Remove Ownership Remove Patent Application Remove Patent Law Remove Technology
article thumbnail

The USPTO and USCO Delivered a Report to Congress on IP Issues with NFTs – Maintains Existing IP Regime

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Moreover, many expressed concern that NFT-specific legislation would be premature at this time and could impede the development of new NFT applications, given the evolving nature of the technology. Unsophisticated consumers may conflate the purchase of an NFT associated with a digital good with ownership of IP rights in that good.

Reporting 130
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. Previously, IPilogue reported that Australia has granted patent ownership to an AI inventor.

Invention 111
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

The USPTO and USCO Delivered a Report to Congress on IP Issues with NFTs – Maintains Existing IP Regime

LexBlog IP

Moreover, many expressed concern that NFT-specific legislation would be premature at this time and could impede the development of new NFT applications, given the evolving nature of the technology. Unsophisticated consumers may conflate the purchase of an NFT associated with a digital good with ownership of IP rights in that good.

article thumbnail

“Artificial Intelligence Systems as Inventors?” – The Max Planck Institute on Machine Autonomy and AI Patent Rights

IPilogue

Emily Xiang is an IPilogue Writer, the President of the Intellectual Property Society of Osgoode, and a 2L JD Candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School. . argue that classifying “inventor” as an “agent noun” is insufficient to conclude that non-human entities can be considered inventors under patent law. Firstly, Kim et al.

Inventor 111
article thumbnail

Russia Suspends Compulsory License Payments for Some Non-Russians

IP Tech Blog

As a result, owners of Russian patents from the affected countries, including the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Japan, and the European Union, should not expect to be able to enforce their patent rights in Russia in the near term.

article thumbnail

Bad cases make bad law: Has DABUS "the AI inventor" actually invented anything?

The IPKat

AI inventor case catch-up: Formalities, not patentability It is worth remembering that a patent application may be filed for any subject matter, provided the appropriate forms are filled in and the necessary fees paid. The patent applications have simply been refused for failing to satisfy the formal requirements of filing.

article thumbnail

Parliamentary Standing Committee’s Recommendations Concerning AI and IP: A Little Late or Way too Early?

SpicyIP

In this post, I will be analysing the recommendations pertaining to the amendment of patent laws in order to facilitate inventorship and ownership by AI. I will be restricting the discussion to the evaluation of the Indian patent regime, as the implications of AI on Indian copyright law has been previously dealt with here.

Invention 122