Here's a guide that points out how to run your startup board meetings with panache and verve: the aptly titled How to Run a Startup Board Meeting, courtesy of blogger Andrew Payne. And after all his startup experience, Payne knows that of which he speaks. Here's a little sample of what's in store for the brave clicker who boldly makes the leap to wiki.payne.org:

It's important to remember the board’s primary purpose: to hire (or fire) the CEO. The board really only makes that one decision at each meeting.

A secondary purpose is advising the CEO and management team. In a well-functioning board, the directors give advice and opinion, but the CEO and team make the decisions (which might be against board advice, but they’ve got to live with the consequences). The board does not set the plans, objectives, goals, or strategy; instead, the CEO develops these, and presents them to the board for discussion, feedback and (possibly) approval.

Finally, the board formally approves certain business items (as dictated by the company by-laws), such as: stock and option grants, 401(k) plans, compensation for executives, etc. Also, in smaller companies, board approval may be needed for any obligation above a certain threshold (e.g. $100k or $250k). If there’s a question about an item needing board approval, it’s best to err on the side of caution and get formal approval.

After such a meaty quote, it's good to know that Payne explicates things further in the rest of his piece and should you find yourself in the enviable position of putting together your very own startup board, be sure to read the entire thing for yourself.

The 271 Patent Blog: Peter Zura sure knows how to write a synopsis with the best of them. Why not try his Report From IP Business Conference 2009 for an example of his exemplary blogging capabilities? Here's just one of the paragraphs from what is most likely the best reportage of its kind on the IPBC09:

China – Speaker: Ian Harvey, Chairman, Intellectual Property Institute. According to Ian, Chinese IP laws continue to develop and are becoming among the best in the world. The quality of patents were described as “particularly good,” even for applications filed by foreign firms. CIPO recognizes that more examiners are needed, and is in the process of instituting a massive training program to get examiners specialized in examining patents in their technical fields. Costs for prosecution is reasonable, but not cheap. Currently, China is aiming to become one of the top 5 patentees in the world by 2015.

But wait, there's more! Simple click on the above link to Zura's site and check out the rest of the story in all its explicative glory.

BusinessWeek.com: There are many in the storied annals of legal work who stand out from their much-maligned peers. People like Thomas Jefferson, or maybe even President Bill Clinton, if you're feeling kindly, but do you know about a new kid on the block who's sure to join the proud ranks of the litigatory Hall of Fame? Enter John Duffy. You might not recognize him at first glance, but unless you've been hiding on some far-away island under a proverbial rock, you know some of the very famous, and precedent-setting, cases he's worked on. Cases like Bilski, and KSR. You *do* know those names, nu? Michael Orey hopes to increase your familiarity with Mr. Duffy's on-going crusade to change the landscape of US patent law in his recent article, A Scholar-Activist Challenges U.S. Patent Law. Orey writes of Mr. Duffy's exploits, "Last spring, in a case known as Bilski, the Federal Circuit hand-picked Duffy to argue for broadly patenting business methods. The court rejected his argument in an October ruling that significantly pared back what can be patented. Now that the case is headed to the Supreme Court, Duffy says he expects to make another amicus—or friend of the court— filing." Will Duffy meet with better success in front of SCOTUS, or will he have to go back to training for his next big patent win?

PatentBaristas.com: A timely book review in the subject area of intellectual property (IP) is always a welcome addition, yes? Stephen Albainy-Jenei aims to satisfy with his recent look at the Annual Review of Intellectual Property Law Developments: 2006-2008. Albainy-Jenei suggests you add this (initially) 3-years-in-one tome to your IP must-read list. "This type of volume is meant to satisfy two purposes:  (1) to provide a good quick overview to the practitioner of important recent developments; and (2) to provide an easy-to-use way to incorporate the most recent decisions into legal research. This book succeeds on both counts. The book provides good, succinct summaries of recent decisions (and even some legislative and rule-making matters), providing enough information to allow the reader to place the decision in context without suffering information overload." Check out the rest of Book Review Monday and also be sure to click through to the book's Amazon.com link if your curiosity is piqued enough to want to read the complete book in black-and-white.

ArsTechnica.com: Oh, FTC, why must you think you can stop "faux-blogging," or simply "flogging," as I like to call it? How can anyone honestly say they can tell when someone's a shill for a company or product without actually knowing it's a fact? Snooptress Jacqui Cheng enlightens us further: "Undisclosed 'sponsored' blogging may soon go the way of the dodo, the T. Rex, or the quagga under some strict new guidelines under consideration by the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC says it is looking at bloggers who write about certain products or services in exchange for money or favors from the companies behind them, potentially misleading the Internet-reading public about an apparent conflict of interest. The Commission hopes to introduce new guidelines this summer to better define how bloggers can write about these products." Enforcement? That's going to be the sticky wicket, methinks? FTC to crack down on undisclosed "sponsored" blogging for more on this sad attempt to stop people from pretending on the Interweb tubes...Good luck with all that, FTC!