Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP - Susan Y. Tull, Lexology; Patenting the Future of Medicine: The Intersection of Patent Law and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
"Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the world of medicine, and the intellectual property directed to these inventions must keep pace. AI computers are diagnosing medical conditions and disorders at a rate equal to or better than their human peers, all while developing their own software code and algorithms to do so. These recent advances raise issues of patentability, inventorship, and ownership as machine-based learning evolves."
Showing posts with label artificial intelligence (AI). Show all posts
Showing posts with label artificial intelligence (AI). Show all posts
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
Friday, February 2, 2018
Copyright And Artificial Intelligence; Intellectual Property Watch, January 30, 2018
Edward Klaris, Managing Partner, KlarisLaw and KlarisIP, Lecturer-in-Law at Columbia Law School, Intellectual Property Watch; Copyright And Artificial Intelligence
"If a software engineer programs a bot which can generate music, for example, the copyright belongs to the person who created a song by controlling the bot, not the engineer who fabricated the software, nor the bot itself. The monkey may have pushed the camera button, but the photographer owns the copyright. That’s got to be the rule even in a world where the bot may be operating more on its own and with increasing artificial intelligence. United States law needs to evolve to recognize that, although a person may rely even 100 percent on a machine to produce original work, the person is the author worthy of Constitutional protection.
Of course, there may well be cases that test this position going forward. But, in an increasingly mechanized world, we must hold fast to the original principles of promoting “the progress of science and useful arts” by protecting human creativity and innovation."
"If a software engineer programs a bot which can generate music, for example, the copyright belongs to the person who created a song by controlling the bot, not the engineer who fabricated the software, nor the bot itself. The monkey may have pushed the camera button, but the photographer owns the copyright. That’s got to be the rule even in a world where the bot may be operating more on its own and with increasing artificial intelligence. United States law needs to evolve to recognize that, although a person may rely even 100 percent on a machine to produce original work, the person is the author worthy of Constitutional protection.
Of course, there may well be cases that test this position going forward. But, in an increasingly mechanized world, we must hold fast to the original principles of promoting “the progress of science and useful arts” by protecting human creativity and innovation."
Monday, November 28, 2016
YouTube protects copyright with artificial intelligence; The Australian, 11/29/16
Chris Griffith, The Australian; YouTube protects copyright with artificial intelligence:
"YouTube is using artificial intelligence to thwart a game of cat and mouse by users circumventing copyright. The Google-owned service already has algorithms for detecting copyright movie, video and music content that users post on YouTube. Over the years, some users have developed tricks for getting around detection. Some have posted video with colours reversed, or images of each frame reversed vertically or horizontally. Other techniques include altering colours, changing the aspect ratio, cropping frames and using a halo effect. The idea is to make video unrecognisable as copyright content... YouTube however is fighting back. It has been delving into the world of artificial intelligence and machine learning to dissemble video and music, and outfox these cunning operators. “That’s what we’re using machine learning for, to take out these things, and to work out they are the same image,” said Harris Cohen, senior product manager of Content ID at YouTube."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)