Owners of intellectual property should be aware of how their works are used by generative AI models and the users of these tools, and timely action should be taken to defend intellectual property against infringement. Join LJN for a free webinar on Nov. 9.
In August, the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia affirmed the U.S. Copyright Office's denial of a copyright application for a visual piece of art generated entirely by an artificial intelligence-driven computer called the "Creativity Machine." Recognizing that U.S. "copyright law protects only works of human creation," the court determined that the Copyright Office "acted properly in denying copyright registration for a work created absent any human involvement."
Part One of a Two-Part Article This two-part article sheds light on several important aspects of patents on AI technology. In Part One, we provide a general overview of the IBM v. Zillow lawsuit and discusses strategies to diversify patent portfolios to maximize protection on AI-related technology.
Several tech companies are making strides training speech recognition tools to mimic the speaker's voice. And while this can improve user clarity and accessibility for those with physical limitations, there is another, more troubling trend: the prevalence of "voice deepfakes" — creating synthetic voices from unknowing (or unwilling) participants using generative artificial intelligence.
As technology continues to advance at an unprecedented pace, legal practitioners are presented with both challenges and opportunities to harness the power of AI in their practices. This article lays out a general roadmap for success in modern legal firms through the strategic incorporation of AI technologies.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia recently upheld a final refusal by the U.S. Copyright Office to register a visual work that was "autonomously created by a computer algorithm running on a machine," which the plaintiff called the Creativity Machine and identified as the "author" of the work.
Recognizing that U.S. "copyright law protects only works of human creation," the court determined that the Copyright Office "acted properly in denying copyright registration for a work created absent any human involvement."
Standing still and waiting to take action wasn't easy, but the patience paid off. Now, I understand some of AI's limitations and ways to leverage it to propel marketing and sales activities.
An Executive Order released by the Biden Administration on Aug. 9 places increased importance on due diligence when investing in specific foreign countries. The Executive Order will regulate outbound investments in China with a focus on key technologies critical to safeguarding U.S. national security, including artificial intelligence.
Takeaways from 'IBM v. Zillow' from a Patent Drafting Perspective Part Two of a Two-Part Article In Part One of this article we discussed the IBM v. Zillow case, where IBM sued Zillow for infringing on seven IBM's patents directed to artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for estimating property value. The focus was on the difficulties in establishing patent infringement on specific AI algorithms, as well as the strategic advantages of including additional patent claims that target ancillary features of an AI system. In this segment, we analyze the claims made in the Zillow case and present some tips for drafting AI-related claims from the perspective of patent infringement.
