The IP Trailhead from JMB Davis Ben-David April 2026

In a Better Place

The Value of IP

Jeremy Ben-David, Founder, Managing Partner

An Israeli, English-language newspaper recently published the following headline: Israeli battery-swapping IP owners demand $250 million from Chinese EV giant for patent infringement.

It was quite unusual, if only because the IP being asserted is part of a patent portfolio that belonged to the now defunct company Better Place which went bankrupt in 2013.

Enter the concept of the ‘shelf life’ of IP and the phenomenon of non-practicing entities referred to as NPEs, primarily by those who not only understand patents and agree that they make a positive contribution to society, but also understand that owning patent rights purely as a financial tool, without undertaking any manufacturing type of activity associated with the patented inventions, may be perfectly valid, in a multitude of scenarios.

There also those who are prejudiced against the very concept of intellectual property. Some of them use the popular press as their primary source of information about patents, and the inherent lack of accurate and impartial information often reinforces such prejudice, and may induce them to dismissively refer to NPEs as ‘patent trolls’.

So here I am, sitting at my desk and sipping my coffee as I peruse the news report about the Better Place patent suit. As I consider the world of NPEs vs trolls, my daydreams have me striking up an imaginary conversation with a person, a Luddite who would sooner break machines than see technological advances. I may drop the phrase “patent troll” into said conversation, possibly with an appropriate epithet, and then watch them simmer with righteous outrage.

But then I would steer the conversation to a much lighter, happier subject. I would tell them about a startup company who wanted to save the planet from noxious, carbon-based pollution by doing away with gasoline (if you’re in New York) or petrol (if you’re attending the upcoming INTA conference in London).

I’d be sure to catch their attention.

And then I’d tell them that the company concerned believed in fuel tank replacement ideology.

And when they hear that, they’ll be intrigued as to how it is all supposed to work; and I’d tell them that they wanted to replace gas tanks with batteries, and that they’d have electric refueling stations which would replace conventional refueling stations.

“Go on”, my conversation partner would then urge, “what else”? “Oh”, I’d say, and I’d add that when you get to an electric refueling station, you’d simply slip out the spent battery and pick up a fully charged replacement.

“That’s genius”, I’d hear. “That will move the World to a far, far better place”, they might say. And then, their own stroke of creativity would be restrained no more. They’d smile knowingly. They’d take a deep breath. And they’d come out with it. “I don’t know what they named their company, but they should call it “Better Place!” they say.

And what would I do? I’d wait for a moment. Somewhat bemused, almost embarrassed, but then I’d confirm to them that the company had indeed been called “Better Place”. They’d smile, but then crease their brow with a frown. “What do you mean “had”, “don’t you mean “is”? Actually, I’d say, “no. Better Place” filed for bankruptcy in 2013, so they are actually in a “better place” of a different kind.”

But then I could tell them not to worry, because the IP had been sold at the time, presumably to pay off some of the accumulated debts, and had been bought by a company called Charge Peak, a non-practicing entity, an NPE. “Oh” my conversation partner would exclaim, somewhat puzzled. “What’s an NPE, what do they produce?”.

“Nothing”, I would say. “They realized that the business idea dreamed up by Better Place was somewhat ahead of its time. So they waited for the advent of the electric car business globally, and for someone to start infringing the patents that they’d bought from Better Place. And now, 13 years later(!) they’re suing the Chinese electric vehicle company Nio for$250 million, alleging patent infringement.

I’m not sure how my imaginary conversation would end. Hopefully, I’d be able to explain that there’s more to the field of IP than populist concepts. I have maintained for many years that in the laws of some countries (including in Israel and India) there exists the concept of ‘working’ a patent. In Israel, if a patented invention is not being sufficiently worked e.g. if a patented medicine is not being produced in sufficient quantity at reasonable cost to the consumer, it may be subject to the issuance of a compulsory license.

Anyway, as I wake up from my reverie, I notice that my coffee seems to have cooled off, a sure sign that I need to get up and take a stretch, at least as far as the coffee machine.

Oh, and apropos coffee, INTA is about to start. If you see Avraham Hermon, a senior JMB partner and podcast host, be sure to say hi!