Intellectual Property Law and Copyright Laws

Paul Bain has completed the second edition of Art Law: Cases and Controversies, a comprehensive legal guide published by LexisNexis that examines the intricate legal frameworks governing art creation, transactions, collecting, and preservation. The publication features contributions from leading professionals and addresses how traditional art law principles intersect with modern challenges posed by the Internet and artificial intelligence technologies.

Artificial intelligence has revolutionized innovation at unprecedented speed, but its rapid advancement raises critical questions about intellectual property rights. Is AI a transformative tool that lawfully builds on existing knowledge, or does it systematically infringe on the creative works and patents of inventors and artists? The answer depends on which side of this intensifying legal debate you occupy.

The U.S. government has filed a Statement of Interest of the United States of America under 28 U.S.C. § 517 in the Southern District of New York multidistrict litigation over OpenAI’s use of copyrighted works to train large language models. The filing appears to be the federal government’s first direct intervention in the wave of artificial intelligence (AI) training copyright cases, and it advises the court to treat model training (separate from use of AI to generate outputs) on copyrighted text standing alone as a highly transformative fair use under current law.

A company trying to register a trademark sometimes encounters an unusual situation: the owner of the trademark cited against its application does not object to the registration, but the United States Patent and Trademark Office still does.

Paul Bain has completed the second edition of Art Law: Cases and Controversies, a comprehensive legal guide published by LexisNexis that examines the intricate legal frameworks governing art creation, transactions, collecting, and preservation. The publication features contributions from leading professionals and addresses how traditional art law principles intersect with modern challenges posed by the Internet and artificial intelligence technologies.

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.

The Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Comet Technologies USA, Inc. v. XP Power, LLC overturned a $40 million trade secret verdict, exposing a critical distinction between federal and state trade secret law regarding burden of proof. The court found that jury instructions applicable under California's Uniform Trade Secrets Act improperly shifted the burden of proving information was "readily ascertainable" from the plaintiff to the defendant under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act.

Ankura's latest insights explore critical intersections of technology, security, and business strategy. From AI coding vulnerabilities threatening developer tools to the evolving challenges of trade secret protection in an AI-driven economy, these analyses examine how organizations must adapt their approaches to risk, compliance, and operational resilience in rapidly changing digital and regulatory landscapes.

A Washington federal court’s recent refusal to overturn a $1.9 million trade secret verdict against three former chemical sales representatives illustrates a commonly misunderstood point in trade secret law: a compilation of individually unremarkable, even public, information can still be a protectable trade secret.

In a recent PTAB decision, Director Squires addressed whether Microsoft's IPR petition should proceed despite Sandpiper CDN's discretionary denial request. The ruling hinged on two critical factors: the novelty of Microsoft's art citations and Sandpiper CDN's failure to disclose its own commonly assigned prior art during patent prosecution. This case provides important guidance on how patent owners' prosecution conduct can impact discretionary denial outcomes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

The Federal Circuit dismissed a patent owner's appeal in In re Hybir, Inc., ruling that a settlement agreement containing only a nominal $100 optional license tied to the appeal's outcome failed to create a live case or controversy. The court determined that such an arbitrary sum functioned merely as a "side bet" on the appeal rather than representing real economic significance or concrete dispute necessary to sustain federal jurisdiction.

When people hear “Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.,” they usually remember it as the case that made it easier to get attorney’s fees in patent litigation. That is true, but it also undersells what actually shifted. Ten-plus years later, the common story is still a little too simple.