By Leo Valiquette
I got a call last week from my incumbent Canadian telecom services provider eager to justify its existence to me.
We all get these calls from time to time. One of those “how can we serve you better” calls. This shouldn’t have been surprising, considering how my service provider’s top rival had been crawling all over my neighbourhood the past couple of weeks installing new fibre services.
I don’t mind taking a call in the middle of a workday if the intent truly is to find a better way to serve me, and for less money, to boot.
But my patience had worn thin after 20 minutes on the phone while this less-than-nimble customer service rep fumbled around; it was all for the sake of a mere $7 a month, after all. Then I got lost in some on-hold void waiting to seal the deal with the verifier.
I finally hung up at the 30-minute mark. There was no profusely apologetic followup call through the remainder of that day. In fact, the service rep didn’t call back until the very same time the next day, when I had less time to spare. I didn’t take the call. She never left a message. Maybe I’ll call them back later this week. Or maybe I’ll call those other guys about their fibre service.
Read More
By David French 
“Don’t disclose your invention or you’ll lose your patent rights!” This is the type of advice that you will typically get in a coffee shop, or over a beer around 5:30 in the evening before you head home. Is this true?
Well the answer really is, “Yes and no.” How can this be?
The answer is that you will lose your patent rights in Europe and countries generally that adopt a standard of “absolute world novelty” as a requirement for granting a patent. I like to describe this as requiring that an invention be “pristine” in order to qualify for a patent grant under this standard. But you will not lose your patent rights in Canada, and not in certain other important countries, simply by disclosing the invention yourself. At least, you will not lose your patent rights immediately.
At least four countries in the world — Canada, USA, Australia and the Republic of South Korea — provide an unqualified one-year grace period to excuse public disclosures made by an inventor (or applicants claiming rights under an inventor meaning assignees). A number of other countries, such as Japan, do have grace periods but they are often limited to six months and in some cases only protect certain types of disclosures. All countries around the world are required by an international convention to give a period of protection against an applicant’s own disclosures where the disclosures occur at a recognized international exhibition, according to Paris Convention Article 11.
Read More
By Denzil Doyle
Canada’s current prime minister seems to have a better understanding of the impact of technology on the country’s economy than most of his predecessors. He is not afraid to refer to key reports like the Jenkins Report and to engage in dialogue with the trade associations that are relevant to the industry. However, he would be well advised to urge his speech writers to be a little more selective in his use of the phrase “R&D.” Like most politicians and bureaucrats, his speeches suggest that if we just do more R&D, our payback from the technology that it creates will be automatic. As a result, they have established goals for R&D in Canadian industry, and they have been critical of Canadian industry when those goals are not met.
What we must do is focus the dialogue more directly on Canada’s share of world trade in technology-based products and services and less on R&D. For example, it would be refreshing to hear the PM make a statement like, “It is unacceptable for a country like Canada to have such a large trade deficit with the rest of the world in technology-based goods and services.” The dialogue will not be easy; the definition of high technology can be vague and so can its value on both a national and international basis. Worse still, there is a strong lobby for the status quo and it is generating lots of R&D dollars, particularly for government laboratories and universities.
Read More
By Daylin Mantyka
It’s Friday again, which means we’ve compiled a short list of the top articles we read and loved this week. Compliments of Business 2 Community, The Globe and Mail, VentureBeat and Marketo, these posts were shared extensively throughout the startup and marketing communities.
First up, an article that reminds us about the definition of copywriting, followed by a post on crowdfunding in Canada. Third, we’ve selected a highly-shared article that challenges the notion of the lean startup methodology. Next, a post that explores how a background in physics can help with a career in marketing. We conclude with an optimistic outlook for the Canadian tech scene.
What is copywriting and why is it not content marketing?
Julia Spence reminds us that although copywriting and content marketing are often used in the same context, they aren’t synonymous with one another. This post is a good refresher on what copywriting is and what a copywriter does.
Read More
From all of us at Francis Moran and Associates, we hope you have a relaxing and safe Canadian Thanksgiving weekend. Regular posting will resume tomorrow.
