Federal Circuit: Claims that Cover a Scientific Impossibility are Invalid for Lack of EnablementFederal Circuit: License Granting Exclusive Right to Sub-License and Assert Patents Qualifies As a Grant of All Substantial Rights
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN The Intellectual Property Strategist
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
AI claims are getting more scrutiny and regulators are looking more closely at whether organizations can substantiate what they say their AI does, while courts are beginning to address what happens when AI-generated search summaries get information wrong.
A recent lawsuit claims that an “iconic” saying about the universe and apple pie is as strongly linked with astronomer Carl Sagan as the act of turning letters in a gown is with Wheel of Fortune co-host Vanna White.
This is the second in a two-part series on AI-driven crises. Part 1 examined communications during an incident while the facts are still developing. Part 2 addresses crisis plans, governance and tabletop exercises before an agent acts on behalf of the business.
This article walks through where intellectual property ownership gaps come from, how they surface in diligence and why they are so often tied to the way founder equity is structured.
© Copyright 2026 ALM Global, LLC trading as Centellic.
Advertise with Us Customer Support Terms of Service Privacy Policy
