Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently analyzed whether case law discussing the scope of the on-sale bar under 35 USC §102 as it stood prior to the America Invents Act (AIA) still applies to the revised §102 under the AIA. See, Helsinn v. Teva, No. 2016-1284, 2016-1787 (Fed. Cir. May 1, 2017). Despite leaving unresolved the ambiguity about the effect of secret sales under §102, the Helsinn ruling offers clues to practitioners seeking to avoid the on-sale bar.
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
Beyond Language: How Multimodal AI Sees the Bigger Picture
By Matthew R. Carey
The possibilities for patenting innovative applications of multimodal models across industries are endless.
Protecting Technology-Assisted Works and Inventions: Where Does AI Begin?
By Ed Lanquist, Jr. and Dominic Rota
Just like any new technology, efforts to protect and enforce intellectual property on AI-based technologies are likely to be hampered by a lack of both a unified governing framework and a common understanding of the technology.
Content-Licensing Payment Dispute Turns On Existence of Fiduciary Relationship
By Stan Soocher
A recent New York federal court decision in a dispute between a broker that sublicenses program content and a broadcaster that sublicensed content from the broker considered the interaction of contract language and extra-contractual elements of the parties’ relationship to determine whether a fiduciary relationship existed.
Federal Judge Blasts Patent Trolls
By Rob Maier
A recent order from Chief Judge Colm Connolly in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware may serve as a warning for “patent trolls” — the derogatory term used to describe companies whose sole function is to acquire and then assert patents, often in cases that are questionable on the merits — against filing cases in Delaware going forward.