S. Congress. One part getting attention concerns artificial intelligence. First, subsections (a) and (b) provide for funding to upgrade the federal information technology system with artificial intelligence. Importantly, the funding should provide better cybersecurity protection for federal information technology systems. Second, subsection (c) seems to provide a ban on enforcement of state or local regulation of artificial intelligence. A draft of the proposed section is below.
PART 2—ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
MODERNIZATION
Section 43201. Artificial intelligence and information
technology modernization initiative.
Subsection (a) would appropriate $500,000,000 to the
Department of Commerce for fiscal year 2025, to remain available through
September 30, 2035, for the purpose of modernizing and securing federal
information technology systems through the deployment of commercial artificial
intelligence, automation technologies, and the replacement of antiquated
business systems.
Subsection (b) states that the Secretary of Commerce shall
use these funds to support the replacement and modernization of legacy business
systems with state-of-the-art commercial artificial intelligence systems and
automated decision systems, the adoption of artificial intelligence models that
increase operational efficiency and service delivery, and improve the
cybersecurity posture of Federal information technology systems through
modernized architecture, automated threat detection, and integrated artificial
intelligence solutions.
Subsection (c) states that no state or political subdivision
may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models,
artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems during the
10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
Subsection (d) provides definitions for key terms used in the
Act, including “artificial intelligence”, “artificial intelligence model”,
“artificial intelligence system”, and “automated decision system”.
The House Ways and Means Committee has a list of other parts
of the proposed budget bill of interest, including taxation of university endowments:
- Holds
woke, elite universities that operate more like major corporations and
other tax-exempt entities accountable, ensuring they can no longer abuse
generous benefits provided through the tax code.
- Increases
the university endowment tax and subjects the largest endowments to the
corporate tax rate.
- Increases
tax on massive non-profits that resemble hedge funds and pay their
employees huge salaries.
The National Conference of State Legislatures states: “[This
a]dds to the current 1.4% excise tax on net investment income from private
universities endowments that are greater than $500,000 per student. The new tax
rate is based on a tiered, student-adjusted system. Universities with
per-student endowments above $2,000,000 are taxed at a 21% rate, between
$1,250,000 and $1,999,999 at 14%, and between $750,000 and $1,249,999 at 7%.”
Wednesday, 21 May 2025
Reducing Anticompetitive U.S. Regulations Process Continues
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust are continuing their work to address anticompetitive regulations across the U.S. government. The FTC press release states:
Today, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of
Justice Antitrust Division issued
a joint letter directing the heads of agencies across the federal
government to create a list of anticompetitive regulations that reduce
competition, entrepreneurship, and innovation.
FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and Assistant Attorney
General Abigail Slater of the DOJ’s Antitrust Division issued the letter, which
advances President Trump’s Executive
Order on Reducing Anticompetitive Regulatory Barriers.
The Executive Order directs all agency heads to provide a
list identifying anticompetitive regulations within their agency’s rulemaking
authority to the FTC and DOJ. Along with each regulation identified, the agency
must include a recommendation for deletion; a recommendation for specific
modifications; or a justification for the potential anticompetitive effects.
The joint letter follows a recent Request
for Information launched by the FTC inviting members of the public to
comment on how federal regulations can harm competition in the American
economy.
Following public feedback and the lists of anticompetitive
regulations from agency heads, the FTC and DOJ will provide the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget a consolidated list of regulations that should
be rescinded or modified, along with recommended modifications.
Wednesday, 14 May 2025
Steve Blank Sounds Warning for U.S. Academic Research Decline
The very talented Steve Blank has laid out a case for why U.S. academic research is in serious trouble based on recent U.S. policy changes. As he states, once you lose your advantage it's unlikely to be regained. My guess is that there's a certain point at which the lead is lost and is too difficult to regain. A March 2025 Nature article reports on a poll which indicates that of 1,600 scientists surveyed around 75% are contemplating moving with Canada or Europe as top destinations. I wonder what unintended consequences--particularly those that are beneficial for the United States--may exist in distributing U.S. researchers around the world. Could they be lured back in three years and seven months? And, what could be some unintended negative consequences? Do we really want to lose our best researchers during a military build-up around the world? Gee whiz, it seems like almost everything is a national security issue and all technology is dual use. Steve Blank's blog post is available, here.
Thursday, 3 April 2025
U.S. Department of Justice Creates Anticompetitive Regulation Task Force
On March 27, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice launched the Anticompetitive Regulations Task Force. The Task Force is soliciting public input concerning regulations that may hinder competition. I wonder if IP-related laws will be examined. The Press Release states:
Today, the Justice Department launches an Anticompetitive
Regulations Task Force to advocate for the elimination of anticompetitive state
and federal laws and regulations that undermine free market competition and
harm consumers, workers, and businesses. The Antitrust Division has a long
history of advocacy against laws and regulations that create unnecessary
barriers to competition. The Task Force will surge resources to these
efforts and invite public comments to support the Administration’s mission to unwind
laws and regulations that hinder business dynamism and make markets less
competitive.
“Realizing President Trump’s economic Golden Age will require
unwinding burdensome regulations that stifle free market competition. This
Antitrust Division will stand against harmful barriers to competition whether
imposed by public regulators or private monopolists,” said Assistant Attorney
General Abigail Slater of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “We look
forward to working with the public and with other federal agencies to identify
and eliminate anticompetitive laws and regulations.”
On Jan. 31, President Trump signed Executive Order 14192 declaring “the policy of the
executive branch” to be that federal agencies should “alleviate unnecessary
regulatory burdens placed on the American people.” Consistent with this policy,
on Feb. 19, President Trump signed Executive Order 14219 directing agencies to “initiate
a process to review all regulations” and identify regulations that, among other
things, “impose undue burdens on small businesses and impede private enterprise
and entrepreneurship.” Consistent with longstanding practice, the Antitrust
Division will support federal agencies’ deregulatory initiatives by sharing its
market expertise on regulations that pose the greatest barriers to economic
growth.
Regulatory capture is a well-studied phenomenon in which
agencies become “captured” by special interests and big businesses, rather than
serving the interests of the American people. But when regulations serve the
few and impose undue burdens on small businesses, private enterprise, and
entrepreneurs, they also harm competition and ultimately hurt American
consumers, workers, and businesses. For example, regulations can increase
compliance costs, preventing businesses from competing on a level playing field
with powerful corporations. Regulations can also discourage or even
intentionally prohibit small businesses and new products from entering markets
and lowering prices for American families. In contrast, eliminating unnecessary
anticompetitive regulations makes it easier for businesses to compete. More
competition empowers the American people — not government regulators — to drive
economic progress and innovation. When every American has a fair opportunity to
enjoy the benefits of competitive free markets, every American has an
opportunity to realize the American dream.
By identifying and working with state and federal agencies to
revise or eliminate these laws and regulations, the Anticompetitive Regulations
Task Force will contribute to making the American dream a reality. As a first
step, the Antitrust Division will initiate a public inquiry to identify
unnecessary laws and regulations that raise the highest barriers to
competition. In particular, the Division will seek information from the public
about laws and regulations that make it more difficult for businesses to compete
effectively, especially in markets that have the greatest impact on American
households, including:
- Housing: Americans spend more than one-third
of their monthly income on housing, and the cost of owning or renting a
home continues to rise. Laws and regulations in housing markets can
contribute to these problems by making it more difficult for companies to
build and ordinary Americans to rent or buy.
- Transportation: Laws and regulations in areas
like airlines, rail, and ocean shipping can grant antitrust immunities,
outright monopolies, or safe harbors for conduct that undermines
competition. As a result, Americans pay more for travel, fuel, and a
variety of other products.
- Food and Agriculture: By the end of the
Biden-Harris Administration, grocery prices were 27% higher than at the
end of the first Trump Administration. Eliminating unnecessary
anticompetitive regulations will help farmers, growers, and ranchers
increase the amount of food they produce and unlock lower prices for
American consumers.
- Healthcare: Laws and regulations in healthcare
markets too often discourage doctors and hospitals from providing
low-cost, high-quality healthcare and instead encourage overbilling and
consolidation. These kinds of unnecessary anticompetitive regulations put
affordable healthcare out of reach for millions of American families.
- Energy: Reliable and affordable energy is
essential to modern American life — whether in homes, businesses,
manufacturing plants, schools, hospitals, sporting events, or data
centers. Laws and regulations can undermine reliability and affordability
by protecting incumbent electricity providers from competition or
disruptive innovation.
The public will have 60 days to submit comments at www.Regulations.gov (Docket
No. ATR-2025-0001), no later than May 26. Once submitted, comments will be
posted to Regulations.gov. All market participants are invited to provide
comments in response to this inquiry, including consumers, consumer advocates,
small businesses, employers, trade groups, industry analysts, and other
entities that are impacted by anticompetitive state or federal laws and
regulations.
In addition to reviewing responses from the public, the Task
Force will bring together attorneys, economists, and other staff from across
the Division, together with interagency partners, to identify state and federal
laws and regulations that unnecessarily harm competition. The Antitrust
Division will then take appropriate action, including helping agencies revise
or eliminate these regulations.
The Task Force will also consider other ways to advocate for
the removal of anticompetitive laws and regulations. The Division routinely
files amicus briefs and statements of interests in private litigation, and it
will continue to do so to promote competition and oppose anticompetitive laws
and regulations. The Division also provides comments on proposed legislation in
the states on the request of state legislators. These efforts will continue
with an eye toward protecting competition and interstate commerce in light of
dormant Commerce Clause principles.
The Justice Department has a long history of serving as the
Executive Branch’s chief competition advocate by working with agencies to
identify and eliminate unnecessary regulations. In 2018, the Justice Department
released a
report on how regulations can harm competition. Following this report, the
Justice Department submitted dozens of comments to federal agencies supporting
efforts to eliminate unnecessary regulations and increase competition. For
example, the Justice Department, in consultation with the Federal Trade
Commission, submitted
a comment opposing regulations that would have protected
incumbent electricity transmission companies from much-needed competition in
energy markets across the country. The Justice Department filed comments aimed
at making it easier for individuals and small businesses to navigate the
federal government bureaucracy. The Justice Department also provided technical
assistance and trainings to federal agencies to help them analyze how new and
existing regulations might affect competition, or whether competition may be a
better alternative to regulation altogether.
The Anticompetitive Regulations Task Force will continue
these efforts, supporting ongoing efforts across the Trump Administration to
unleash competition by eliminating unnecessary, burdensome, and wasteful
government regulations. For more information on the Task Force, including
contact information, see Anticompetitive
Regulations Task Force page on the Division’s website.
Bad Timing: Starving the University Technology Transfer System
A group of over 1000 scientists who are elected members of
the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine has released a
letter expressing concern with the Trump Administration’s handling of research
funding. The letter states, in part:
If our country’s research enterprise is dismantled, we will
lose our scientific edge. Other countries will lead the development of novel
disease treatments, clean energy sources, and the new technologies of the
future. Their populations will be healthier, and their economies will surpass
us in business, defense, intelligence gathering, and monitoring our planet’s
health. The damage to our nation’s scientific enterprise could take decades to
reverse.
The AUTM, the Association of University Technology Managers,
noted that the Great Recession would have been much worse if it had not been
for university technology transfer. Harming the engine that’s been
creating innovation and new business may not be such a good thing right
now. Besides pushing us into a recession, I do wonder what the political
fallout will be of the increased removal of research funding from universities. Not
only do universities spin-off companies to varying degrees of success but
there are universities located in many, many congressional districts--and those
universities are major regional employers. The full letter is available, here. The
Scientific American discusses the full letter, here.