Remove Government Remove Intellectual Property Law Remove Inventor Remove Patent Law
article thumbnail

Australia’s Reversal of its DABUS decision on AI-Generated Inventions: How Does this Impact an Imminent Canadian Discussion on AI Inventorship?

IPilogue

Reversing what seemed like a victory for supporters of AI-owned intellectual property, the full bench of the Federal Court of Australia has confirmed the majority view of the world: only human inventors can own patent rights to their creations. Thaler and DABUS embarked on their journey for AI patent ownership.

Invention 111
article thumbnail

Patent – a shield for modern biotechnology

Biswajit Sarkar Copyright Blog

Thus, a legal safeguard should be provided to inventors for their inventions to keep their interest in science alive. In modern biology research, inventors come from various disciplines such as pharmaceutical, environmental, agricultural, and dairy, and all of them are involved in improving the quality of life.

Patent 92
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Amendment of German patent law: small step or giant leap for proportionality?

The IPKat

Thus, the GPA will henceforth include an explicit proportionality defense to permanent injunctions in patent law. Reportedly, several German patent judges immediately commented along similar lines [ here ]. here , at 5]; novel generations of pharmaceuticals that make prior patent clearance difficult [e.g. here and here ].

article thumbnail

Your Intellectual Property Attorney Can be Located in a Different State

LexBlog IP

For most intellectual property questions, your attorney can be located anywhere in the United States. This is because most of the relevant intellectual property laws involving patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets are federal laws, which apply uniformly throughout the United States.

article thumbnail

The Reasonable Robot by Ryan Abbott: Legally regulating AI—is it obvious?

IPilogue

Abbott examines this concept in four legal areas: tax, torts, criminal, and intellectual property law. As we automate more work, the tax base shrinks, costing governments billions of dollars in tax revenue. The section on intellectual property (IP) is particularly intriguing in light of recent events.

Inventor 106
article thumbnail

Proposed Changes to U.S. Patent Practice: Creation of a Design Patent Practitioner Bar

LexBlog IP

Supporters of the proposal believe it would: Improve the quality of design patent practitioners and representation. Enable more underrepresented groups to practice design patent law. Assist more underrepresented inventors in acquiring patents. They are expected to: Have minimal economic impact on small entities.

article thumbnail

Evergreening of Patents

Kashishipr

To comply with international standards, the Australian government had to make some changes in its existing laws. The main objective of Sections 26C and 27D was to prevent the patent holders from getting an extension on their patents by taking advantage of loopholes and undue benefits of the Justice system.

Patent 105