Arbitration and the Future of Intellectual Property Disputes

Young ICCA is pleased to present a panel discussion of “Arbitration and the Future of Intellectual Property Disputes” during the fourth annual California International Arbitration Week (CIAW), on 12 March 2025.

Parties frequently opt for arbitration where confidentiality is a concern, and arbitration can be attractive to parties in disputes involving intellectual property, technology, and life sciences, all of which are cornerstones of California’s economy. Jurisdictional rules often limit what is arbitrable, and parties have taken to including IP “carve-out” provisions in their contracts.  More recently, however, a global trend in favor of the arbitrability of intellectual property disputes has seen a decline in the use of “carve-out” provisions and an increase in the number of intellectual property-related matters brought to arbitration.  

This event will bring together a panel of diverse professionals working at the intersection of arbitration and intellectual property to discuss: (1) the varied nature of intellectual property disputes, from infringement actions to breach of contract claims; (2) the worldwide trend toward arbitrability and arbitration of intellectual property disputes; and (3) the advantages and disadvantages of arbitration for parties to such disputes.

The panel will be moderated by Young ICCA Co-Chair Eva Y. Chan and will include Thomas W. Walsh (Partner, Freshfields), Rina See (Barrister, Bankside Chambers), and Giorgio A. Sassine (Associate, Musick Peeler; Secretary of the Board of CalArb).  

The panel discussion will last approximately 90 minutes, followed by a networking reception.

Post-Event Report: Young ICCA Panel at California International Arbitration Week

Written by Max Novak.

On March 12, 2025, Young ICCA hosted a panel discussion titled “Arbitration and the Future of Intellectual Property Disputes” during the fourth annual California International Arbitration Week. The panel was moderated by Eva Y. Chan (Young ICCA Co-chair and Associate at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom) and featured speakers Thomas Walsh (Partner, Freshfields), Rina See (Barrister, Bankside Chambers), and Giorgio Sassine (Senior Associate, Musick Peeler and Secretary of the Board of CalArb).

Following an introduction and overview of Young ICCA and its initiatives, Ms. Chan began with a discussion of global trends in arbitration and intellectual property. Ms. See spoke to the increasing number of intellectual property-related cases being referred to arbitration, and Mr. Walsh emphasized that jurisdictions worldwide have increasingly become hospitable to arbitration of intellectual property disputes. Mr. Walsh also highlighted that “IP Carve Out” provisions have become less common in contracts, while noting that practitioners may still find such provisions in older contracts or those based on outdated precedents.

Ms. Chan also prompted the panelists to discuss arbitration from the perspective of California parties, particularly those in the tech industry. Mr. Sassine and Mr. Walsh emphasized that though tech companies were traditionally skeptical of arbitration, they have started to come around, particularly due to the advantages of international enforcement provided by the New York Convention. Ms. See highlighted that technical issues and confidentiality are typically the primary concerns for parties in the tech industry, and that institutions such as the American Arbitration Associations have adopted specialized rules designed to facilitate arbitration of patent and trade secret disputes. Mr. Sassine also noted that “tech lists” developed by institutions such as the Silicon Valley Arbitration & Mediation Center have become a useful starting point for parties seeking arbitrators with relevant industry experience.

The panelists also addressed the common misconception that California is “unfriendly” to arbitration. Mr. Walsh countered this narrative by emphasizing that the state’s position on consumer and employment arbitration did not reflect its position on international arbitration. Mr. Sassine also emphasized the benefits of a California seat, given the California courts’ robust experience with IP matters, and Ms. See highlighted initiatives such as the recent partnership between the Singapore International Arbitration Center and FedArb that are focused on developing international arbitration in the state. Mr. Sassine concluded by encouraging arbitration practitioners to educate their clients and transactional colleagues in California about the benefits of arbitration and the importance of well-drafted arbitration clauses, a sentiment that was echoed by several members of the audience.

In conclusion, the panel provided up-to-date insights on the current landscape for arbitration of IP disputes, both globally and in the state of California, which will be useful to arbitration practitioners as well as clients and potential users of arbitration in the intellectual property and technology spaces.