Photo of James Gatto

James Gatto

Subscribe to James Gatto's Posts

Jim Gatto is a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office. He is Co-Leader of the Artificial Intelligence Team, the Blockchain & Fintech Team, and Leader of the Open Source Team.

Contact:Read more about James Gatto

The White House Executive Order on AI (“EO”) is comprehensive and covers a wide range of topics. We provided a summary here. It addresses many of the risks and problems that can arise with AI. One of the topics which raises many legal issues, particularly with generative AI (“genAI”), is intellectual property. Some of the IP issues include: i) whether training AI models on copyrighted content constitutes infringement; ii) whether the output of genAI that is based on copyright-protected training material constitutes infringement; iii) what level of human authorship/inventorship is required for copyright/patent protection of genAI-assisted works; iv) whether genAI tools that create art “in the style of” particular artists constitutes copyright infringement and/or violate the right of publicity; v) whether genAI tools that are trained on copyright-protected materials must maintain copyright management information; and vi) whether genAI tools, such as AI code generators, that are trained on open source software, must comply with the terms of the open source licenses.Continue Reading White House Executive Order on AI Punts on IP Issues

The US just catapulted into being the world leader on regulating AI. Bypassing Congress, the White house issued an Executive Order focusing on safe, secure and trustworthy AI and laying out a national policy on AI. In stark contrast to the EU, which through the soon to be enacted AI Act is focused primarily on regulating uses of AI that are unacceptable or high risk, the Executive Order focuses primarily on the developers, the data they use and the tools they create. The goal is to ensure that AI systems are safe, secure, and trustworthy before companies make them public. It also focuses on protection of various groups including consumers, patients, students, workers and kids. Continue Reading White House Executive Order Ramps Up US Regulation of and Policy Toward AI

The growth of artificial intelligence (“AI”) and generative AI is moving copyright law into unprecedented territory. While US copyright law continues to develop around AI, one boundary has been set: the bedrock requirement of copyright is human authorship. Given this, it is clear in the US, AI alone cannot be an author. This bedrock principle was reinforced in two recent copyright decisions. But unanswered questions abound. For example, how will the Copyright Office address collaborative or joint works between a human and AI? And will this bedrock principle be limited to generative AI, or may it lead to revisiting copyright protection for other technologies where creative decisions are left to machines?Continue Reading Generative AI and Copyright – Some Recent Denials and Unanswered Questions

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is booming. Investors and companies are pouring cash into the space, and particularly into generative AI (GAI), to seize their share of the market which McKinsey reports could add up to $4.4 trillion annually to the global economy. Some companies are investing tens or hundreds of millions of dollars or more into GAI. Whether companies are building their own AI technology and training their own AI models, or leveraging third party tools, there are significant legal issues and business risks that directors need to consider as part of their fiduciary obligations and corporate governance. Five of the top issues to understand and consider are addressed in this article. Many other issues can arise. A wave of litigations and enforcement actions has swelled. Boards should get educated on these issues and ensure appropriate policies and corporate governance are implemented to manage the business and legal risks.Continue Reading 5 Things Corporate Boards Need to Know About Generative AI Risk Management

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has been active in enforcements involving various AI-related issues. For an example, see Training AI Models – Just Because It’s “Your” Data Doesn’t Mean You Can Use It and You Don’t Need a Machine to Predict What the FTC Might Do About Unsupported AI Claims. The FTC has also issued a report to Congress (Report) warning about various AI issues. The Report outlines significant concerns that AI tools can be inaccurate, biased, and discriminatory by design and can incentivize relying on increasingly invasive forms of commercial surveillance. Most recently, the FTC instituted an investigation into the generative AI (GAI) practices of OpenAI through a 20 page investigative demand letter (Letter). Continue Reading The Need for Generative AI Development Policies and the FTC’s Investigative Demand to OpenAI

AI-based code generators are a powerful application of generative AI. These tools leverage AI to assist code developers by using AI models to auto-complete or suggest code based on developer inputs or tests. These tools raise at least three types of potential legal issues:Continue Reading Solving Open Source Problems with AI Code Generators – Legal Issues and Solutions, Part 2

AI-based code generators are a powerful application of generative AI. These tools leverage AI to assist code developers by using AI models to auto-complete or suggest code based on developer inputs or tests. These tools raise at least three types of potential legal issues:Continue Reading Solving Open Source Problems with AI Code Generators – Legal Issues and Solutions, Part 1

While you were asking ChatGPT to create a 3-course menu for the upcoming book club you’re hosting or to explain the Rule Against Perpetuities, several federal government agencies announced initiatives related to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated systems, focusing on the potential threats stemming from the misuse of this powerful technology. As the development and use of AI becomes integrated into our daily lives and employee work routines, and companies begin to leverage such technology in their solutions provided to the government, it is important to understand the developing federal government compliance infrastructure and the potential risks stemming from the misuse of AI and automated systems.Continue Reading ChatUSG: What Companies Doing Business with the Government Need to Know About Artificial Intelligence

Recent patent cases have made it more difficult to obtain utility patent protection for some of the functional aspects of computer software. One way to, at least partially, overcome this is to consider design patent protection for computer generated icons and certain aspects of the graphical user interface (GUI) elements of a computer program. Strategic use of design patents can be an important part of an overall patent strategy. It should be noted, however, that design patents are not meant as a replacement for utility patents, but rather, as a supplement to them.Continue Reading Design Patent Protection for Computer Generated Icons and Graphical User Interfaces

Generative AI (GAI) applications have raised numerous copyright issues. These issues include whether the training of GAI models constitute infringement or is permitted under fair use, who is liable if the output infringes (the tool provider or user) and whether the output is copyrightable. These are not the only legal issues that can arise. Another GAI issue that has arisen with various applications involves the right of publicity. A recently filed class action provides one example.Continue Reading Celebrity “Faces Off” Against Deep Fake AI App Over Right of Publicity

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has issued a Request for Comments (RFC) on Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) system accountability measures and policies to advance its efforts to ensure AI systems work as claimed and without causing harm. The RFC is targeting self-regulatory, regulatory, and other measures and policies to provide reliable evidence that AI systems are legal, effective, ethical, safe, and otherwise trustworthy. It is also seeking policies that can support the development of AI audits, assessments, certifications and other mechanisms to create earned trust in AI systems that they work as claimed (similar to how financial audits create trust in financial statements).Continue Reading Another Federal Agency Issues Request for Comments on AI