Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Supreme Court decided two copyright cases this term, both involving states. In the first, Allen v. Cooper, 140 S.Ct. 994 (2020), the Court dealt the states a victory by holding that, despite an act of Congress to the contrary, states retain their sovereign immunity from copyright infringement actions — for now, anyway. In the second case, Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc., 140 S.Ct. 1498 (2020), the Court dealt states a loss by holding that the state of Georgia could not claim copyright ownership in statutory annotations it created. The Court thus expanded the rights of states as copyright infringers but restricts states’ rights as copyright owners. This article discusses the cases and their likely impact on copyright law going forward.
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
Blockchain Domains: New Developments for Brand Owners
By John McElwaine
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
AI Can Facilitate Innovation, But It Can Also Become a Potent Patent Killer
By Michael K. Friedland
When is an inventor not an inventor? It’s when the inventor isn’t human. So, if a non-human inventor can’t, in the eyes of patent law, be an inventor, what role can the non-human inventor have in the patent system? The answer is straightforward. Even though it can’t create, it can destroy.
Patent Your Trade Secrets In Wake of Noncompete Ban
By Daniel E. Rose
While it may be growing more difficult to protect business information with the FTC’s noncompete ban, patents can provide strong protection over technical innovations, regardless of whether the inventor stays with the company or leaves.
Key Takeaways from the Latest USPTO Guidance on AI
By James DeCarlo
The April Guidance, which supplements prior guidance issued in February, seeks to remind practitioners of existing rules and to educate them on potential risks associated with artificial intelligence tool use, allowing practitioners to mitigate these risks.