Remove Inventor Remove Ownership Remove Patent Application
article thumbnail

[Guest post] Ownership of IP rights by DAOs – the future is nigh?

The IPKat

Here's what Marianna writes: Ownership of IP rights by DAOs – the future is nigh? Ownership of IP In a recent curious example, Spice DAO paid $3 million for an original 1975 copy of the Dune bible by Alejandro Jodorowsky. Such ownership sometimes arises “automatically” when a work has been created in the course of employment.

Ownership 134
article thumbnail

Guest Post by Kevin Ahlstrom: Closing the Gender Innovation Gap with Guided Inventor Sessions

Patently-O

– Jason) Guided invention sessions not only increase idea submission rates but also transform individuals’ perception of themselves as inventors. By creating a supportive environment and equipping participants with the necessary tools, these sessions pave the way for gender equality in patenting.

Inventor 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

…And The Covaxin Patent Saga Continues: BBIL Changes the Patent Application Again

SpicyIP

The Story Till Now On one hand, COVID-19 cases are rising yet again to everyone’s surprise, and on the other, the surprises from the Covaxin patent application don’t seem to stop. BBIL then did a quick about-face on this application and issued a clarification on June 22 that they would be refiling with proper credits to ICMR.

article thumbnail

DABUS Scores Again with Win on AI Inventorship Question in Australia Court

IP Watchdog

The Federal Court of Australia on Friday ruled in Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879 that an artificial intelligence (AI) system can be an inventor under the Australian Patents Act. 2019363177 did not comply with reg 3.2C(2)(aa) 2019363177 did not comply with reg 3.2C(2)(aa)

Inventor 131
article thumbnail

“Artificial Intelligence Systems as Inventors?” – The Max Planck Institute on Machine Autonomy and AI Patent Rights

IPilogue

In July 2021, the Federal Court of Australia affirmed in Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879 that artificial intelligence (AI) systems may be deemed “inventors” under Australian patent law. The principal question at hand is whether non-human entities, such as AI systems, should have legal capacity.

Inventor 111
article thumbnail

Thaler v. Comptroller-General: Supreme Court Affirms that an AI Cannot be an Inventor under UK Patent Law

Intepat

Registration at UKIPO The case in question, originating in 2019, presents a groundbreaking legal dilemma: Can an artificial intelligence (AI) system be acknowledged as an inventor for the purposes of patent ownership? Failing to comply would result in the application being considered withdrawn.

article thumbnail

Alleged Co-Inventor Not Bringing Home the Bacon This Time

The IP Law Blog

Well, it turns out that not all contributions count when it comes to being an inventor of a patent for a better method of precooking bacon. In 2021, HIP sued Hormel, challenging Hormel’s ownership and the inventorship of U.S. 9,980,498 (the “’498 Patent”). 9,980,498 (the “’498 Patent”). The court in Pannu v.

Inventor 110