Two IPs In A Pod
Brilliant inventions, fresh product designs, iconic brand names and artistic creativity are not only the building blocks of successful business - they deliver a better world for us all. But these valuable forms of intellectual property must be protected in order to flourish. We are the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys - the UK's largest intellectual property organisation. Our hosts Lee Davies and Gwilym Roberts chat with entrepreneurs, creatives, patent attorneys and the occasional judge about how patents, trade marks, designs and copyright can improve our lives and solve problems for humanity.
Two IPs In A Pod
How LOT Network is tackling Patent Risk: Insights from Ken Seddon
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
In this episode, we speak with Ken Seddon, CEO of LOT Network, about the increasing influence of non-practising entities (NPEs) and the growing role they play in patent litigation through the acquisition and assertion of patents. The discussion explores LOT Network’s “herd immunity” model, under which member companies automatically receive a licence if patents are transferred to an NPE, helping to mitigate patent risk across sectors including technology, automotive, banking, and semiconductors. The episode also considers why patents are increasingly viewed as “stronger” assets in today’s litigation environment, alongside wider trends shaping the global patent landscape.
Welcome Back And Quick Introductions
SPEAKER_04So Lott is um a private owner solution. It's a community of companies uh that have gotten together to decide that, or basically just take responsibility for the NPE or patent control problem that's now across the world.
SPEAKER_01This is the third time we've done podcasts on the internet.
SPEAKER_02That has to take it out of it, doesn't it? It's a fun it's a lengthy day. Um lucky we've got fascinating, exciting people to perk us up. Yeah, yeah, but yeah. And we haven't recorded that banter yet.
SPEAKER_01We haven't recorded that banter, but we might be fine. We may have to visit it offline afterwards because I know that you're under pressure to um to leave shortly, aren't you? Because it's a busy interview. Yeah, you've got certain important meetings to attend to. I low can stay. So I'll uh I'll see you in throughout. I'll look after you. Slot, don't worry, mate. Thank you very much. So um uh a returning guest. It's not often it's not often we give people uh the honour of coming back, is it? Unless they're a really, really good first time around. Yeah. So uh so Ken, welcome back to the podcast.
SPEAKER_04Thank you. Glad to be here, glad to see it wasn't blacklisted and uh it until return.
SPEAKER_01So good to um so Anthony works the wheels for you, I think it's fair to say. So uh he was very, very keen that as we were encamping that we've got you on. Oh, wonderful, appear. He's a good man, he's my uh European rep for life. Yeah, and uh we're gonna have on-gound relationship, but he don't be on all things like we've been doing a panel in two days' time as well, which is exciting. I'm looking forward to that.
SPEAKER_02That's been quite interesting.
SPEAKER_01He was on the inter bus with us yesterday as well. So we did get a little bit of time with Anthony yesterday. Yeah, so welcome back. Many of the people who listen to this won't necessarily listen to the first podcast. So do you want to start off with a bit about you, who you are, what you do?
SPEAKER_04Sure. Uh Ken Sedon, I'm the CEO of Lat Network. I've been doing this, I can't believe it, for 11 years now. I'm on my 11th year. Uh, but I come from an IP background. I started as an engineer in Motolola. Uh, they sent me to law school. I worked at Intel. I was then at uh Micron for a few years, then uh was at Apple during the smartphone wars, and most recently the vice president of IP at ARM, uh just down the road in Cambridge. Yeah, yeah. I was only there a couple weeks ago.
What The LOT Network Actually Does
SPEAKER_01Yeah. I dropped into the guys.
SPEAKER_04Beautiful place.
SPEAKER_01Yeah.
SPEAKER_04Um, and what's the Lot Network all about? So Lot is um a private owner solution. It's a community of companies uh that have gotten together to decide that, or basically just take responsibility for the NPE or patent control problem that's now across the world. Historically, it was just a US problem, uh, but now with the advent of the UPC growing in strength and size and numbers, uh, we see a lot more NPE activity here. Uh, but the reality is if, you know, I guess the irony of it is companies are the ones that cause the NPE problem. At the end of the day, it's a company that sells patents for a variety of reasons. They have too many of them. They did a business pivot, uh, they're desperate for cash. It can be, you know, nothing nefarious, but an operating company sells their patents, the NPEs buy them. Uh, in recent nine to 12 months, patents become a lot stronger, a lot more of a concern. And as a result, they're uh a lot, it's attracting a lot more litigation, finance, and funding who backs these uh NPEs to assert them against operating companies.
SPEAKER_02So I'm gonna come back to one of the things you just said there about patents getting stronger. But before we do that, just work into the kind of the model that it works to then. So the collaborative model between multiple um operating companies, how does the NP angle, how do they mitigate that?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, so the we have now 6,114 members are involved. When I started uh 10 years ago, we had 14 companies. Now we have over 6,100. Um and it's across all industries automotive, banking, semiconductor, pharma even. And the one thing all these companies have in common, the one thing I can get them all to agree on is that NPEs are harmful to their business. And so what they've all done is signed the exact same license agreement, very straightforward, that simply says, look, I agree if I if any of my patents ever go to an NPE, the rest of you in the community get a free license. And in return, they're receiving that exact same promise from the 6,000 other companies. So it's effectively herd immunization. And uh last year we had 1,087 companies join. This year we'll do close to 1,200. And the reason why it's growing faster, so yeah, the herd is strong, but what people are realizing is I want to be in the herd. Because every time you know three three companies a day are joining lot, our herd gets bigger and uh they're stronger, safer. But the companies that are not in lot, they're now part of the ever-shrinking group that's not protected. Nobody wants to be the gazelle that's going left when the herd goes right. And uh, in light of all the changes that have happened with the strengthening patent system on a global scale, people realize this is a risk they have to take very seriously.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and I think the herd immunization makes a lot of sense, actually, doesn't it? So I mean some companies will decide not to do it, but that might be, for example, because they might want to sell to a child.
SPEAKER_04And we even have we've got lot members now. I think this fears of recession, patents are very expensive to maintain and keep alive. And a lot of, you know, quite often in most legal departments, the IP budget is the largest chunk of the whole legal budget and it gets the biggest attention. And the CFO will say, Well, do we really need 10,000 patents? Could we get away with 9,500? You know, how would that really change our strategy? And the pressure for that, these companies either throw the patents away or put them up for sale. We've had members recently quite successfully sell off patents to MPEs, and kind of an unexpected uh twist, they're using me as their priest. Their view is I joined a lot, I gave everybody a chance to get a free license. If I can make money
Herd Immunity And Selling Patents
SPEAKER_04selling my patents to an NPE and somebody outside the herd gets hurt, that's their fault. Because they could have joined the I they've they feel like I took the high road, I gave everybody a chance to get a free license. And if you don't want my free license, well, then you're gonna have to pay the NPE. You have the moral conscience. It is. It doesn't not that they should feel guilty, but I think one of the concerns when you sell patents is what's gonna happen to them. Is it gonna is there a risk of retaliation? Is there gonna be a harm to your reputation? Are my customers gonna get sued? How does it impact everything? And now that 6,000 companies are in lot, a lot of people could say, okay, the people I care about are protected. I don't have to worry about if some other industry gets hit. Okay.
SPEAKER_02Um, so that's when we first uh uh had it on the podcast, um, a lot was gonna moving into Europe, if I may, I feel like the the note because the UKC had kicked off, and suddenly there was this extremely cost-effective and quite powerful court that there wasn't there before with what 400 million people in its orbit, as it were. And you, I think early on said, look, this is gonna be troll troll territory. This is this is what trolls want. Low cost, high impact. Um, how have you seen things panning out as in the last two and a half years?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, it's taking a little longer than I would have predicted originally. I think um, because in Europe, uh loser pays models, and in many cases, uh, you have to post a bond of some kind in order to proceed with litigation. So I think it just took longer for the litigation funders to work that into their model. They were used to the US system, and it just took them time to calculate what rate of return, what risks do these other checkpoints introduce. But we've already seen hundreds of NPE cases being filed in the US. Um, I think it also is required or expectations were raised. The the NPEs feel more confident. As long as I have a quality patent, um, I'm absolutely free to go, you know, I'm I'm confident I'm gonna win. So then I don't have to worry about a loser pay model and be quite successful. That's brought about a lot of interest around standard essential patents. Right. You know, because there's kind of this declaration, we're all agreeing that it's essential to the standard. Now we're just debating, is it valid? Uh, do you perform that part of the standard or not? And it eliminates some of the uncertainty around uh litigating with these with patents by MPs. So is the the it the the snowball starts up, is it worth saying? Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely.
SPEAKER_02Back to the other point, another big change, especially in the last nine, 12 months, I think you're saying is what you're calling the strengthening of the patent system. Tell us more.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, uh patents have definitely gotten stronger. Let me clarify what I mean by stronger. Um, it's not that they're more valid or that the claim scopes have gotten bigger. It's simply that there's a greater risk that that patent is going to make it to a district court and uh you're gonna face a verdict, or at least a trial, the cost of a trial, and maybe a verdict. And so the the um about six to nine months ago, there was a major shift in uh the your ability to file what's called an interparty re-exam. Normally, the first line of defense an operating company does in the US is go to the patent office and change the validity, challenge the validity of that patent. That effectively has gone away. Um there's still some possibility of it. Uh, but what's really concerning is how things have somewhat been politicized. Um interesting if you look at the data. If the patent is owned by an NPE of the end of last quarter, you only had a 15% chance of instituting the IPR. But if the patent was owned by an operating company, you have a 30% chance of instituting the IPR. And what I can't figure out is why the owner of the patent should matter. If we're simply, as intellectuals, deciding, well, does this prior art raise a question of patentability for this patent? The owner of the asset shouldn't matter, and it's starting to matter. And that's part of what I think the average IP attorney needs is to wake up to and be more responsive to.
SPEAKER_02And that's not a statistical fluctuation, that's a doubling of the proportion. I hadn't heard that before. Yeah. And we can we can we can hypothesize as to why that might be, but the fact of it is really interesting. Okay.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, and I think what the means is uh you as a defendant operating company, you now have to assume, okay, I I don't have that first line of defense. I'm gonna have to challenge the validity and infringement at trial, and we're going to trial on this patent. And so that has made the uh the call time to money shorter for these uh for the litigation funding funding folks. They're now you know, there's not gonna be a stay of the litigation. We're going to trial. We can calculate with more certainty when it's gonna be filed and statistical analysis, what are my odds of winning, and how much I'm gonna get. And it gives that's that certainty, I think, is attracting a lot more litigation funders.
SPEAKER_02And litigation funding, again, is an amazing, it's a strange concept, isn't it? That the IP litigation should be something that's effectively its own investment class, I think.
SPEAKER_04It is. I mean, I guess you have a choice. You know, some people have a choice between investing in Apple stock or Google or Microsoft or whatever, but there is money that's looking for a greater rate of return. And um, just giving on the loan itself, uh, when these litigation funders give the loan to the NPE, they're charging anywhere from 20 to 35 percent interest, you know, far more than a bank. If the NPE could go to a bank, they would, but they they couldn't. So there's that guarantee return on the interest rate. And then, of course, if you hit the home run, um, their clients are doing well. And it's not, again, I don't think it's nefarious, it's just money that's looking for the best rate of return that it can get.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, yeah, that's I'm I'm interested in logistics, Bullham.
SPEAKER_02So I won't, I won't go there yet until you finish sort of um a couple more kind of landscape questions, really, which is uh uh yeah, we I think you've had some interesting stats about how much US patent litigation is NPE driven.
SPEAKER_04Oh yeah, it's it's the number it's the number one source of patent risk. In the US against a high-tech company, it's 90% of all patent litigation being filed. And the reality, it's you know, if you think it makes common sense, most operating companies don't have the desire or budget to go fight their competition. They're trying to deal with the tough economic times, they're trying to figure out tariffs, they're trying to figure out oil supply and gas prices and supply chain, and there just isn't that appetite to sue their direct competitor. Of course, the the only exception being the pharma folks still tend to do that, and that's because that's a different world of one patent, one product, and it's really fighting the livelihood of that product. But from a risk mitigation standpoint, if you're an in-house attorney, your job is to figure out the NPE problem.
SPEAKER_02Okay, and so very strong prevalence in the US, increasing visibility
Europe And The UPC Risk Shift
SPEAKER_02uh in in Europe. Uh, are you seeing any other around the world? Is it catching on this model?
SPEAKER_04Or there is there is some NPE activity in China, but at this point it's limited to one foreign entity suing another foreign entity in the Chinese leverage. Yeah. Yeah. So the courts, the Chinese courts are glad to allow you to have your fight in their courtroom. You just can't involve state-owned enterprises. That's that's not going to get you much success. Now, but in China, you don't have the same kind of injunction and damages risk uh that you do elsewhere. Brazil has gotten very uh a lot of attention recently uh because they're more of a timing standpoint, you can get a preliminary injunction within six weeks uh but after filing the court. So you have to be very responsive uh in addressing an NPE case there.
SPEAKER_01So Gwillam touched on the importance of Europe in terms of how you expand in the network. Uh so I'd just like to tease into that a wee bit. There are multiple Europe. So we use the word Europe and sort of interchangeably for all sorts of things. We've got the political Europe, the EU. Um we've got the geographical Europe, the physical continent, we've got the patent Europe, the EPC. Um, so there's there's multiple Europe's. Which one are you looking at? Is it a geographical thing? Is it a political thing? Where are you focusing?
SPEAKER_04Uh and I want to I would actually maybe introduce a fourth one. I would thank you. I would suggest maybe it's really the technical Europe. Um and this is really driven by the divergence of technology. So if you are a car maker, it doesn't really matter where you are, but you're a car maker, now you're incorporating wireless technology, NVIDIA technology.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_04Technology that came from outside of your industry. Um, if you're just a a retailer, now you're including AI in your customer databases and trying to predict what I should stock in my store. So now you're using AI technology. So I think it's this convergence of technology that as any European company uses more tech that they had nothing to do with developing, they're just increasing the risk of that risk exposure.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, yeah, but okay, I've got another Europe. There's probably some more as well. There's probably food Europe. Yeah, for sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Weather Europe, climate Europe, yeah. So in terms of uh let's sort of break it down a wee bit, because Europe is a difficult thing, it's almost intangible, isn't it, in terms of how you access it. Are there particular countries that you're keen to get into first? How does it work? What's the strategy?
SPEAKER_04Well, so I know where the problems are. Um what I'm seeing is the NVEs love the German courts uh for filing a lot of their activities. So really it's a question of who's gonna get sued in the German courts. So we already have Volkswagen, Mercedes, Daimler, um, they're all members of La Bosch, they're all members of Law. So really it's a question of who's gonna get pulled into those European at those German courts uh with the lawsuit. And given the kind of the universal nature of it, it could be from any country, it could be an Italian company, could be a company that's in Spain, but if you have some activity in Germany and you could get sued in Germany under the um the UPC, you're now at risk. So yeah. Um, and we're just trying, we're and I I really do feel like I'm in a race condition. I'm trying to get companies into luck, get them the vaccine before the disease gets to them. You know, because these trolls are trying to buy patents anywhere they can get them. And the strong the sooner I can get them into lock, uh, the more patents we can get under license. Right now we have six million patent assets already under our license. It's the world's largest patent pool of any kind, and that includes 25% of all US patents. So even if you are, you know, in the Netherlands or France, but you have some sales and activity in the US, you know, I can assure you that 25% of these patents uh US patents are not going to harm
Why Patents Feel Stronger Now
SPEAKER_04your your US business.
SPEAKER_01So that's opened up a couple of questions. Am I I like to carry on, Glenn for a bit? Yeah, that's opened up another couple of questions for me. Sorry, it's logistics is what I do, so that's the bit's the bit that really interests me. Um so Gwillem and I on an earlier podcast were talking about um forum shopping when it comes to litigation and also courts being increasingly competitive. Um how are you seeing that play out? Is that is that a real risk for people, forum shopping?
SPEAKER_04Uh I think it is. I don't know if we've had the verdicts that make it clear this verdict in Germany needs to be the place, is a hot place to go. I think it's more of a question: do the judges demonstrate an appetite and an understanding and a willingness to hear the patent cases? Uh-huh. And that's what I think the first wave of jury jury forum shopping is let me go where I think I'm gonna have a my case heard in a fair shot. Because the the NPEs, especially in Europe, they're only going to assert a patent they're fairly confident in. Yeah. They paid a lot of money for it, uh, probably with reads on some standard or uh something similar to a standard and a key implementation of a standard, and they're ex they're have big investors, they're expecting a big payday.
SPEAKER_01And in terms of getting into companies, be they big or not so big, uh I won't say SMEs because that's probably not a massive target, but it will be in the future, won't it? How what's your audience? Is it the board? Is it in-house attorney? Is it external counsel? What how would you cultivate the audience?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, it's interesting. It kind of depends on the size of the company. We do actually welcome SMEs. Um, Lot itself is a nonprofit, and we've grown so fast that we've actually had to make Lot free for any company with less than $25 million in turnover. So we have over 4,000 startups are part of our community. For them, it's free and they're getting the same, they're part of the hurt, they're getting the same defensive protection. Um, if I'm talking to a very large tech company with a large pad portfolio, it's usually the chief IP council. Yeah. Um, if it's somebody who's in the early rounds of funding, um, it tends to be a general council. And we're also seeing traction with like a chief risk officer. In many ways, we get put in the same bucket as you know, privacy insurance, cybersecurity insurance, DO insurance.
SPEAKER_01Yeah.
SPEAKER_04We're just another form of risk that companies of all sizes are acknowledging as out there. Um, obviously, you can't get insurance policy really to deal with IP risk, but for solving your NBE problem, you just join a lot.
SPEAKER_01So I guess our conversations have to be had with like finance leaders in organizations that you know what's it mean on the balance book?
SPEAKER_04Exactly. And then for them, it's usually a very easy decision. You know, for even the biggest of companies, it's $20,000 a year to be a member. Uh, you know, you could get if you get sued one time, this thing's more than pinged for itself. So it's it's a very easy ROI conversation to have as compared to trying to secure a you know cybersecurity policy or something like that.
SPEAKER_01I'm sitting here thinking, how does this change the world? That's that's because that always fascinates me. So this is new and growing, relatively new and growing. Your ambition would be to have more people in than outside, possibly everybody within rather than outside. Once everybody's within, has that changed the patent system so seismically that it no longer ceased to operate as it should?
SPEAKER_04Actually, I think it's going to be the best thing for the patent system, period. Um, so I've been around long enough. I've got the gray hair and the cigars approve it. Um, I remember a day when I was at a company and we spent a million dollars per patent for a portfolio of wireless patents. Just recently, the BlackBerry portfolio sold for less than $35,000 a piece. Yeah. What has happened is in the last 10, 15 years, much has been done to weaken the patent system. And it's all in response to the NPE problem. You're seeing things like the eBay case. You know, NPEs can't get an injunction. Uh, you're seeing damages go away. Now you're seeing uncertainty with 101. You saw AIA was introduced, and that what's brought the IPR. So now there's a chance that patent is never going to get uh survive the patent office review. So all these things were done to effectively defang the patent system because of the NPU problem. If we can eliminate the NPU problem, we can go back to a world that we should be in. I want a world with strong patents. Honestly, I'm a cancer survivor. And I'm only alive because a drug company invested RD on a drug that treated me. And you're only going to invest in RD if you're confident there's a patent that's going to protect your invention. Otherwise, everyone's going to steal it. And I've got five daughters and a beautiful wife. I want better drugs and treatments and cures, and I want to have grandkids. So I want
Litigation Funding And Global Hotspots
SPEAKER_04a strong patent system where operating companies have faith that their RD will be protected. Um, and we stop wasting money on the NPEs. Because no operating company is getting rich with this problem. It's just siphon away resources that should be reinvested in RD.
SPEAKER_02That's interesting. The NPE problem is a problem. It's bad for the reputation of the patent system. Yeah. But all the attempts to legislate it out of existence fail because there's no safe definition of an NPE. I mean, I get I know you guys have got one in your agreement, but I mean trying to do it at the legislative um level. And I remember hearing about this and saying that in the pharma business, a lot of companies probably qualify with any definition as an NPE but unfail it. The companies that develop have no intention of making because that's not how it works in farm, and they then license on or whatever it is, quite often will be caught by any kind of broad definition of NPE. So there has to be another way of doing it. And and as you say, as a result, the systems get weakened because we find we we make provisions for the whole system focused on that that that small that smaller problem. So it is it it worries me actually as part of the system. That's that's not my interview, but I'll just throw that one away. So I know that there's um various other models out there for kind of dealing with this in terms of collaborative models. Um one that's just caught my eye quite recently. I think they're called licensing negotiation groups and LNGs or something like this.
SPEAKER_04Well, is that is that the one that was brought about by the uh the auto industry? Yes, yeah, yeah. Yeah. That is, yeah, and that and that gets to be a bit of uh uh touchy. You have antitrust concerns where a group of operating companies are getting together, but they're doing it because they want to set the pricing for royalty rates. Right. So now you're so now you have the licensors, you have organizations like the Vonsi, the patent holders, the licensors, they believe they have the precedent and justification for a royalty rate. Now on the buy side, the licensees are saying, well, we think it we're gonna get together and try to influence the system and negotiate for a lower price. So that's all about royalty. And when you're doing that, that obviously triggers a lot of antitrust concerns. We don't we avoid that altogether because it's a free license. You know, everybody signs the exact same agreement, everybody's welcome as part of law. Whereas these licensing groups or pools, it tends to be just a handful of folks with a lot of market power trying to go directly against the other side who also has a lot of licensing power.
SPEAKER_02It's fascinating. The competition, I think we've never done one on competition law. No, we should. Which is quite interesting, but there's always that crossover between IP, which is literally monopolistic, versus competition law, which hates monopolies. And yeah, they both there's a place for both of them. But every now and then you get to that intersection, and you've got to try and work out how you go on. That is yeah, it's really interesting how they buffed up against each other. But that's that's a separate podcast.
SPEAKER_04So yeah. Well, we feel good about it because um the D of the Department of Justice, the FTC, they send very strong signals. The governments, I think universally, both in Europe and in the US, they prefer licensing over litigation. They they recognize how inefficient litigation is, and they much prefer the parties work it out themselves. And so, um, and the other advantage there is governments don't like figuring out the value of IP. What is this patent worth? And what's the right level of value? They much prefer the parties do that themselves. And so with law, you know, it's free. Everyone signs it, everyone's open to do it. It's the same agreement. Um, you can do it or not do it. It's absolutely voluntary. And uh I think that the models we'll try and echo and reaffirm many of the things the the DOJ said they would prefer license it and so done litigate over it.
SPEAKER_01So I have another question. Uh I'm looking at your badge, Ken, which we made you put on the table because it they jangle these uh inter badges. Um and it tells me that you're a speaker. So um trademark event. What are you doing here? I
Membership ROI And Who Should Join
SPEAKER_01think about hands.
SPEAKER_04Well, I have to thank Willem for that. Um and well, and kudos to Intel and kudos to uh SIPA for you know putting on an event together. I think far too long the trademark folks and the patent folks have been siloed. Yeah, I mean, I worked at big companies where I knew there were trademark lawyers there, I just never got to interact with them or see them. And it's dangerous in a large firm where you don't know what your colleague does. And that the more you can understand their trade and their craft, if you're doing an MA deal or something, you need to be in a position to appreciate what you have to worry about. Um, and for the smaller companies, I know a lot of small one-man, one-person, one-woman shops where one person has to do everything. And so I think if you can create a platform where you can get knowledge on patents and trademarks, that's uh that's a rare thing. I'm not that familiar with. I know where else you would go to get that, except for good.
SPEAKER_02No, and I think the I think the world needs a global IP, a patent, a global patent conference that has that same sort of scope as Inter. Therefore, putting it in one place makes sense. Uh I mean, you know, in private practice, for me it works because everyone will need to talk to you in one place. And I'll, you know, sure. If nothing else, it's going to save on flights for everybody and for the planet. Um, no, I'm looking forward to my panel actually, patent parent politics for it's a good thing. Oh, tell us a little bit about it, well, it's it's all I think the the there's two layers to it. One is how and why do patents go geopolitical, which they are. I mean, they they there's political elements, as you mentioned, uh potentially uh in the states, um, they're being used in trade negotiations more and more. I mean they'd be the subject of sanctions. The trade bazooka. Yes, so this power, they are a tool of power now, which they used to be a commercial tool, but there's a kind of a macro level. So that's an interesting one. But the other thing that uh Inter very kindly reminds us is that, and then remind people why it's relevant to your day job. Because I mean uh it's just not an academic one. We're actually going to talk about how might this affect your portfolio management, your decision making. So it's an interesting session, actually. It'll have been done, but I suspect by the time this podcast goes out, so I can tell you what actually good speakers too, the academics, we've got um people from you know the kind of these organizations like lot, we've got EPO speakers, uh range of, and we've got some people from oh Nokia's there as well, actually. So, you know, some people use the system, the whole thing, loads of different perspectives, probably some conflicting ones, but that's putting the sign of a good panel and perfectly valid as well. So, yeah.
SPEAKER_01And I think we're lucky we've got you coming along. We've got a ministerial reception tomorrow. I think we've got you coming
Inter Panels Patents Politics And Wrap
SPEAKER_01along to that game. I'm looking forward to it, yes. All these VIPs, I'm honored to be such a real smart people. They're all agree near you. I just imagine you're a consummate networker. I can sense that about it.
SPEAKER_04Well, that's that's what I like wearing the white hat is because no one, I I people like I can help people. I can, you know, I I've got 6,000 companies, I know the head of IP, I know the general counsel, so we're constantly putting people together. Uh and being a nonprofit, I'm usually the only person in the room who doesn't care about money. So that gives me a certain kind of credibility. Like, okay, okay, I can't yell at this guy because you know he's pretty transparent.
SPEAKER_01Well, Ken, thank you so much for coming on and sharing your time with us. Uh, enjoy the rest of the winter. I'm sure you're gonna have a great time right here. Um look forward to catching up with everyone in the week as well.