Scanning books to create a searchable database of books constitutes fair use. Scanning books to create eBooks does not. Will scanning images (or other copyright-protected content) to create a generative AI model for use in creating images be deemed fair use?
Continue Reading Will eBook Ruling Impact Fair Use Analysis for Generative AI?
On March 16, 2023, the U. S. Copyright Office (USCO) launched a new AI Initiative to examine the copyright law and policy issues raised by artificial intelligence (AI), including the scope of copyright in works generated using AI tools and using copyrighted materials in AI training. According to the USCO: “This initiative is in direct response to the recent striking advances in generative AI technologies and their rapidly growing use by individuals and businesses.” It is also a response to requests from Congress and the public.
Continue Reading Copyright Office Artificial Intelligence Initiative and Resource Guide
The U.S. Copyright Office (“Office”) has published guidance on its policy and practices for examining and registering works that contain material generated by the use of artificial intelligence technology. Some of the key points include the following:
Roblox recently announced that it is working on generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools that will help developers who build experiences on Roblox, to more easily create games and assets. The first two test tools create generative AI content from a text prompt and enable generative AI to complete computer code. This is just the tip of the iceberg on how generative AI will be used in games and a variety of other creative industries. Music, film, art, comic books, and literary works are some other uses. AI tools are powerful and their use will no doubt be far reaching. In the near term, so too will the associated legal issues. Some of the legal issues include:
Continue Reading How Generative AI Generates Legal Issues in the Games Industry
The rapid rise of AI used with advertising, marketing and other consumer facing applications has caused the FTC to continue to take notice and issues guidance. For example, the FTC is concerned about false or unsubstantiated claims about an AI product’s efficacy. It has issued AI-related guidance in the past. The following is some recent FTC guidance to consider when referencing AI in your advertising. This guidance is not necessarily new, but the fact that it is being reiterated should be a signal that the FTC continues to focus on this area and that actions may be forthcoming. In fact, the recent guidance states: “AI is important, and so are the claims you make about it. You don’t need a machine to predict what the FTC might do when those claims are unsupported.”
The Situation
Smart contracts are often mentioned in blockchain-themed patent applications and recited in claims. However, Examiners without a thorough understanding of this concept or unfamiliar with blockchain technology often equate smart contracts with legal or commercial contracts stored on blockchains. As a result, the Examiners may find claims directed to merely applying the blockchain technology to execute legal or commercial contracts, for example, as part of a commerce system, like hedging. See, e.g., Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S.Ct. at 2356 (citing Bilski v. Kappas, 561, U.S. 593, 611 (2010)).
Blockchain patent applications may be divided into two types: underlying technologies of blockchain, such as consensus methods, security, etc., and applications of blockchain in, e.g., fintech, legal, and other industries. In patent examination, the first type, because it recites underlying technology improvement, rarely elicits subject matter rejections. The second type, applications of blockchain, are often found to be directed to an abstract idea. This article analyzes a recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision in a blockchain patent application and explores drafting and prosecution strategies to anticipate subject matter scrutiny.
Continue Reading Blockchain Patentability Through The Lens Of A Recent PTAB Decision
Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are rapidly emerging as disruptive technologies. As has happened with many new technologies, particularly disruptive ones, a patent arms race is occurring. The number of patents being filed for these technologies is rapidly increasing.
The number of published applications shows roughly a tenfold increase over the number of issued patents.
Despite this increase in patent filing activity, many companies are unaware of what aspects of this technology can be patented and many myths and misconceptions exist. In addition to the usual misconceptions about patents (detailed below), the open source aspect of many blockchain-based inventions leads to greater confusion. The patentability of software and technology platforms does not cease just because some or all of the software is open source or built on a known protocol.
Continue Reading Patent Strategies for Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain Technology