<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Case Study- Client Reconsiders a “Non-Negotiable” RFP  IP Ownership Provision</title>
	<atom:link href="http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/case-study-client-reconsiders-a-%e2%80%9cnon-negotiable%e2%80%9d-rfp-ip-ownership-provision/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/case-study-client-reconsiders-a-%e2%80%9cnon-negotiable%e2%80%9d-rfp-ip-ownership-provision/</link>
	<description>For RFPs and Pitches</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 20:01:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Congdon</title>
		<link>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/case-study-client-reconsiders-a-%e2%80%9cnon-negotiable%e2%80%9d-rfp-ip-ownership-provision/comment-page-1/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Congdon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 21:01:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/?p=200#comment-42</guid>
		<description>Congrats on what seems to be a successful push-back. Despite their &quot;no&quot; the first time, you stuck to your guns. Bravo. And the 4A&#039;s is in a great position to provide the industry with the ammo needed. 

One has to wonder how many clients would be willing to change their policy. Perhaps the client deserves some kudos here, too. The practice certainly suggests they could be a good partner.

Respectfully,

Steve Congdon
(agency-only new biz consultant)
Thunderclap Consulting Group</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congrats on what seems to be a successful push-back. Despite their &#8220;no&#8221; the first time, you stuck to your guns. Bravo. And the 4A&#8217;s is in a great position to provide the industry with the ammo needed. </p>
<p>One has to wonder how many clients would be willing to change their policy. Perhaps the client deserves some kudos here, too. The practice certainly suggests they could be a good partner.</p>
<p>Respectfully,</p>
<p>Steve Congdon<br />
(agency-only new biz consultant)<br />
Thunderclap Consulting Group</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tomfinneran</title>
		<link>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/case-study-client-reconsiders-a-%e2%80%9cnon-negotiable%e2%80%9d-rfp-ip-ownership-provision/comment-page-1/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>tomfinneran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/?p=200#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Re: IP Ownership

4A has heard of a number of instances where agencies have been successful in calmly and thoughtfully “pushing back” when the prospect “insists” on owning all IP. Your agency should explain to the prospect why it is important (and fair) for the agency to preserve ownership of its new business ideas and work product –and—let the prospective client know that their rights to use work product that they develop can also be protected.

To assist you in new business IP discussions with prospects there are tools available from the 4A that were used by the agency that submitted the “Non-Negotiable” case study post. The Guidance section of Review Central includes:

--4A Committee Advocates Agency New Business IP Protection.
The new business committee letter to search consultants advocating protection of agency I.P. developed during the review process

--The New Business Tool Kit contains best practice guidance including position papers related to protecting agency new business I.P.:
….Ownership of Agency Ideas, Plans and Work Developed During the New Business Process
….Agency Search Agreements

Tom Finneran
4A Agency Management Services</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: IP Ownership</p>
<p>4A has heard of a number of instances where agencies have been successful in calmly and thoughtfully “pushing back” when the prospect “insists” on owning all IP. Your agency should explain to the prospect why it is important (and fair) for the agency to preserve ownership of its new business ideas and work product –and—let the prospective client know that their rights to use work product that they develop can also be protected.</p>
<p>To assist you in new business IP discussions with prospects there are tools available from the 4A that were used by the agency that submitted the “Non-Negotiable” case study post. The Guidance section of Review Central includes:</p>
<p>&#8211;4A Committee Advocates Agency New Business IP Protection.<br />
The new business committee letter to search consultants advocating protection of agency I.P. developed during the review process</p>
<p>&#8211;The New Business Tool Kit contains best practice guidance including position papers related to protecting agency new business I.P.:<br />
….Ownership of Agency Ideas, Plans and Work Developed During the New Business Process<br />
….Agency Search Agreements</p>
<p>Tom Finneran<br />
4A Agency Management Services</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

