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
In this post, I will be analysing the recommendations pertaining to the amendment of patentlaws in order to facilitate inventorship and ownership by AI. I will be restricting the discussion to the evaluation of the Indian patent regime, as the implications of AI on Indian copyright law has been previously dealt with here.
The first standing order requires non-governmental companies and corporations to disclose the name of every person all the way up the chain of ownership who has “a direct or indirect interest in the party.” . The issue arose as a result of two standing orders issued by Judge Connolly.
More and more loans are being supported by certain intellectual property assets, such as copyrights, designs, and patents, or revenue streams connected to these assets. Ownership of intellectual property (IP) used as collateral often belongs to the borrower. Conclusion.
The question of ownership in the virtual world, particularly in video games, has long been debated. Let’s also not forget the Delhi High Court’s telling move to set aside three compromise decrees recognizing settlement agreements between ISRA and certain defendants (see also here ). Well … not really!
Patent and Trademark Office granted ownership of the word “Jesus” to Jesus Jeans, owned by a publicly traded Italian company, BasicNet, giving the company exclusive rights in America to sell clothing bearing the name “Jesus.” ” (at page 9 and 13). .” World Intellect. 75, 79 (2020). 17 U.S.C. §
The decision clarifies the purpose of the two processes and is a must read for all patentlaw enthusiasts. opined that apart from enforcing the settlement worked out from the preceding decree, the Court can also examine further infringements that might have arisen during execution. Vodafone Idea Ltd.
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