By: Joe T. Schuler, Esq. and Teige P. Sheehan, Ph.D. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently handed down what is likely to be the first among many decisions shaping the patentability issues surrounding artificial intelligence. In Recentive Analytics v. Fox, the Federal Circuit leaned on existing law applicable to eligibility of software…
Co-Authored by: Trent L. Rector, Esq. and Teige P. Sheehan, Esq. The advent of powerful artificial intelligence, or AI, technologies continue to impact almost every aspect of society. Inventorship and patenting are no exception. The ability of computer algorithms to generate new content has raised the possibility that a computer running an AI program could…
Co-Authors: Alana M. Fuierer, Esq. and Katelin Schaub In January 2025, the Copyright Office released the second of two reports providing guidance for copyrightability and artificial intelligence (AI) in response to its August 2023 Notice of Inquiry. See https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf. The most recent report investigates the type and level of human contribution that would allow a…
By: Trent L. Rector In Hachette Book Group, Inc. v. Internet Archive, 115 F.4th 163 (2024), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling finding Internet Archive’s free digital library was not fair use under the Copyright Act. The dispute centered around how libraries lend books to the public and…
By: Stephen P. Scuderi On July 17, 2024, the USPTO published its new “2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, Including on Artificial Intelligence” (the 2024 Updated PEG), which became “effective” on that same day. This article will provide a review of the history leading to the 2024 Updated PEG, plus an overview of…
By: Christina E. Brule The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a notice of proposed rulemaking on May 10, 2024 for a rule that would affect terminal disclaimer practice to obviate (overcome) non-statutory double patenting. Background Non-statutory double patenting, or obviousness-type double patenting (ODP), is a judicially created doctrine (e.g., there is no…
By: Arjay Parhar When the system is built around a dated statute, how does the U.S. Copyright Office (“Copyright Office”) treat unanticipated technologies? AI-generated images are notably absent from 17 U.S.C. § 102, but that has not stopped AI artists from seeking copyright protection. In two examples, the Copyright Office rejected image copyrights for Théâtre…
By: Emily Fraser Recent litigation within the automative industry could potentially upend the current standard of obviousness for design patents. In February, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument en banc in LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC. The last time the Federal Circuit issued an opinion en banc in a design patent case…
By: Thomas L. Sica “No civil action shall be maintained under the provisions of this title unless it is commenced within three years after the claim accrued.” 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). The above quote is the statute of limitations for copyright claims in the United States. While this seems straightforward, there has been a significant…
By: Rachel L. Pearlman In Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Arthur Weasley advises, “Never trust anything that can think for itself if you can’t see where it keeps its brain.” Despite speaking about a bewitched journal, Mr. Weasley’s words are also applicable to many issues attorneys are running into when deciding when and…