eLife Trialing Radical New Approach To Peer Review 28/06/2018 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment eLife, an online publisher of research in the life and biomedical sciences, is trialing a radical new approach to peer review to increase editorial transparency and promote more efficient access to innovative new research.
US ITC Not Keeping Pace With Digital Revolution, New Report Argues 26/06/2018 by David Branigan, Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment The rapid rise of digital technology in the twenty-first century places new demands on intellectual property protections, while presenting new challenges. A new report suggests that a leading US agency that investigates patent infringement may need to be updated to keep up.
On Questionable Legal Basis, US Court Expands Range Of Patentable Inventions 21/06/2018 by Steven Seidenberg for Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment For more than a decade, the United States has been making it harder to obtain patents. A series of court rulings have steadily restricted the types of inventions that are patent-eligible. The tide, however, may be now turning. The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Vanda Pharmaceuticals v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals has opened the way to many future patents on biotech and personalized medicine. The ruling is a big step forward for the biotech and medical industries, and perhaps for patients seeking better medical care. But there’s a catch. Vanda could be overturned because it conflicts with the US Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories.
Rethinking Article III Standing In IPR Appeals At The Federal Circuit (US) 18/06/2018 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment If the Federal Circuit will not correct its misplaced jurisprudence, then it is time for the Supreme Court to correct course, and bring into line the Federal Circuit’s IPR standing to appeal jurisprudence, with the Supreme Court’s (and other Circuits’) more forgiving law of allowing petitioners whose petitions are denied, to challenge such denials, particularly when Congress has set forth reasonable conditions, like Section 319, upon which such challenge is to occur, write Charles Macedo, Chandler Sturm, and James Howard.
US Imposes USD 50B In Tariffs On China For Forced IP/Tech Practices, Cybertheft 15/06/2018 by William New, Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment The United States today released a list of products imported from China to the US on which additional tariffs will be placed as a measure aimed at pressuring China to change its practices the US says force US companies to give up intellectual property and transfer technology. Some industries have been dropped from the list such as pharmaceuticals, while a second list has now been announced, officials told reporters this morning.
World’s 5 Largest IP Offices Name Artificial Intelligence A Top Strategic Priority 15/06/2018 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment The heads of the patent offices of China, Europe, Korea, Japan and the United States met today and declared artificial intelligence one of the top strategic priorities for them as a group. Other efforts included work on harmonising patent practices, the Global Dossier program, classification of new technologies, and patents and standards, according to a release.
US Section 301, China, And Technology Transfer: Law And Its Limitations Revisited (Again) 07/06/2018 by Intellectual Property Watch 3 Comments Frederick Abbott writes: On 20 May 2018, US Treasury Secretary Mnuchin announced that the US and China were “putting the trade war on hold” while the two countries seek to “execute the framework” of a broad agreement intended to reduce the US trade deficit in goods with China. According to the joint statement issued on 19 May 2018, “Both sides attach paramount importance to intellectual property protections, and agreed to strengthen cooperation. China will advance relevant amendments to its laws and regulations in this area, including the Patent Law.”
In Defense Of Fair Use 04/06/2018 by Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment Copyright law, to be sustainable, calls for a balance. Under copyright law, creators receive exclusive rights to allow or prevent others from making copies of their works for a limited time as an incentive to create. Users receive benefits from the results of the creator’s labor, perhaps through watching, reading or listening to those results. Users may also benefit pursuant to a license to use the works in other ways. Eventually the works fall into the public domain, allowing further reuse by everyone. Recent litigation involving a graffiti artist and a purveyor of sportswear shows how sometimes a flexible mechanism for balancing the copyright entitlements of creators and users makes sense, writes Roy Kaufman.
‘Every Great Science Discovery, Invention, Is The Stuff Of Dreams, Not The Stuff Of Reason’: Interview With David Hanson Of Hanson Robotics 29/05/2018 by Catherine Saez, Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment Sophia, the well-known human-like robot who acquired citizenship in Saudi Arabia, was at the Artificial Intelligence for Good Global Summit which took place earlier this month in Geneva. Her creator, David Hanson, also CEO and founder of Hanson Robotics, gave an interview to Intellectual Property Watch’s Catherine Saez and explained his philosophy about intellectual property, the needed spark of interest in human-like robots, data collection, and innovation. Hanson is also lead designer and inventor of key technologies including Frubber nanotech, facial expressions and AI software. He is former Walt Disney Imagineering designer, and recipient of numerous awards. A video interview about Sophia is embedded in this text.
US Patent System Remains 1st In The World, Despite Errors In Chamber Rankings 21/05/2018 by Intellectual Property Watch 1 Comment Over the past few months, US officials ranging from PTO Director Andrei Iancu to a number of Congressional members, most recently Rep. Kelly (Illinois-2), have cited to the Chamber of Commerce’s ranking of intellectual property systems, which has dropped the US patent system from 1st in the world to 12th. They cite the rankings as evidence that the US patent system is in urgent need of review. Unfortunately, the rankings are based on misinterpretations and falsehoods. These are worth noting ahead of a House Judiciary hearing Tuesday with Iancu testifying.