This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
This can include information such as the name, address or the IP address of a person, their appearance or voice. By way of brief overview of data protection law, under the UK GDPR personal data means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person. What does this mean for the AI and copyright consultation?
It's time for a weekly review of posts from the surrounding IP blogs over the past week! Marks IP has reported on the background to the dispute and the JPO's decision on the invalidity action. The IPKat has reported on a few of them below. Meanwhile, in Japan, Apple Inc. The Judgment of the Court was summarized by legal-patent.com.
Here they are in case you missed them: TRADE MARKS Katfriend Marijus Dingilevskis posted on a recent decision of the Lithuanian Supreme Court, which states that even if a trade mark has been registered in the international register for 40 years, this is no guarantee that a subsequent national designation will be also registered.
It provides an outline of the basic legal principles and how the IP system works. The preface reiterates that the purpose of the book is to describe the essential nature of living IP law: "What we want is the reader to come away with a good idea of how IP works in practice."
Now in its second edition, the book offers a perspective on how one can address the overlap between intellectual property (IP) rights, either to reconcile them in whole or in part, or to pre-empt one over the other. Chapter 2, authored by David Musker, considers the overlaps between patents and designs.
The consultation document restates the fundamental right to intellectual property as the fundamental principle of ‘protection of the intellectual creations of individuals in the online space’ but is otherwise silent on IP. What ideas the Commission has with respect to the Database directive is difficult to gauge from the consultation.
This post focuses on selected copyright and related rights matters that the Institute details in its Position Statement. The Data Act Proposal explicitly addresses the relationship between the new right to access and share IoT data and the sui generis databaseright provided for in Article 7 of Directive 96/9/EC.
A vanishing right? The Sui Generis DatabaseRight and the proposed Data Act by Paul Keller. [T]he The Contested Meaning of Web3 & Why it Matters for (IP) Lawyers by Mark Fenwick and Paulius Jurcys. T]he European Commission published its proposal for a Data Act.
Focusing on SMEs, the report highlits that IP protection among these remains low. In addition, in order to help EU companies protect their AI with IPrights, the EU’s position as a global standard-setter should be strengthened. EU Intellectual Property Office, 2022 IP Youth Scoreboard. Coming soon and latest referrals.
On the copyright side, it stresses that some of the sources used to research the sector may be subject to copyright and databaserights and as such it warns against infringement with an important focus on exceptions.
This may not come as a surprise given that personal data may be processed at all stages of the AI life cycle, including in the design, training, testing and deployment of the AI system. .” ICO’s Response to the White Paper The ICO appears to be the first UK regulator to have published a public response to the White Paper.
The last source, scraping internet data, has been the most controversial so far and given rise to concerns from both intellectual property and data protection perspectives, and nascent litigation in various jurisdictions when the scraping has been done without permission of the copyright/databaseright holders.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content