Courtesy of the Founders League, we have the first iteration of the "Providence Startup Map." While there are inevitable omissions, and it is not clear how the creators define a "startup," the map demonstrates the tremendous growth in startups in Rhode Island over the past few years. Most of the companies appear to have been founded in the last 3 years, although some (like Andera) are longer in the tooth.
To quote from the Founders League announcement:
Just a few years ago, the landscape looked much different, with far fewer companies and entrepreneurs calling Rhode Island home. Several entrepreneurship support programs have also emerged, showing a growing optimism that our progress is sustainable and that we are just at the beginning of our startup revolution.
No one person or organization is responsible for the growth reflected on this map. The startup community is building momentum because many among us are rowing in the same direction and contributing in important ways.
Here's to lots more rowing and contributing over the next few years!!!
Please report any omissions to: info (AT) foundersleague (DOT) co
Thursday, December 12, 2013
Friday, November 8, 2013
RI VentureTracker™ --- What Happened? Venture Investments in RI Companies Plummet in Q3 2013
Venture capital investments in New England companies
jumped to $870 million invested in 109 companies in the third quarter of 2013,
according to the Money Tree Report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and the National
Venture Capital Association based on data from Thomson Reuters.
But only one of those companies is in Rhode Island,
netting a total of $499,000. The third
quarter dollar amount represents a 98.5% decrease over investments in Rhode Island companies
in the second quarter, when $33,308,000 was invested in 6 deals.
What happened? A
total of $53,508,000 had been invested in 9 Rhode Island companies in the first
half of 2013. This is the lowest
investment level in Rhode Island companies since 2007, when only $5 million
was invested in the entire year! Is it just a random occurrence? Or is it a sign that, despite all the hype,
Rhode Island government and institutions still are not really invested in
creating an environment in which start-up companies can flourish similar to
those in Massachusetts and California?
At the same time, investment levels across the U.S.
climbed. Nationally, venture capitalists
invested $7.8 billion in 1005 deals in the third quarter. This represents an increase of 12% in dollars
and a 5% increase in deals compared to the second quarter of 2013, when $7.0
billion was invested in 956 deals. The
Software, Biotechnology and Medical Device sectors received the most investment
dollars for the quarter. Investment in
Internet companies also held steady, with $1.5 billion being invested in 252
deals.
Locally, the only company to receive an investment in the third
quarter of 2013 is:
·
Neurotech USA, of Cumberland, received a follow-on
investment of $499,000 from Versant Ventures Inc., after receiving a $7,000,000
investment in the second quarter.
Neurotech is developing sight saving therapies for chronic retinal
disease.
Related Posts:
Venture Investments in RI Companies Jump in Q2 2013
Venture Investment Dollars in RI Companies Fall in First Quarter 2013
Venture Investment Dollars in RI Companies Soar in 2012
More Venture Dollars Find RI in 4th Quarter
Venture Dollars Find RI in Second Quarter 2011
Venture Investments in RI Companies Jump in Q2 2013
Venture Investment Dollars in RI Companies Fall in First Quarter 2013
Venture Investment Dollars in RI Companies Soar in 2012
More Venture Dollars Find RI in 4th Quarter
Venture Dollars Find RI in Second Quarter 2011
Friday, October 18, 2013
RI TrademarkTracker™ --- RI Trademark Filings Down 12.9% Through 3rd Quarter 2013
Applicants with Rhode Island addresses filed 230 applications to register trademarks with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) during the third quarter of 2013. This represents a 21% decrease over the 291 trademark applications filed by Rhode Island owners during the third quarter of 2012, and exactly the same number as the 230 trademark applications filed for the third quarter of 2011.
Through September 30, Rhode Island applicants have filed 737 applications with the PTO in 2013. This represents a 12.9% decrease over the 846 Rhode Island trademark applications filed for the first 9 months of 2012, and a 17.3 % decrease over the 891 trademark applications filed by Rhode Islanders for the first nine months of 2011.
Nationally, there is a slight upward trend in filings. A total of 78,945 trademark applications were filed with the PTO in the third quarter of 2013, representing a 1% increase over the 78,176 trademark applications filed in the third quarter of 2012. A total of 242,085 applications have been filed with the PTO in 2013 through September 30, representing a .2 % increase over the 241,628 applications filed during the first 9 months of 2012.
The most likely explanation for the downward trend in filings remains the sluggish economy in Rhode Island. During economic downturns, there are fewer new start up companies to file new applications, and mature companies are watching budgets carefully and only filing where necessary to protect their major brands. Nationally, the economy is picking up, but the trend has not really been felt here yet.
The top five RI filers during July, August and September of 2013 are 4 consumer product companies and one financial services company. Hasbro filed the largest number of applications among Rhode Island applicants with 20 filings. Alex and Ani was next with 17 applications. Hasbro subsidiary Wizards of the Coast was third with 9 filings, followed by RBS Citizens Financial Group (8 filings) and CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (8 filings).
Data supplied by PTO.
Related Posts:
RI Trademark Filings Decrease 9% in First Half of 2013 (8/15/2013)
Through September 30, Rhode Island applicants have filed 737 applications with the PTO in 2013. This represents a 12.9% decrease over the 846 Rhode Island trademark applications filed for the first 9 months of 2012, and a 17.3 % decrease over the 891 trademark applications filed by Rhode Islanders for the first nine months of 2011.
Nationally, there is a slight upward trend in filings. A total of 78,945 trademark applications were filed with the PTO in the third quarter of 2013, representing a 1% increase over the 78,176 trademark applications filed in the third quarter of 2012. A total of 242,085 applications have been filed with the PTO in 2013 through September 30, representing a .2 % increase over the 241,628 applications filed during the first 9 months of 2012.
The most likely explanation for the downward trend in filings remains the sluggish economy in Rhode Island. During economic downturns, there are fewer new start up companies to file new applications, and mature companies are watching budgets carefully and only filing where necessary to protect their major brands. Nationally, the economy is picking up, but the trend has not really been felt here yet.
The top five RI filers during July, August and September of 2013 are 4 consumer product companies and one financial services company. Hasbro filed the largest number of applications among Rhode Island applicants with 20 filings. Alex and Ani was next with 17 applications. Hasbro subsidiary Wizards of the Coast was third with 9 filings, followed by RBS Citizens Financial Group (8 filings) and CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (8 filings).
Data supplied by PTO.
Related Posts:
RI Trademark Filings Decrease 9% in First Half of 2013 (8/15/2013)
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
RI IPCaseTracker™ -- Only 2 New IP Cases Filed in RI in 3rd Quarter 2013
We knew it was too good to be true. We saw 10 new intellectual property (patent, trademark and copyright) case filings in the first six months of 2013 at the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island, 6 filings in June alone.But things returned back to normal levels in the third quarter, with only 1 new patent filing (which actually is a transfer from another judicial district) and 1 new copyright filing. Still, we are enjoying a 20% increase over the number of IP case filings for the first 9 months of 2012, and over the number of IP case filings for the first 9 months of 2011 as well.
Overall, patent filings lead the way so far in 2013, with 7 new case filings. There have also been 2 new trademark case filings, and 3 new copyright case filings. We will attempt to highlight some of these filings in upcoming blog posts.
These numbers only include cases that have been designated in the court's database as a patent, trademark or copyright case. There are other cases pending where the complaint may include trademark or other intellectual property claims, or where intellectual property counterclaims may have been asserted. But unless the case is designated as such in the court's database, we are not counting it here.
Related Posts:
6 New IP Cases Filed in RI in June 2013 (7/2/2013)
Overall, patent filings lead the way so far in 2013, with 7 new case filings. There have also been 2 new trademark case filings, and 3 new copyright case filings. We will attempt to highlight some of these filings in upcoming blog posts.
These numbers only include cases that have been designated in the court's database as a patent, trademark or copyright case. There are other cases pending where the complaint may include trademark or other intellectual property claims, or where intellectual property counterclaims may have been asserted. But unless the case is designated as such in the court's database, we are not counting it here.
Related Posts:
6 New IP Cases Filed in RI in June 2013 (7/2/2013)
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
RI VentureTracker™ --- Venture Investments in RI Companies Jump in Q2 2013
Venture capital investments in New England companies
jumped to $823 million invested in 114 companies in the second quarter of 2013,
according to the Money Tree Report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and the National
Venture Capital Association based on data from Thomson Reuters.
Six of those companies are in Rhode Island, netting a
total of $33,308,000. This represents a
62% increase over investments in Rhode Island companies in the first quarter,
when $20,500,000 was invested in 3 deals.
A total of $53,508,000 has been invested in 9 Rhode Island companies in
the first half of 2013.
At the same time, investment levels across the U.S. also
climbed. Nationally, venture capitalists
invested $6.7 billion in 913 deals in the second quarter. This represents an increase of 12% in dollars
and a 2% increase in deals compared to the first quarter of 2013, when $6.0
billion was invested in 896 deals. The
Software, Biotechnology and IT Services sectors received the most investment
dollars for the quarter. Investment in
Internet companies also increased, with $1.9 billion being invested in 270
deals.
Locally, the six companies to receive investments in the
second quarter of 2013 are:
·
Greenbytes, Inc.,
·
Mnemosyne Pharmaceuticals Inc., of
Providence, received a $5,166,000 early stage investment from existing
investors Atlas Venture Advisors Inc. and Clol Biotechnology Industries,
Ltd. Mnemosyne is developing small
molecule therapeutics to treat schizophrenia and other cognitive and
neuropsychiatric disorder.
·
Neurotech USA, of Cumberland, received a
later stage investment of $7,000,000 from Versant Venture Management LLC. Neurotech is developing sight saving therapies
for chronic retinal disease.
·
Swipely Inc., of Providence, closed a
Series B expansion investment in May of $12,000,000. The round was led by Shasta Ventures, with
participation from existing investors Greylock Partners, Index Ventures and
First Round Capital. Swipely provides a
payment processing platform and online tools to help businesses understand
their customers through analyzing their credit card and debit card usage.
·
Teespring Inc., of Providence, allows
non-profits and others to create and sell custom t-shirts with zero upfront
costs. Teespring received an undisclosed
amount from FoundersClub Inc., as part of an overall investment of $1.1 million
across 11 companies in Silicon Valley’s Y Combinator startup accelerator
program.
·
VoltServer, Inc.., of Charlestown, closed
on Series A investment of $2,142,000 in June.
Investors included Rhode Island’s Slater Technology Fund, Marker Hill
Capital, Natural Resources Capital Management, Angel Street Capital and the
Clean Energy Venture Group. VoltServer
has developed a digital power solution that enables telecom providers to
remotely power remote equipment over existing communications wiring.
Related Posts:
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Register Your Trademarks Early ... Or Else!
Dorpan, S.L. v. Hotel Melia, Inc., No. 12-1679 (1st Cir., Aug. 28, 2013)
A recent case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal court whose rulings cover Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico, demonstrates how important it is for business owners to register their trademarks as early as possible, and the consequences of not doing so.
The case involves a dispute between two hotels over the right to use the mark “Meliá” in Puerto Rico. Hotel Meliá, Inc. (HMI) has operated the Hotel Meliá in Ponce, Puerto Rico, at the same location without interruption since 1895. The hotel has achieved some reknown, and has attracted many famous guests over the years, including President Theodore Roosevelt. Although HMI claims that the Hotel Meliá is the oldest continuously operating hotel in Puerto Rico, HMI never registered its name as a trademark with either the Puerto Rico Department of State, or the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Sol Meliá, a public Spanish company, owns and operates the largest hotel chain in Spain and the third largest in Europe, as well as several hotels in North America using variations of the Meliá mark. Since the late 1990’s, Sol Meliá and its affiliated company Dorpan, S.L. (collectively, Dorpan), have registered 11 variations of trademarks containing Meliá with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for their hotel and resort services. In 2007, Sol Meliá renovated and reopened a luxury beach resort in Coco Beach, Puerto Rico, called “Gran Meliá,” about 80 mles from Ponce. HMI predictably objected, negotiations between the two companies broke down, and the dispute moved to court in 2008. The district court granted summary judgment for Dorpan, finding that “these two marks can co-exist within Puerto Rico without causing substantial confusion to the reasonable consumer.” HMI appealed.
On appeal, the First Circuit noted that, in the United States, trademark rights derive from use of the mark, not from registration, and analyzed the contours of Dorpan’s trademark rights under federal law and HMI’s trademark rights under common law. Dorpan’s trademark registrations had become “incontestable” under Section 15 of the Lanham Act, which creates a presumption that the holder of the mark is entitled to exclusive use of the mark throughout the United States if certain conditions are met. In this case, however, HMI raised a so-called “Section 15 defense.” Section 15 explicitly limits the incontestable right of a federal trademark holder to the extent, if any, to which use of a mark infringes a valid common law or state trademark right acquired by continuous use of a mark from a date prior to the date of Dorpan’s registration. As a result, Dorpan’s rights under federal law are limited to the extent of any rights HMI acquired under Puerto Rico common law before Dorpan’s federal registration issued.
A recent case from the First Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal court whose rulings cover Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico, demonstrates how important it is for business owners to register their trademarks as early as possible, and the consequences of not doing so.
The case involves a dispute between two hotels over the right to use the mark “Meliá” in Puerto Rico. Hotel Meliá, Inc. (HMI) has operated the Hotel Meliá in Ponce, Puerto Rico, at the same location without interruption since 1895. The hotel has achieved some reknown, and has attracted many famous guests over the years, including President Theodore Roosevelt. Although HMI claims that the Hotel Meliá is the oldest continuously operating hotel in Puerto Rico, HMI never registered its name as a trademark with either the Puerto Rico Department of State, or the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Sol Meliá, a public Spanish company, owns and operates the largest hotel chain in Spain and the third largest in Europe, as well as several hotels in North America using variations of the Meliá mark. Since the late 1990’s, Sol Meliá and its affiliated company Dorpan, S.L. (collectively, Dorpan), have registered 11 variations of trademarks containing Meliá with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for their hotel and resort services. In 2007, Sol Meliá renovated and reopened a luxury beach resort in Coco Beach, Puerto Rico, called “Gran Meliá,” about 80 mles from Ponce. HMI predictably objected, negotiations between the two companies broke down, and the dispute moved to court in 2008. The district court granted summary judgment for Dorpan, finding that “these two marks can co-exist within Puerto Rico without causing substantial confusion to the reasonable consumer.” HMI appealed.
On appeal, the First Circuit noted that, in the United States, trademark rights derive from use of the mark, not from registration, and analyzed the contours of Dorpan’s trademark rights under federal law and HMI’s trademark rights under common law. Dorpan’s trademark registrations had become “incontestable” under Section 15 of the Lanham Act, which creates a presumption that the holder of the mark is entitled to exclusive use of the mark throughout the United States if certain conditions are met. In this case, however, HMI raised a so-called “Section 15 defense.” Section 15 explicitly limits the incontestable right of a federal trademark holder to the extent, if any, to which use of a mark infringes a valid common law or state trademark right acquired by continuous use of a mark from a date prior to the date of Dorpan’s registration. As a result, Dorpan’s rights under federal law are limited to the extent of any rights HMI acquired under Puerto Rico common law before Dorpan’s federal registration issued.
In analyzing HMI’s rights under common law, the First
Circuit correctly noted that HMI, as the senior user, does not automatically
acquire exclusive right to use the mark throughout Puerto Rico. Rather, HMI is entitled to exclusive use of
the mark in the area where it “currently do[es] business” using the mark. The First Circuit equated this area to the
“one in which the use of a similar mark would create a likelihood of
confusion.” As a result, the First
Circuit treated the inquiry into the scope of HMI’s pre-existing common law
trademark rights and the likelihood of confusion analysis between HMI’s and
Dorpan’s marks as one and the same.
The First Circuit next undertook a traditional
multi-factor likelihood of confusion analysis, and, with one exception, reached
the same conclusion as the district court on the factors. The only factor where the First Circuit and
the district court reached a different conclusion was on the strength of the
marks. Here, the First Circuit found
errors in the district court’s analysis.
The court felt there were genuine issues of material fact on the
relative strength of the two competing marks.
The court noted that a reasonable jury could find that Dorpan would be
able to use its greater financial strength to flood the market with
advertising, thereby causing HMI to lose control over its brand and
reputation. The court also noted that,
on the other hand, a reasonable jury could conclude that “Hotel Meliá” was so
strongly associated with historic downtown Ponce that consumers are unlikely to
associate it with a hotel in Coco Beach.
As a result, the court vacated the summary judgment ruling, and remanded
the case for further factual determinations on the issue of likelihood of
confusion.
The case is instructive for several reasons:
·
It serves as a reminder that trademark owners
should file trademark applications as early as possible. If HMI had filed its applications prior to
the time Dorpan filed its U.S. applications in the 1990’s, Dorpan probably
would not have been able to obtain U.S. registrations, and the position of the
litigation would have been much different.
The modest cost of obtaining a U.S. registration is far, far less than
the amounts HMI must have spent litigating this issue in the federal courts.
·
By not registering its trademarks before Dorpan,
and by not petitioning to cancel Dorpan’s registrations before they became
“incontestable,” HMI’s use of its MELIÁ
mark is limited to use where it “did business” prior to the date of
Dorpan’s Certificate of Registration.
The First Circuit noted that, for a hotel, this area is much larger than
the city in which it operates. Unlike
other service providers, hotels seek to attract customers physically distant
from the point of service, so HMI’s rights even may extend outside of Puerto
Rico. But for most service providers,
the area in which it “does business” is going to be limited.
·
The decision also reminds us that the first user
of a trademark can never be stopped from using its mark, even by a junior user
who obtains an incontestable U.S. registration, at least to the extent the mark
was in use on the date that the junior user obtains its U.S. Certificate of
Registration.
·
The scope of the senior user’s common law rights
are more or less co-extensive with the area in which there is likelihood of
confusion. In other words, if there is likelihood of confusion in an area, then
the senior user has trademark rights there.
In an actual dispute, survey evidence would probably be required to
demonstrate likelihood of confusion.
Thursday, August 15, 2013
RI Trademark Filings Decrease 9% in First Half of 2013
Applicants with Rhode Island addresses filed 505
applications to register trademarks with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) during the first half of 2013.
This represents a 9% decrease over the 553 trademark applications filed
during the first 6 months of 2012.
The top five RI filers during the first half of 2013 are
all consumer product or entertainment organizations, which is not
surprising. Hasbro led the way with 33
filings. The Big East Conference was
next with 27 filings, in support of its search for a new name and identity for the members who did not split off and retain the Big East name. Hasbro subsidiary Wizards of the Coast was
third with 18 filings, followed by CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (10 filings) and DécorCraft, Inc., the Providence-based consumer product design and distribution
company (8 filings).
Data supplied by the PTO.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Introducing Italian Technology and Gaming Attorney Giulio Coraggio
I am pleased to introduce Giulio Coraggio, an Italian attorney in DLA Piper's Milan office, who specializes in gaming law, Internet law and technology law issues, and who writes a blog called "GamingTechLAW" (subtitled: "The Blog on Gaming and Technology Law and Whatever Sounds Interesting").
Giulio has written a series of articles for his blog dealing with the legal issues with clauses in outsourcing agreements. In particular, recently he has written a post on the importance of Intellectual Property clauses that anyone who negotiates or reviews outsourcing agreements should read.
Even though Giulio writes from an Italian law perspective, his advice also is sound for those of us who draft and negotiate these clauses in the United States. It is interesting that, despite differences in the common law and civil law legal systems, the provisions in these agreements address practically all of the same concepts and issues.
If you enjoy the post on intellectual property clauses, here are links to the other posts in the series so far:
Liability Clauses
Termination Clauses
SLA's and Penalty/Liquidated Damages Clauses
Forum Selection and Applicable Law Clauses
Giulio has written a series of articles for his blog dealing with the legal issues with clauses in outsourcing agreements. In particular, recently he has written a post on the importance of Intellectual Property clauses that anyone who negotiates or reviews outsourcing agreements should read.
Even though Giulio writes from an Italian law perspective, his advice also is sound for those of us who draft and negotiate these clauses in the United States. It is interesting that, despite differences in the common law and civil law legal systems, the provisions in these agreements address practically all of the same concepts and issues.
If you enjoy the post on intellectual property clauses, here are links to the other posts in the series so far:
Liability Clauses
Termination Clauses
SLA's and Penalty/Liquidated Damages Clauses
Forum Selection and Applicable Law Clauses
Friday, July 5, 2013
Venture Investment Dollars in RI Companies Fall in First Quarter 2013
Venture capital investments in New England fell to $677 million
invested in 88 companies in the first quarter of 2013, according to the MoneyTreeReport by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture
Capital Association based on data from Thomson Reuters. This represents a 22% decline from the fourth
quarter of 2012.
Three of those companies are in Rhode Island, netting a total of
$20,500,000. However, one long-standing biotechnology company, Nabsys,
Inc., received $20,000,000 of those funds.
At the same time, investment levels across the U.S. continue to
decline. Nationally, venture capitalists invested $5.9 billion
in 863 deals in the first quarter. This represents a decrease of 12%
in dollars and a 15% decrease in deals compared to the fourth quarter of 2012,
when $6.7 billion was invested in 1,013 deals.
The Software, Biotechnology and Medical Device sectors once again
received the most investment dollars for the quarter. Investment in
Internet companies declined, with only $1.4 billion being invested in 231
deals.
Locally, the three companies to receive investments in the first
quarter of 2013 are:
Absolute Commerce, Inc., of Providence, received an early stage
investment of $250,000 from the State’s
Slater Technology Fund. Absolute
Commerce is developing electronic
procurement technology designed to speed the process of integrating suppliers’
product catalogs with buyers’ electronic resource management (ERP) computer
systems.
Care Thread, Inc. (formerly called Consano Inc.), of Providence,
also received a
$250,000 early stage investment from the Slater Fund. Care Thread delivers a HIPAA-compliant mobile
messaging solution that provides every member of a patient’s health care team
with real-time information detailing a patient’s status and treatment.
Nabsys,Inc., of Providence, closed a $20,000,000 Series D follow on investment in
March. The financing was led by new
investor from Bay City City Capital, with participation from existing
investors, including Point Judith Capital and Stat Venture Partners. The money will be used to support the
commercial launch of the company’s positional sequencing platform used in DNA
analysis, genome mapping and genome sequencing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)