Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

2021

Discipline
Institution
Keyword
Publication
Publication Type

Articles 601 - 607 of 607

Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law

Beyond Transparency And Accountability: Three Additional Features Algorithm Designers Should Build Into Intelligent Platforms, Peter K. Yu Jan 2021

Beyond Transparency And Accountability: Three Additional Features Algorithm Designers Should Build Into Intelligent Platforms, Peter K. Yu

Faculty Scholarship

In the age of artificial intelligence, innovative businesses are eager to deploy intelligent platforms to detect and recognize patterns, predict customer choices and shape user preferences. Yet such deployment has brought along the widely documented problems of automated systems, including coding errors, corrupt data, algorithmic biases, accountability deficits and dehumanizing tendencies. In response to these problems, policymakers, commentators and consumer advocates have increasingly called on businesses seeking to ride the artificial intelligence wave to build transparency and accountability into algorithmic designs.

While acknowledging these calls for action and appreciating the benefits and urgency of building transparency and accountability into algorithmic …

Go to article

Information Age Technology, Industrial Age Laws, Elizabeth I. Winston Jan 2021

Information Age Technology, Industrial Age Laws, Elizabeth I. Winston

Scholarly Articles

The United States patent system was born during the Industrial Age — at a time where the focus was on promoting innovation in machines, and tangible means of changing the world. With the dawn of the Information Age, innovation is increasingly intangible. The industrial age laws, as currently interpreted, are not well-suited for the changing and evolving technological world. Information age innovators face challenges at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, through the judicial system and at the United States International Trade Commission. It is time for a change in the system to reflect the realities of modern technology. …

Go to article

Bargaining For Innovation, Elizabeth I. Winston Jan 2021

Bargaining For Innovation, Elizabeth I. Winston

Scholarly Articles

Reward drives innovation. For this reason, Congress has enacted a system of patents, trademarks, and copyrights to incentivize innovation. Such publicly ordered intellectual property regulation supports public and private interests—mandating disclosure of the innovation while legislating protection of that disclosure. Increasingly, though, the legislated incentives are proving insufficient for innovation, and innovators are relying on private incentives, undermining the fundamental balance of our legal framework and maximizing the reward to innovators at the cost of the public’s interest. Enforcement of contracts that supplant legislation rather than supplement it contravenes public policy and vitiates the public’s interest. It is time to …

Go to article

Fintech: New Battle Lines In The Patent Wars?, Megan M. La Belle, Heidi Mandanis Schooner Jan 2021

Fintech: New Battle Lines In The Patent Wars?, Megan M. La Belle, Heidi Mandanis Schooner

Scholarly Articles

Historically, financial institutions have relied on trade secrets and first-mover advantages, rather than patents, to protect their inventions. For the few financial patents that were issued, conventional wisdom was that they weren’t terribly interesting or important. In our 2014 study on financial patents, we showed that banks were breaking from past patterns and increasingly seeking patent protection. We explained that financial institutions were primarily building their patent portfolios as a defensive measure—i.e., to protect themselves from infringement suits. Indeed, the finance industry successfully lobbied Congress to include provisions in the America Invents Act of 2011 that made it easier to …

Go to article

Fashion's Brand Heritage, Cultural Heritage, And The Piracy Paradox, Felicia Caponigri Jan 2021

Fashion's Brand Heritage, Cultural Heritage, And The Piracy Paradox, Felicia Caponigri

Journal Articles

This Article explores the role that heritage has on our understanding of the appropriateness of intellectual property protection for fashion designs in light of Christopher Sprigman and Kal Raustiala’s seminal work in The Piracy Paradox. At times, heritage seems to both reinforce Sprigman and Raustiala’s argument that fashion thrives in a low-IP regime and, at other times, heritage challenges that argument. Taking Italian fashion design as a case study, this Article considers the intersection of brand heritage, cultural heritage, and intellectual property law and makes three central observations. First, that fashion designs reflecting brand heritage thrive in a low-IP regime. …

Go to article

Copyright And Disability, Blake E. Reid Jan 2021

Copyright And Disability, Blake E. Reid

Publications

A vast array of copyrighted works—books, video programming, software, podcasts, video games, and more—remain inaccessible to people with disabilities. International efforts to adopt limitations and exceptions to copyright law that permit third parties to create and distribute accessible versions of books for people with print disabilities have drawn some attention to the role that copyright law plays in inhibiting the accessibility of copyrighted works. However, copyright scholars have not meaningfully engaged with the role that copyright law plays in the broader tangle of disability rights.

Go to article

Ai And Copyright, Carys Craig Jan 2021

Ai And Copyright, Carys Craig

All Papers

This chapter examines the most pertinent issues facing copyright law as it encounters increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI). It begins with a few introductory examples to illuminate the potential interactions of AI and copyright law. Section 1 tackles the question of whether AI-generated works are copyrightable in Canada and who, if anyone, might own that copyright. This involves a doctrinal discussion of “originality” (the threshold for copyrightability) as well as reflections on the meaning of “authorship,” and concludes with the suggestion that autonomously generated AI outputs presently (and rightly) belong in the public domain. Section 2 turns to consider issues …

Go to article

First Prev