The following post was originally included as part of our recently published memorandum “Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2024”.
Artificial Intelligence (AI), and in particular, generative AI, will continue to be an issue in the year to come, as new laws and regulations, agency guidance, continuing and additional litigation on AI
The following post was originally included as part of our recently published memorandum “Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2024”.
Artificial intelligence (AI) was the biggest technology news of 2023. AI continues to revolutionize business in big and small ways, ranging from disrupting entire business models to making basic support functions more efficient.
IPNews® – With the use of AI proliferating daily, an increasing question is who owns works created by AI.
The copyright office is on record as saying that works exclusively produced by AI are not copyrightable. However, a work partly created by AI and partly created by a person can be protected provide that there is
Quando un nuovo fenomeno assume dimensioni considerevoli, diventa imprescindibile l’istituzione di un sistema di regole, e il fenomeno dell’influencer marketing reclamava ormai da tempo un intervento normativo.
Con un “primo grande passo”, così come definito dalla stessa Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni nel relativo comunicato stampa (disponibile qui), il Consiglio dell’ AGCOM –
AI chatbots have grown increasingly ubiquitous over the last year. For example, the basic version of ChatGPT is a conversational chatbot capable of understanding natural language inputs and generating highly coherent text responses. However, exciting new multimodal AI models like Google’s Gemini showcase more sophisticated capabilities.
In 2025, the cost to trademark a name is changing to $350 per Class in government filing fees. Syed Law charges between $1,349 to $2,949 per trademark application, including government filing fees for one Class. The same applies to:
The copyright eligibility of computer-generated literature and artistic works is not, contrary to what many may think, a post-millennial question. In a case decided as early as 1985 [1], in a time long before the internet era, the English court had already held that a computer is no more than a tool by which
On December 11, 2023, the Copyright Review Board affirmed the Copyright Office’s decision to reject Ankit Sahni’s application to register the AI-generated work depicted above. The artwork, entitled “SURYAST” was based on a photograph taken by Sanhi, which Sanhi submitted into the RAGHAV Artificial Intelligence Painting App (“RAGHAV”) and instructed to paint in the style
La decisione (disponibile qui) è l’ultima di una serie di pronunce scaturite da due domande di brevetto depositate presso l’Ufficio Brevetti del Regno Unito (UKIPO) dal Dott. Stephen Thaler, nelle quali veniva designato come unico inventore il sistema di intelligenza artificiale “DABUS”, di proprietà dello stesso Dott. Stephen Thaler.
Le due domande erano state
In a decision issued[1] November 27, 2023, a Chinese court ruled that AI-generated content can enjoy protection under copyright law. The finding, the first of its kind in China, is in direct conflict with the human authorship requirement under U.S. copyright law and may have far-reaching implications.