Remove topics pre-closing-issues
article thumbnail

Copyright and AI in Australia: 2023 in Review

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Which copyright issues has the Australian government been grappling with? Over the last few years, the Australian government has been observing public consultations on AI and IP issues that have been conducted in other jurisdictions, especially in the UK and US, and listening to conversations happening among local stakeholders and academics.

article thumbnail

Use of large language models in the patent industry: A risk to patent quality?

The IPKat

However, any solution pre-dating LLMs would have had severely limited functionality compared to LLMs. Software predating LLMs could have provided pre-drafted boilerplate language, searched for exact words and phrases within text and assessed the correspondence of text to a predetermined format.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Rethinking enablement: Court grants cert in Amgen v. Sanofi

Patently-O

On Friday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on two petitions raising intellectual property issues, including the closely-watched enablement case Amgen v. Hetronic International , a trademark dispute involving extraterritoriality issues. Those decisions used the pre-1952 version of the patent law statute, Rev.

article thumbnail

Generative AI, Copyright and the AI Act

Kluwer Copyright Blog

TLDR Generative AI is one of the hot topics in copyright law today. In the EU, a crucial legal issue is whether using in-copyright works to train generative AI models is copyright infringement or falls under existing text and data mining (TDM) exceptions in the Copyright in Digital Single Market (CDSM) Directive.

Copyright 138
article thumbnail

Jury Instructions and Objective Indicia of Nonobviousness: Federal Circuit Grants New Trial in Inline Plastics v. Lacerta

Patently-O

At the close of trial, jury instructions are typically given orally by the judge and can also be provided to the jury in writing for reference during deliberations. A jury is typically seen as a “fact finder” – empaneled to decide disputed issues of material fact.

article thumbnail

“Private” Facebook Groups Aren’t Legally “Private”–Davis v. HDR

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Both groups are “private” Facebook groups: Both Ahwatukee411 and PARC have “always been” private, closed Facebook groups—meaning only group members can access and see posts made within the Groups. Both Groups require prospective members to undergo a screening process. ” Intrusion Into Seclusion.

Privacy 134
article thumbnail

UK takes uncompromising approach to interpretation of "the product" under Art. 3(a) SPC Regulation (Newron v Comptroller [2023] EWHC 1471)

The IPKat

An often contentious issue in SPC cases is whether "the product" has the same meaning in different parts of the SPC Regulation. The judge also found Yeda to be entirely consistent with the (latest) CJEU case law on the topic, specifically Santen ( C-673/18 ) (para. Xadago Legal Background: What is "the product"? safinamide [.]

Art 117