Group Presentations on Intellectual Property

The 2 presentations on Intellectual Property on Monday by groups GeriAmbience and Interactive Architecture were quite good.

Interactive Architecture

Interactive Architecture made their visual written presentation in simple point form and elaborated on that with their oral presentation.  Their written presentation did not contain much information whereas with their oral presentation they explained each point.

They spoke about Patents, Trademarks, Copyright, Domain Names, Common Law Rights, Plant Breeder Rights and Circuit Layout Rights, however went into further detail with only Patents, Trademarks and Copyright.

For their examples Interactive Architecture used the Toyota Hybrid Engine and the Apple Retina Display as examples of designs that are patented. They spoke about other examples for copyright and Trademarks as well.

Their images were referenced, but the references disappeared when the image was enlarged.

They did not really relate their presentation to their project.

GeriAmbience

GeriAmbience had a different type of presentation on Intellectual Property. They related their presentation pretty much entirely on their project. They still went over the concepts of IP but also how IP is affecting the way they carry out their work, whether they need permission to use some technologies or methods.

GeriAmbience had no images in their presentation, it was a pretty well written presentation and pretty well spoken, I would have been able to understand the written presentation without the oral presentation and vice versa.

Their references were in one slide at the beginning of their written presentation rather than throughout the presentation, and because they had no images the references were for the information.

Instead of having external examples of IP, they had examples of IP within their project, with the use of their software and technology like Kinect for Windows, Kinect Sensor, Crysis Cryengine 3 and Arduino.

Overall

In listening to these two presentations, they were quite similar yet quite different. Interactive Architecture did not relate their presentation to their project where GeriAmbience did. Interactive Architecture had some good external examples in their presentation whereas GeriAmbience used the technology and programs they are using as their examples. The 2 groups differently explained the multiple parts of IP.

Overall they were good presentations on Intellectual Property.