<rss xmlns:a10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Intellectual property</title><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/rss/intellectual-property</link><description>Recent blog posts</description><language>en</language><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{6A3AED63-9CED-40D4-ACD9-FDD57FA70904}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2026/03/ai-copyright-six-key-rulings</link><a10:author><a10:name>Stephanie Schmidt</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Marc B. Collier</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Logan Woodward</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Ethan Glenn</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Regulation</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>AI copyright: Six key rulings</title><description>Artificial intelligence continues to expand its capabilities and challenge existing legal principles, with copyright law at the forefront. </description><pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 14:15:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Stephanie Schmidt, Marc B. Collier, Logan Woodward, Ethan Glenn</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{F30EC852-9E67-467F-BB46-B9A44E32C931}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2026/01/a-new-year-brings-new-ai-obligations</link><a10:author><a10:name>Marc B. Collier</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Susana Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Ethan Glenn</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Susan Linda Ross</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Isabela Pena-Gonzalez</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>A new year brings new AI obligations</title><description>Courts are beginning to define how companies should consider retaining outputs generated by GenAI tools.</description><pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 21:14:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Marc B. Collier, Susana Medeiros, Ethan Glenn, Susan Linda Ross, Isabela Pena-Gonzalez</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{D70148AF-869F-44DA-B1BB-AFBD58D09EE6}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/12/machine-readable-opt-outs-and-ai-training-hamburg-court-clarifies-copyright-exceptions</link><a10:author><a10:name>Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Machine-Readable opt-outs and AI training: Hamburg Court clarifies copyright exceptions</title><description>A recent decision by the German Hanseatic Higher Regional Court (OLG Hamburg, 5 U 104/24, 10 December 2025) in the case of Robert Kneschke v. LAION e.V. provides the first appellate-level guidance in Germany on questions surrounding copyright exceptions for text and data mining (TDM) and scientific research in the context of AI training. </description><pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:11:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{ABE5C375-3FE5-4E9A-BAAD-85CD70DD34A1}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/11/germany-delivers-landmark-copyright-ruling-against-openai-what-it-means-for-ai-and-ip</link><a10:author><a10:name>Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Germany delivers landmark copyright ruling against OpenAI: What it means for AI and IP</title><description>The Regional Court of Munich (LG München I) has issued a landmark judgment in GEMA v OpenAI (Case No. 42 O 14139/24), holding that the use of copyrighted song lyrics for training generative AI models without a licence violates German copyright law. </description><pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2025 09:00:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{CDCD1198-DFA1-4B0F-A49F-85925693D719}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/11/getty-v-stability-ai-first-ai-judgment-made-but-key-questions-remain-unanswered</link><a10:author><a10:name>Jonathan Ball</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Polina Maloshchinskaia</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Getty v Stability AI: First AI judgment made but key questions remain unanswered</title><description>The judgment was passed down on 4 November 2025 in Getty v Stability AI, the UK’s first case on infringement of intellectual property by generative AI.</description><pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2025 14:14:13 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jonathan Ball, Polina Maloshchinskaia</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{9DF150ED-691F-474F-AB40-8746EF375C35}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/08/eu-design-law-reform-implications-for-businesses</link><a10:author><a10:name>Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>EU design law reform: Implications for businesses</title><description>On 1 May 2025, the first phase of reform of European design law entered into force. Regulation (EU) 2024/2822 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/73 together, as phase I, form part of a broader modernisation initiative (the so-called “Designs and Models Package”) being implemented in two phases. </description><pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:35:57 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{EABCE6F1-99C9-4DEA-809F-6C05BF351ED6}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/08/german-federal-court-refers-ad-blocker-case-back-to-hamburg-higher-regional-court</link><a10:author><a10:name>Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>German Federal Court refers ad blocker case back to Hamburg Higher Regional Court</title><description>On 31 July 2025, the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) issued its decision (decision of 31 July 2025 - I ZR 131/23) in the long-running dispute between Axel Springer and Eyeo (Adblock Plus), referring the case back to the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg for further examination. (Our previous blog, Germany: Copyright and ad blockers, summarises the earlier stages of this litigation.) </description><pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:20:54 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{F302A96F-982B-4DC8-AA2B-BE321B1C47AD}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/07/uk-latest-trends-in-technology-disputes</link><a10:author><a10:name>Jonathan Ball</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Verity Quartermain</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Liability</category><category>Technology</category><title>UK: Latest trends in technology disputes</title><description>Norton Rose Fulbright LLP’s Cyber and Technology team recently hosted a roundtable dinner in London, bringing together technology lawyers and a diverse group of clients from leading financial institutions and tech-driven businesses. </description><pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2025 09:41:47 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jonathan Ball, Verity Quartermain</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{7A22B462-7F7C-40F3-9B77-5BF9079FE50D}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/07/intellectual-property-rights-on-insolvency-risks-and-remedies-for-a-licensee</link><a10:author><a10:name>Mike Knapper</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Matthew Thorn</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Helen Coverdale</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Nicole McKenzie</a10:name></a10:author><category>Blog post</category><category>Intellectual property</category><title>Intellectual property rights on insolvency: risks and remedies for a licensee</title><description>What are the principal areas of risk for a licensee of IP rights when the licensor enters into an insolvency process?  What are the steps that a licensee may take to protect itself in potential future insolvency proceedings of its licensor?  </description><pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2025 14:36:51 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mike Knapper, Matthew Thorn, Helen Coverdale, Nicole McKenzie</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{C963F312-F9BD-4A5C-A0A3-0197E271E62F}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/06/generative-ai-updated-global-guide-to-key-ip-considerations</link><a10:author><a10:name>Jonathan Ball</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Felicia J. Boyd</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Justin Davidson</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Georgina Hey</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Jurriaan Jansen</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Mike Knapper</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Frank Liu</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Clemens Rübel</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Jasper Geerdes</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Clement Monnet</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Artificial intelligence</category><title>Generative AI: Updated global guide to key IP considerations</title><description>Generative AI systems are trained using vast amounts of data, often taken from sources in the public domain that may be protected by copyright or other intellectual property rights. So could training a generative AI system using publicly accessible copyright work constitute an infringement?  And could the output infringe?</description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2025 10:04:40 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jonathan Ball, Felicia J. Boyd, Justin Davidson, Georgina Hey, Jurriaan Jansen, Mike Knapper, Frank Liu, Maya Medeiros, Clemens Rübel, Jasper Geerdes, Ronak Kalhor-Witzel, Clement Monnet</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{6D1CDDD1-7780-4500-B3FF-F67FC7D0FB19}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/03/ip-monitor-oecd-ai-paper-ip-issues-in-ai-trained-on-scraped-data</link><a10:author><a10:name>Brian Chau</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Daniel Daniele</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>IP monitor: OECD AI paper: IP issues in AI trained on scraped data</title><description>Developing high-performance generative AI systems and other AI systems based on machine learning often requires access to vast amounts of data for training (AI training data) and improving their accuracy and performance, and data scraping is an approach that is taken to generate large enough data sets. </description><pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2025 11:21:58 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brian Chau, Daniel Daniele</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{631E0EC5-F767-4D05-9BBA-A5F7BFF99961}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2025/01/uk-government-consults-on-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence</link><a10:author><a10:name>Mike Knapper</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Michael Sinclair</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Rosie Nance</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Intellectual property</category><title>UK Government consults on copyright and Artificial Intelligence</title><description>The UK government has issued a new consultation, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, under which it is proposing to address a tension that exists between:</description><pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:53:44 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mike Knapper, Michael Sinclair, Rosie Nance</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{3E7A659E-F2E7-4DDB-8339-BF23F91384D6}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2024/11/germany-copyright-and-ad-blockers</link><a10:author><a10:name>Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Germany: Copyright and ad blockers</title><description>Does a browser plug-in that suppresses advertisements on websites (a so-called “ad blocker”) by manipulating browser-generated data structures constitute an unauthorised modification of a computer program, and so amount to an infringement of copyright under Germany copyright law?</description><pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 09:54:29 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ronak Kalhor-Witzel</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{673851AC-8FF6-4C36-8741-6CBD1E240885}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2024/11/skykick-v-sky-the-uk-supreme-courts-decision</link><a10:author><a10:name>Farah Mukaddam</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Skykick v Sky: The UK Supreme Court's decision</title><description>The UK Supreme Court has handed down its hotly-anticipated trade mark decision in the Skykick v Sky case. The Supreme Court judgment was given notwithstanding that the parties having settled the dispute, indicating the significance of the points of law that were raised in the case.</description><pubDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2024 10:10:10 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Farah Mukaddam</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{FE60293E-DABF-42C8-B581-8AA714953813}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2023/08/the-new-influencer-marketing-french-law-from-lol-to-advertising</link><a10:author><a10:name>Clement Monnet</a10:name></a10:author><category>Blog post</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Regulation</category><title>The new Influencer marketing French law: from #LOL to #Advertising</title><description>Influence and content creation have revolutionized the approach to marketing. In the absence of specific regulations applicable to this new form of advertising, influence marketing has been - until now - solely governed by existing law, in particular advertising law and consumer law.</description><pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2023 16:08:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Clement Monnet</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{7C7FDAB9-AC7D-46C4-B07C-064FE85692EF}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2023/03/biological-computing-and-related-legal-considerations</link><a10:author><a10:name>Andrea L. D'Ambra</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Gerar Mazarakis</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Life sciences and healthcare</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Artificial intelligence</category><title>Biological computing and related legal considerations</title><description>As recent innovations in Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) such as ChatGPT ignite debate over issues such as the legal status of non-humans, privacy implications of novel computing abilities, and rights of intelligent systems’ creators over output, similar considerations confront another emerging computing field—one involving human cells.</description><pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2023 16:41:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Andrea L. D'Ambra, Gerar Mazarakis</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{421642AE-055E-4E64-AA06-B12192585062}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2023/02/privilege-privacy-and-confidentiality</link><a10:author><a10:name>Farah Mukaddam</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Data protection</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Technology</category><title>Privilege, privacy and confidentiality; unlike confidentiality, reasonable expectation of privacy is not a precursor to privilege</title><description>The Commercial Court in Jinxin Inc v Aser Media Pte Ltd and others &amp; Others has ruled that an employer’s right to monitor and access private information of an employee held on its systems does not extend to a loss of confidentiality in those documents, and therefore a loss of privilege, as against the employer.  </description><pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2023 12:02:32 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Farah Mukaddam</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{521D2062-A0D2-4B5D-9811-FEEAC995AA4C}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/08/federal-court-of-canada-continues-to-support-patentability-of-computer-implemented-inventions</link><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Brian Chau</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Canada</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Technology</category><title>Federal Court of Canada continues to support patentability of computer-implemented inventions</title><description>In Benjamin Moore &amp; Co. v. Attorney General of Canada, 2022 FC 9231, the Federal Court of Canada set aside the Canadian Intellectual Property Office’s (CIPO) refusal of patent applications for two computer-implemented inventions relating to colour selection methods using experimentally derived relationships for colour harmony and colour emotion.</description><pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2022 13:08:14 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maya Medeiros, Brian Chau</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{E488496F-C2C0-4CC0-80E4-1DA91D4C9681}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/07/hermes-challenge-of-metabirkin-nfts-to-continue</link><a10:author><a10:name>Felicia J. Boyd</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Metaverse and NFTs</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Technology in emea</category><title> Hermès Challenge of “MetaBirkin” NFTs to Continue</title><description>In a case that is likely to provide much awaited guidance on the application of trade mark law to non-fungible tokens (NFTs), luxury design house Hermès International and Hermès of Paris, Inc. (Hermès) is suing artist Mason Rothschild in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for trademark infringement and dilution, misappropriation of its BIRKIN trademark, cybersquatting, false designation of origin and description, and injury to business reputation.</description><pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2022 09:42:31 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Felicia J. Boyd</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{1289E2F4-A343-4A4B-A203-E28E207F488B}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/07/uk-government-responds-on-ai-and-ip-rights-to-allow-text-and-data-mining-of-copyright-works</link><a10:author><a10:name>Polina Maloshchinskaia</a10:name></a10:author><category>Blog post</category><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><title>UK Government responds on AI and IP rights to allow text and data mining of copyright works in all circumstances</title><description>The UK Government has published its response to the consultation on AI and IP rights (our recent blog post sets out a detailed overview of the questions raised by the consultation), having held several roundtables and received detailed written responses from participants across industries.</description><pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2022 09:54:48 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Polina Maloshchinskaia</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{41C4A534-45E7-4224-B9ED-1F07964E916E}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/05/demise-of-the-machines-australia-overturns-ruling-on-artificial-intelligence-as-a-patent-inventor</link><a10:author><a10:name>Jackie O'Brien</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Isobel Taylor</a10:name></a10:author><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Australia</category><category>Intellectual property</category><title>Demise of the machines: Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia overturns ruling on AI as a patent ‘inventor’</title><description>After a somewhat surprising victory in the Federal Court last year  (about which we wrote in our article ‘Rise of the Machines’), the hopes that an artificial intelligence machine, nicknamed DABUS, could be named as the inventor on a patent application have now been dashed by the Full Court.  In short, the Full Court upheld an appeal by the Commissioner, ultimately finding that Dr Thaler’s patent application had indeed lapsed for failure to name an ‘inventor’ as required by the relevant regulations. </description><pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2022 09:03:52 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jackie O'Brien, Isobel Taylor</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{6D9EEDED-F3A6-46CF-AE04-2D3432E8F185}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/04/russia-enables-free-use-of-russian-patents-and-other</link><a10:author><a10:name>Clemens Rübel</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Russia enables free use of Russian patents and other IP of rights holders in countries committing “unfriendly acts”</title><description>On 7 March 2022 a decree of the Russian government took effect, announcing that compensation need not be paid for the unauthorised use of Russian patents, utility models and designs to rights holders connected with foreign countries committing “unfriendly acts” against Russian legal entities and individuals.</description><pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:01:48 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Clemens Rübel</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{C197C0E8-D661-4B5C-8132-CB7CD5D06690}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/03/copyright-protection-for-ai-created-work</link><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>David Yi</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>William Chalmers</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Data protection</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Technology in emea</category><title>Copyright protection for AI-created work?</title><description>Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are capable of creating a wide range of artistic, musical, and literary works and inventions without human involvement. These AI creations raise challenges to intellectual property (IP) frameworks. </description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:04:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maya Medeiros, David Yi, William Chalmers</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{0894B793-11A9-4D61-86DD-D95006F143D0}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/03/digital-health-2022</link><a10:author><a10:name>Roger Kuan</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Jason Novak</a10:name></a10:author><category>Data</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Digital Health 2022</title><description>Norton Rose Fulbright lawyers Roger Kuan and Jason Novak contributed several chapters to Digital Health 2022 International Comparative Legal Guide, published by GLG, which is a leading global platform for legal reference, analysis and news. Kuan also served as a contributing editor for the publication.</description><pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2022 15:08:50 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roger Kuan, Jason Novak</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{689EA3D8-8BC1-4ABC-A1E3-8D24047235D3}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/02/intellectual-property-rights-in-the-metaverse</link><a10:author><a10:name>Daniel Daniele</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Data</category><category>Metaverse and NFTs</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Metaverse insights</category><category>Featured articles</category><title>Intellectual property rights in the Metaverse</title><description>The metaverse will offer an immersive digital world that feels physical and tangible in nature. Interacting with metaverse has the opportunity to shift the internet in a new direction and pose new intellectual property rights for developers, contributors, and users.</description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 17:00:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel Daniele</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{4733D594-7C7D-48F5-B6EC-CA7BC9578014}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/02/ai-inventorship-on-the-horizon-dabus-comes-to-canada</link><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>William Chalmers</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>David Yi</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Canada</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Ethics</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>AI inventorship on the horizon: DABUS comes to Canada</title><description>The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) recently provided a first glimpse into how it will treat the issue of AI inventorship. In December 2021, CIPO issued a non-compliance notice for the Canadian patent application identifying DABUS as the inventor along with a statement that “[t]he invention was autonomously generated by an AI” (the DABUS Application). The DABUS Application listed “Thaler, Stephen L.” as applicant. </description><pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2022 14:59:55 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maya Medeiros, William Chalmers, David Yi</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{A4DEF0FC-233F-4D54-822B-545397114B40}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/02/uk-guidance-for-marketers-in-the-cryptoasset-space</link><a10:author><a10:name>Verity Quartermain</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Hannah Meakin</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Regulation</category><category>Blog post</category><title>UK guidance for marketers in the cryptoasset space</title><description>On 18 January 2022, HM Treasury announced that it will be bringing adverts for cryptoassets in line with other types of financial advertising by extending the financial promotion restrictions to encompass them.  This will mean that adverts for cryptoassets will need to be either promoted by a firm authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) or Prudential Regulatory Authority (PRA), or be approved by an authorised firm.</description><pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2022 14:46:24 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Verity Quartermain, Hannah Meakin</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{D9868BD2-E25A-4128-B8F0-D7B9818854B2}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2022/01/open-source-software-licence-obligations</link><a10:author><a10:name>Brian Chau</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Intellectual property</category><title>Open source software licence obligations: Potential pitfalls for proprietary trained neural networks</title><description>Open source software and components can provide useful building blocks to reduce development time and effort.  In particular, certain open source software and components are made available for use under open source licences with “copyleft” requirements designed to enable downstream users to, among others, make changes to the software, obtain and modify source code of derivative works, and redistribute copies of the software or modified versions of the software.  </description><pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2022 16:50:19 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brian Chau, Maya Medeiros</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{ECD3AF5D-68B8-436F-AA8D-958F890B50B7}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/12/uk-government-asks-for-the-publics-views-on-how-to-deal-with-ai-and-ip-rights</link><a10:author><a10:name>Verity Quartermain</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>UK Government asks for the public’s views on how to deal with AI and IP rights</title><description>Following its call for views on AI and the IP framework in early 2021, the UK Government has released another consultation on AI and IP rights.</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:45:02 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Verity Quartermain</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{5F736513-FBCB-42B4-B2E7-83DCB5EC347B}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/12/the-year-that-was-for-dabus-the-worlds-first-ai-inventor</link><a10:author><a10:name>Jackie O'Brien</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Isobel Taylor</a10:name></a10:author><category>Blog post</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Australia</category><category>Technology</category><category>Unlocking IP</category><title>The year that was for DABUS, the world’s first AI ‘inventor’</title><description>While many of us (in Australia at least), have spent the better part of the last two years locked down, sitting on the couch waiting out the COVID-19 pandemic, judges and patent examiners around the world have been busy grappling with questions ranging from the mundane (legislative interpretation) to the existential (what it means to be ‘a creator’ ).</description><pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2021 22:50:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jackie O'Brien, Isobel Taylor</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{366B3C44-E23A-480F-9464-FED958A9F53E}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/11/nfts-and-copyright-infringement-miramax-v-tarantino</link><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Financial institutions</category><category>Blog post</category><category>NFTs insights</category><title>NFTs and copyright infringement: Miramax v Tarantino</title><description>Director Quentin Tarantino recently announced that he would be auctioning as non-fungible tokens (“NFTs”) excerpts from the original handwritten screenplay of the 1994 film Pulp Fiction.</description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Nov 2021 11:35:55 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"></dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{712D0848-2866-48AE-88D7-1D025789F07C}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/11/where-data-meets-ip-protecting-business-data-in-a-commercial-context</link><a10:author><a10:name>Imran Ahmad</a10:name></a10:author><category>Data</category><category>Ethics</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Canada</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Technology in emea</category><title>Where data meets IP - protecting business data in a commercial context</title><description>In this publication we give some some practical tips that businesses transacting with data should consider when licensing their data to third parties.</description><pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:15:47 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Imran Ahmad</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{C7F70E27-05EE-4DA9-8F99-2B6E71FAE650}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/11/where-data-meets-ip</link><a10:author><a10:name>Imran Ahmad</a10:name></a10:author><category>Data</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Where Data Meets IP</title><description>One key strategy to protect your business’ data is to characterize, and protect, that data as intellectual property.</description><pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2021 11:29:12 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Imran Ahmad</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{5906F1F1-3CB8-4534-9F85-6F60DD3BFE9E}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/11/ai-inventorship-on-the-horizon-part-3</link><a10:author><a10:name>David Yi</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Ethics</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Canada</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>AI Inventorship on the Horizon: Part 3</title><description>In this last instalment of our three part blog series, we consider the policy and legal implications of permitting or prohibiting AI to be an inventor, with a focus on the Canadian context.</description><pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2021 10:30:07 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">David Yi, Maya Medeiros</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{E3619649-CEBD-4EF5-9A4C-5A8038CE46F1}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/10/ai-inventorship-on-the-horizon-part-2</link><a10:author><a10:name>David Yi</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Ethics</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>AI Inventorship on the Horizon: Part 2</title><description>In Part 2 we will analyze the Australian Federal Court’s judgment in more detail, and compare it to decisions reached by the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office, the European Patent Office, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office. </description><pubDate>Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:59:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">David Yi</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{DE08E3A6-5283-41D4-9C3A-78D37DB2F0A4}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/10/nfts-and-intellectual-property-rights</link><a10:author><a10:name>Farah Mukaddam</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Ethics</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>NFTs and intellectual property rights</title><description>We unravel some of the mystery surrounding NFTs and provide an insight into the intellectual property opportunities and pitfalls that a business should be aware of. </description><pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2021 10:35:55 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Farah Mukaddam</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{B583D078-6D52-4BF0-9BAB-9A540E3F2689}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/10/ai-inventorship-on-the-horizon-part-1</link><a10:author><a10:name>David Yi</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Ethics</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>AI Inventorship on the Horizon: Part 1</title><description>Artificial intelligence (AI) machines may soon come to mind when you hear the word “inventor".</description><pubDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2021 07:41:28 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">David Yi</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{BF62B4D3-5822-4BBF-A7CC-FF10F387F8A5}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/08/ip-monitor-government-of-canada-initiates-consultation-on-modernizing-copyright-framework</link><a10:author><a10:name>David Yi</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Maya Medeiros</a10:name></a10:author><category>Artificial intelligence</category><category>Canada</category><category>Internet of things</category><category>Regulation</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><category>Intellectual property</category><title>IP monitor: Government of Canada initiates consultation on modernizing copyright framework for AI and the Internet of Things</title><description>The Canadian federal government has launched a public consultation on adapting Canada’s copyright framework to ongoing developments in artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things.</description><pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2021 10:20:35 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">David Yi, Maya Medeiros</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{36CA7D8A-6718-458B-84DC-188D9F85700C}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/05/trade-mark-protection-of-neologisms-of-new-or-emerging-technology</link><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Can you use a neologism to name a new or emerging technology and expect it to be protected by a registered trade mark?</title><description>Is it enough that a brand is a neologism for it to constitute a registrable trade mark?  Are neologisms automatically considered distinctive for registration and validity of a mark? </description><pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2021 14:32:43 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"></dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{3FBCC260-4A95-4D38-9FEA-999ECBE0339D}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/05/buying-or-selling-a-technology-business-seven-key-issues-to-consider</link><a10:author><a10:name>Debra Gatison Hatter</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Daniel Prati</a10:name></a10:author><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Corporate</category><category>Regulation</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Buying or selling a technology business? Seven key issues to consider</title><description>This article identifies some of the critical and practical issues to keep top of mind when buying or selling a tech business. </description><pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2021 11:00:04 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Debra Gatison Hatter, Daniel Prati</dc:creator></item><item><guid isPermaLink="false">{78689AF3-4960-45B4-B842-F779E6684AED}</guid><link>https://www.insidetechlaw.com/blog/2021/05/technology-joint-ventures-partnering-for-the-future</link><a10:author><a10:name>Jill Gauntlett</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Victoria Birch</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Mike Knapper</a10:name></a10:author><a10:author><a10:name>Dominic Stuttaford</a10:name></a10:author><category>Antitrust and competition</category><category>Corporate</category><category>Data protection</category><category>Intellectual property</category><category>Regulation</category><category>Tax</category><category>UK</category><category>Technology</category><category>Blog post</category><title>Technology joint ventures: Partnering for the future</title><description>This article examines the key aspects of joint ventures in the technology sector and the particular issues and challenges that these joint ventures raise.</description><pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2021 13:04:00 Z</pubDate><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jill Gauntlett, Victoria Birch, Mike Knapper, Dominic Stuttaford</dc:creator></item></channel></rss>