Clause 8

Eli Mazour
  • 5.0 (49)
  • Careers
  • Updated Biweekly

Clause 8 is the long-form IP podcast hosted by Eli Mazour, featuring conversations with the people and forces shaping the patent system. Its audience includes sophisticated in-house counsel, judges, IP policymakers, senior USPTO officials, patent dealmakers, and leading practitioners. The show is designed to help listeners stay ahead of the curve by understanding not just the latest patent developments, but the personalities, incentives, and institutions behind them. Clause 8 features conversations that provide strategic insight into patent law, policy, innovation, licensing, and other issues affecting the IP community. Past guests have included major American innovators, federal judges, USPTO Directors, senior IP staff on Capitol Hill, in-house leaders, patent dealmakers — and Carole Baskin’s attorney from Tiger King. Law360 featured Clause 8 first in its 2026 list of “5 Podcasts to Keep IP Attys Entertained and Informed,” describing its guests as “a bit of a who’s who of IP law.” Clause 8 has also been covered or cited by Bloomberg, Courthouse News Service, Above the Law, IAM, Original Jurisdiction, and other publications. www.voiceofip.com

  1. Jun 2

    Via Eyes "De Facto" Standards for Future Pools

    Kevin Mack, the new president of Via Licensing Alliance, joins Eli for the Clause 8 season finale. Kevin talks about Via's plans to build its next patent pools around "de facto" standards — technology the market adopted on its own, with no standards body behind it — which would push collaborative licensing into territory it has never touched. Mack also takes a hard look at the royalty-free models spreading through tech and AI, from AV1 to the new Shared AI License Foundation (SAIL), argues that "free" rarely stays free, and explains why he's optimistic about where the patent system is heading. Kevin and Eli also discuss: *Via's model and the "tipping point" that turns a pool from a few licensors into thousands of licensees *"De facto" standards: pooling patents for technology no standards body ever blessed *Leadership turnover at Via, the HEVC pool's move to Access Advance, and a new strategy-and-growth group *The push into semiconductors, including a new DRAM memory program *AV1, SAIL, and why Mack thinks royalty-free rarely stays free *Whether AI patents are as "foundational" as advertised — and why "AI is not new" *Efficient infringement, patents as property rights, and why companies ultimately take a license *The mood out of Via's Rome summit and a US patent system tilting back toward owners Notable names, companies & standards People: Kevin Mack (president, Via Licensing Alliance); Heath Hoglund (former Via president); John Amster (Jamster Capital; RPX co-founder) Organizations: Via Licensing Alliance (Via LA), MPEG LA, Dolby, Access Advance, Alliance for Open Media, Shared AI License Foundation (SAIL), WIPO (PatentScope), DOJ, USPTO SAIL founders / board (public): Anthropic, Genentech, IBM, Meta, Microsoft; board observers eBay and TD Bank Group; members include Block and Figma Standards & technologies: AAC, AVC (H.264), HEVC (H.265), AV1, MPEG-2, Qi wireless charging, DRAM memory, SEP / FRAND Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

    Via Eyes "De Facto" Standards for Future Pools

  2. May 19

    AI Boom Calls for New Copyright Law, Says USPTO Chief Behind the DMCA

    Bruce Lehman, head of USPTO from 1993 to 1998, joins Clause 8 for a wide-ranging conversation about the modern IP system, the internet boom, and why the AI era may require a new copyright response from Congress. Lehman helped shape internet-era copyright policy from the USPTO, including the work that led to the WIPO Copyright Treaties and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). He also played a major role in the broader 1990s pro-IP moment, when the United States was strengthening IP rights globally through TRIPS, WIPO, and trade policy. Now, Lehman argues that courts have spent the last two decades weakening copyright through an expansive view of fair use — creating a system where AI companies can train on massive amounts of human-created content without giving creators a meaningful stake. Asked whether new legislation is needed to protect creators in the AI age, Lehman does not hesitate: “The short answer is yes.” The episode also covers: *Lehman’s “patent pendulum” theory and why he believes the US is now in a low-protection IP era *How the DMCA emerged from the Clinton administration’s internet copyright work *TRIPS, WIPO, and the globalization of IP rights in the 1990s *Bayh-Dole and the rise of the university-to-startup pipeline *Lehman’s historic confirmation as the first openly gay man confirmed by the Senate *His role in turning the USPTO into a “prominent perch” for national IP policy *Gilbert Hyatt, submarine patents, and SAWS *USPTO telework, examiner retention, and modernization *His message that current leadership should “stop tormenting the Patent Corps” *The limits of AI — and why Lehman thinks it lacks the "metaphysical" spark behind true invention *Judge Pauline Newman and her pro-patent legacy Watch the full episode and read the companion post on Voice of IP: https://voiceofip.com/ Subscribe to the Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/@clause8 Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

  3. May 5

    The AI Patent Team Alice Built Shares Its Prosecution Secrets

    When Alice came down in 2014, much of the patent prosecution bar reacted with denial. Most practitioners hoped the USPTO, the Federal Circuit, or Congress would clean things up — and that adding some magic language to claims and specifications would eventually be enough. Eli Mazour and Ngai Zhang, separately, came to a different conclusion: there had to be a new, better way to obtain strong patents in the post-Alice world. They started comparing notes more than a decade ago, eventually converged on a shared approach, and now implement these strategies together at Foley & Lardner. On this episode of Clause 8, Eli and Ngai walk through what they actually do — their unique strategies for avoiding and overcoming Section 101 issues, why it's difficult for other attorneys to implement these strategies, and how they think their practice will be impacted in the age of AI. In this episode: * Why relying only on art unit prediction tools & wordsmithing is a losing strategy for § 101 * Why claim 1 shouldn’t be your broadest claim * How taking features out of independent claims helps advance prosecution - and how the strategy also leaves clients routinely surprised by how broad their issued claims end up * Examiner interviews as hostage negotiations: Ngai’s framework based on Chris Voss’s Never Split the Difference * Differing approaches that Ngai and Eli have on whether to push for an explicit on-the-record agreement before ending an interview * AI as a collaborator for patent drafting and prosecution * The importance of human interactions and communication for patent prosecution even in the age of AI Watch the full episode and read the companion post on Voice of IP: https://voiceofip.com/ Subscribe to the Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content: https://www.youtube.com/@clause8 📌 Presented by Tradespace — where ideas take flight. Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

    The AI Patent Team Alice Built Shares Its Prosecution Secrets

  4. Apr 21

    Inventor Gilbert Hyatt's gift to America — will America accept it?

    President Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick pride themselves on being dealmakers and on making the kind of unconventional deals for America no one else could have gotten done. Gil Hyatt is offering them one that sounds like a no-brainer. However, the question remains whether that dealmaking reputation is enough to overcome thirty years of inertia from prior administrations focused on opposing Hyatt, including most notably on keeping any more of his patents from ever issuing. Inventor Gil Hyatt returns to Clause 8 to discuss his proposal to donate foundational AI patents to the Pioneering AI Foundation, a nonprofit he says could help give the U.S. government new leverage to advance American interests. Hyatt also reflects on his decades-long battle with the USPTO, the motivation behind the foundation, and why he sees the project as a gift to America ahead of the nation’s 250th birthday. Will America accept the gift? The episode covers: * 00:23 — the ongoing battle with the USPTO * 02:44 — the Pioneering AI Foundation * 05:35 — using the ITC and trade agreements as leverage * 07:11 — human rights and labor unions: leveling the global playing field * 10:24 — AI in the classroom: the “super headstart” for children * 12:35 — relieving drudgery: AI as a catalyst for creative thinking * 14:27 — addressing skepticism: motives and financials * 16:16 — repaying the dream: the legacy of immigrant parents * 17:34 — advice for the next generation of inventors * 18:22 — final thoughts: destiny and helping America 🎧 Watch the full episode above or listen on your favorite podcast app—and subscribe to the Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content. 📌 Presented by Tradespace – where ideas take flight. Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

    Inventor Gilbert Hyatt's gift to America — will America accept it?

  5. Apr 7

    The Hidden Costs of “Free” Patent Licensing Initiatives

    Is anything in the patent world ever really free? That question anchors a new Clause 8 conversation between host Eli Mazour and Professor Kristen Osenga, a University of Richmond law professor and one of the leading academic voices on standard essential patents. At the center of the discussion is the rise of so-called “royalty-free” technology standards. Osenga’s point is straightforward: “free” often comes with strings attached — particularly for smaller innovators that may be required to cross-license valuable patent rights or accept terms they may later regret. Her main example is the Alliance for Open Media, the tech consortium behind a “royalty-free” video compression standard. The pitch sounds simple: use the standard without paying royalties. But, as Osenga explains, the real question is what companies may be giving up in return — and whether they fully understand the long-term cost of joining. She offers a simple analogy: a store gives away free croissants to get customers in the door. Customers build habits around it. Then one day the sign changes. In Osenga’s view, the same risk exists here. Companies can build products and business models around terms that may not remain as favorable as they first appeared. From there, the discussion broadens into the wider ecosystem of royalty-free standards, cross-licensing organizations, defensive patent pledges, and emerging AI-related IP initiatives. What is driving these arrangements? Collaboration? Public relations? Strategic control? And what, exactly, should companies think through before signing on? As Osenga puts it: “Follow the money … where are these groups making their money? Because it’s probably coming from some other part of their business model.” The episode also covers: * what the pattern of withdrawals from major cross-licensing organizations reveals about how these arrangements play out over time * SEP policy whiplash across US administrations, the Standard Essential Royalties Act (SERA), and where things stand now * the EU’s proposed SEP framework, and why it stalled * the litigation funding debate, including why Osenga founded The Inventors Defense Alliance * the Tillis-Schiff letter to ANSI, China’s push to shape global standards bodies, and the implications for US innovation leadership * why Osenga believes the RESTORE Act is critical to preserving US innovation leadership It is a conversation worth sharing with anyone focused on licensing, standards, or innovation policy. 🎧 Watch the full episode above or listen on your favorite podcast app—and subscribe to the new Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content. 📌 Presented by Tradespace – where ideas take flight. Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

    The Hidden Costs of “Free” Patent Licensing Initiatives

  6. Mar 22

    USPTO Director John Squires' 'Foxhole Buddy' Tells All, Previews Message at Upcoming House Hearing

    The story of how John Squires became USPTO Director doesn’t start inside the Beltway. It starts on the Appalachian Trail, with Doug Pittman camping under shooting stars the night after Trump won the election. Pittman — a serial entrepreneur, inventor, and self-described “foxhole buddy” and “wingman” of Squires — drove up from Georgia to sit down with Eli for this episode., fresh off a meeting with the new director himself. What he shared was a rare inside account of how Squires ended up in the job, what he walked into, and why Pittman believes the USPTO finally has the right person at the helm. “Andrei went to Trump and said I’ve Got Your Man” The short version: it was Pittman who planted the seed. The moment Trump won, Pittman texted Andrei Iancu — the former USPTO director — from a campsite on the trail. Other names were circulating, and he wasn’t a fan of what he was hearing. His answer was John Squires, his own patent attorney. Iancu’s response: Do you think John would do it? Pittman said he’d ask. When he did, Squires’ reaction was immediate: “Doug, you’ve lost your mind.” But Pittman kept pushing, and Iancu worked his magic with the new admistration. Then Howart Lutnick got confirmed as Commerce Secretary. Squires and Lutnick already had a bond forged after 9/11. When Lutnick landed at Commerce — the patent office’s parent agency — the pieces fell into place. “Andrei went to Trump and said, ‘I’ve got your man.’ Long story short, that’s how John became USPTO nominee.” In this episode, Doug discusses: * Journey from son of a pig farmer to serial entrepreneur — including selling his first company in 1998 without ever opening his own envelope * How a billboard spotted on a drive to college with his son inspired the invention that led his first patent, and the years-long journey to get that first patent granted * Why he cried when the patent arrived — and why tears of joy turned into “tears of unhappiness” * How John Squires led his enforcement strategy and and the twists & turns of that impacted Squires’ view of the patent system * Litigation funders walking away over Section 101 and PTAB exposure * The litigation saga, including the experience of having a judge handle a patent case for the first time * Meeting with former USPTO Director Kathi Vidal and Doug’s unvarnished take on her legacy * The PTAB problem, the injunctive relief gap, and what needs to happen for independent inventors to feel comfortable with the patent system * Squires’ upcoming testimony before the House IP committee — and why Pittman thinks it’s a pivotal moment * His “1-8-8 Project,” his advice to Squires to “push the limit,” and the personal picture he sent the director to serve as a daily reminder in his role 📌 Presented by Tradespace – where ideas take flight. Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

  7. Mar 10

    The USPTO Is Changing Course. The Early Examination Data Tells a More Complicated Story.

    Eli Mazour is joined by Juristat’s Francesca Cruz and patent attorney Clint Mehall to look at what the examination data actually says about recent USPTO changes. The conversation moves past anecdotes to analyze how new examiner performance appraisal plan (PAP), new Section 101 guidance, and the end of the AFCP program are affecting day-to-day patent prosecution. The guests discuss a new framework for examiner seniority based on "At-Bats"—the total number of applications an examiner has handled—rather than just years at the Office. The data reveals surprising trends in office action consistency and why mid-level examiners might be more difficult than juniors. The discussion also covers the measurable decline in after-final allowances, why practitioners are defaulting to RCEs, and whether new guidance is actually moving the needle on Section 101 rejections in difficult art units. Chapters:  00:00 - Introduction 03:00 - What Practitioners are Hearing: An "Incredible Year of Change" 04:39 - Examiner Morale and the New Performance Appraisal Plan 06:24 - Redefining Seniority: Measuring "At-Bats" vs. Tenure 12:07 - Data Reveal: Junior vs. Senior Behavioral Trends 15:47 - The "Confidence Gap" and Obviousness Theories 18:19 - Art Unit Volatility: Why Individual Stats Matter More Than Averages 22:52 - Interviews and AFCP: Addressing the USPTO "Myth-Busters" 28:44 - The Shift to RCEs and the Decline of After-Final Allowances 34:52 - Section 101 Trends: Has AI Guidance Changed Rejection Rates? 44:47 - Final Thoughts: Preparing for Prosecution in 2026 Subscribe to the Voice of IP Substack: https://voiceofip.com/ 📌 Presented by Tradespace – where ideas take flight. Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

  8. Feb 24

    From DABUS to ChatGPT and Beyond: How AI Is Reshaping Patent Law

    Artificial intelligence has been raising foundational questions for patent law long before generative tools entered the mainstream. In this episode of Clause 8, host Eli Mazour speaks with Wen Xie, U.S. Patent Attorney and Founder of Lux Lumen Intellectual Property, about how legal thinking around AI, inventorship, and patent eligibility has evolved—and where it appears to be heading. The conversation traces early debates sparked by the DABUS cases, which framed AI inventorship as a question of whether a machine could be named as an inventor. While those cases clarified that U.S. patent law requires a human inventor, they also highlighted a more practical issue that remains unresolved: how to evaluate human contribution when AI tools play a role in the inventive process, including in areas such as industrial design. The episode also examines the USPTO’s shifting approach to AI-related inventions, from post-Alice uncertainty to more recent Section 101 guidance and new USPTO Director’s John Squires Ex parte Desjardins PTAB decision. Wen discusses how applicants can position AI inventions as genuine technological improvements, avoid overreliance on “black box” disclosures, and manage Section 112 risks. The discussion concludes with a forward-looking look at using AI tools for patent practice, the USPTO’s new pilot for AI-powered pre-examination search, and what these developments mean for practitioners and innovators navigating a rapidly changing IP landscape. Watch the full episode or listen on your favorite podcast app—and subscribe to the new Clause 8 YouTube channel for bonus content. Presented by Tradespace – where ideas take flight. Chapters 00:01 – Wen Xie’s early interest in AI and patent law02:10 – AI disruption before ChatGPT: imaging, medicine, and automation04:56 – How AI reshaped Wen’s legal career05:55 – DABUS, Thaler, and the AI inventorship debate08:56 – Human contribution vs. AI output10:40 – Should companies restrict inventors from using AI?11:59 – What in-house counsel should ask about AI use14:20 – Duty of candor, recordkeeping, and litigation risk18:06 – Section 101 and AI as technological improvement22:50 – USPTO guidance, PTAB trends, and examiner behavior32:01 – Section 112 issues and describing machine learning33:40 – Using generative AI in patent drafting39:40 – Advice for junior attorneys in an AI-driven practice Disclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

    From DABUS to ChatGPT and Beyond: How AI Is Reshaping Patent Law
See All (102)

5
out of 5
49 Ratings

About

Clause 8 is the long-form IP podcast hosted by Eli Mazour, featuring conversations with the people and forces shaping the patent system. Its audience includes sophisticated in-house counsel, judges, IP policymakers, senior USPTO officials, patent dealmakers, and leading practitioners. The show is designed to help listeners stay ahead of the curve by understanding not just the latest patent developments, but the personalities, incentives, and institutions behind them. Clause 8 features conversations that provide strategic insight into patent law, policy, innovation, licensing, and other issues affecting the IP community. Past guests have included major American innovators, federal judges, USPTO Directors, senior IP staff on Capitol Hill, in-house leaders, patent dealmakers — and Carole Baskin’s attorney from Tiger King. Law360 featured Clause 8 first in its 2026 list of “5 Podcasts to Keep IP Attys Entertained and Informed,” describing its guests as “a bit of a who’s who of IP law.” Clause 8 has also been covered or cited by Bloomberg, Courthouse News Service, Above the Law, IAM, Original Jurisdiction, and other publications. www.voiceofip.com

Information

  • Creator
    Eli Mazour
  • Years Active
    2017 - 2026
  • Episodes
    102
  • Rating
    Explicit
  • Copyright
    © Voice of IP
  • Show Website
    Clause 8