Showing posts with label reputation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reputation. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 20, 2024

Indian news agency sues OpenAI alleging copyright infringement; TechCrunch, November 18, 2024

 Manish Singh, TechCrunch; Indian news agency sues OpenAI alleging copyright infringement

"One of India’s largest news agencies, Asian News International (ANI), has sued OpenAI in a case that could set a precedent for how AI companies use copyrighted news content in the world’s most populous nation.

Asian News International filed a 287-page lawsuit in the Delhi High Court on Monday, alleging the AI company illegally used its content to train its AI models and generated false information attributed to the news agency. The case marks the first time an Indian media organization has taken legal action against OpenAI over copyright claims.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Justice Amit Bansal issued a summons to OpenAI after the company confirmed it had already ensured that ChatGPT wasn’t accessing ANI’s website. The bench said that it was not inclined to grant an injunction order on Tuesday, as the case required a detailed hearing for being a “complex issue.”

The next hearing is scheduled to be held in January."

Tuesday, June 18, 2024

‘Trump Too Small’ Trademark Case Morphs Into Free Speech Debate; Bloomberg Law, June 18, 2024

Laura Heymann , Bloomberg Law; ‘Trump Too Small’ Trademark Case Morphs Into Free Speech Debate

"The US Supreme Court’s June 13 decision in the “Trump Too Small” trademark case revealed a potential rift among the justices on First Amendment jurisprudence but did little to advance intellectual property law...

Trademark law, the Supreme Court has said in prior cases, is primarily about two goals: preventing confusion among consumers by ensuring accurate source identification and preserving trademark owners’ reputation and goodwill. For these justices, the names clause passed muster because prohibiting the registration of personal names without consent was self-evidently reasonable in light of these purposes; no further analysis was required."

Wednesday, March 6, 2019

IP 101: Intellectual Property Management In The Digital Age; Forbes, March 4, 2019

Danae Vara Borrell, Forbes; IP 101: Intellectual Property Management In The Digital Age

"So, how do brands facing a high number of counterfeits leverage classic IP rights and technology to implement an effective online IP strategy and prevent brand erosion?

Many brands are streamlining processes by enforcing their IP rights, using technology-based solutions that rely on artificial intelligence (AI) and detect potential incidents on behalf of right owners. However, to be effective, the best AI-driven systems should take a holistic approach to brand protection by consolidating tools and actions on a single platform, providing full visibility on all the different types of infringements negatively impacting a company’s reputation such as black, grey and white market goods."

Wednesday, November 28, 2018

Did Uber Steal Google’s Intellectual Property?; The New Yorker, October 22, 2018 Issue

Charles Duhigg, The New Yorker; Did Uber Steal Google’s Intellectual Property?

"Levandowski, for his part, has been out of work since he was fired by Uber. It’s hard to feel much sympathy for him, though. He’s still extremely wealthy. He left Google with files that nearly everyone agrees he should not have walked off with, even if there is widespread disagreement about how much they’re worth. Levandowski seemed constantly ready to abandon his teammates and threaten defection, often while working on an angle to enrich himself. He is a brilliant mercenary, a visionary opportunist, a man seemingly without loyalty. He has helped build a technology that might transform how the world functions, and he seems inclined to personally profit from that transformation as much as possible. In other words, he is an exemplar of Silicon Valley ethics.

Levandowski is upset that some people have cast him as the bad guy. “I reject the notion that I did something unethical,” he said. “Was I trying to compete with them? Sure.” But, he added, “I’m not a thief, and I’m not dishonest.” Other parents sometimes shun him when he drops his kids off at school, and he has grown tired of people taking photographs of him when he walks through airports. But he is confident that his notoriety will subside. Although he no longer owns the technology that he brought to Google and Uber, plenty of valuable information remains inside his head, and he has a lot of new ideas."

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Why was Mother Teresa's uniform trademarked?; BBC News, July 12, 2017

Why was Mother Teresa's uniform trademarked?

"It is also not clear how this trademark on the famous blue striped sari will be enforced. Many online shopping sites already sell variations of "unisex Mother Teresa dress" - blue bordered sari, and a long sleeved blouse.
Also, the move is bound to raise the hackles of the nun's critics - and she has her fair share of them - who have accused her of glorifying poverty, hobnobbing with dictators, running shambolic care facilities and proselytising. "How can anybody appropriate a sari, which has been a traditional Indian dress," one of them asked me, preferring to remain unnamed.
Designers like Anand Bhushan differ. "Some designs of the traditional Indian towel called gamcha, for example, have been trademarked. There's nothing wrong in trademarking a distinctive and iconic design or pattern like Mother Teresa's sari. It's not like anybody is beginning to own the sari.""

Friday, April 14, 2017

Company sued EFF over “Stupid Patent of the Month;” EFF now flips the script; Ars Technica, April 13, 2017

Cyrus Farivar, Ars Technica; 

Company sued EFF over “Stupid Patent of the Month;” EFF now flips the script


"The Electronic Frontier Foundation has sued an Australian company that it previously dubbed as a "classic patent troll" in a June 2016 blog post entitled: "Stupid Patent of the Month: Storage Cabinets on a Computer."
Last year, that company, Global Equity Management (SA) Pty. Ltd. (GEMSA), managed to get an Australian court to order EFF to remove its post—but EFF did not comply. In January 2017, Pasha Mehr, an attorney representing GEMSA, further demanded that the article be removed and that EFF pay $750,000. EFF still did not comply.
The new lawsuit, filed in federal court in San Francisco on Wednesday, asks that the American court declare the Australian ruling unenforceable in the US. Why? According to the EFF argument, the Australian ruling runs afoul of free speech protections granted under the United States Constitution—namely, that opinions are protected.
GEMSA attorneys have threatened to take this Australian court order to American search engine companies to deindex the blog post, making the post harder to find online."

Friday, December 23, 2016

China fines firms for using BMW-like trademark: media; Reuters, 12/19/16

Reporting by Engen Tham; Editing by Stephen Coates, Reuters; China fines firms for using BMW-like trademark: media:
"A court in Shanghai ordered two Chinese firms and the founder of one of them to pay automaker BMW (BMWG.DE) 3 million yuan ($431,617.41) for registering trademarks similar to that of the German firm, the Shanghai Daily reported on Tuesday.
The ruling is the latest win for a large foreign firm in China, a sign that courts are taking trademark infringement more seriously in a country dogged with fakes of everything from clothing brands to entire shops."

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Led Zeppelin faces copyright case for ‘Stairway to Heaven’; PBS NewsHour, 6/19/16

[Podcast and Transcript] Phil Hirschkorn, PBS NewsHour; Led Zeppelin faces copyright case for ‘Stairway to Heaven’ :
"This week in Los Angeles federal court, a jury began hearing evidence and testimony on whether rock band Led Zeppelin may have lifted part of their iconic song, “Stairway to Heaven.” At stake is the band’s reputation and millions of dollars. NewsHour Weekend’s Phil Hirschkorn reports."

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Doctors and dentists tell patients, "all your review are belong to us"; ArsTechnica.com, 5/24/11

Timothy B. Lee, ArsTechnica.com; Doctors and dentists tell patients, "all your review are belong to us" :

"The agreement that Dr. Cirka's staff asked me to sign on that February morning began by claiming to offer stronger privacy protections than those guaranteed by HIPAA, the 1996 law that governs patient privacy in the United States. In exchange for this extra dollop of privacy, it asked me to "exclusively assign all Intellectual Property rights, including copyrights" to "any written, pictorial, and/or electronic commentary" I might make about Dr. Cirka's services, including on "web pages, blogs, and/or mass correspondence," to Dr. Cirka. It also stipulated that if Dr. Cirka were to sue me due to a breach of the agreement, the prevailing party in the litigation will pay the loser's legal fees."

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Podcast: NPR's Fresh Air; The New Price Point? 'Free'; 7/8/09

Podcast [30 min. 49 sec.] NPR's Fresh Air; The New Price Point? 'Free':

"Journalist Chris Anderson believes that businesses can profit by giving their material away on the Internet. His new book Free: The Future of a Radical Price explains how "free" can become a marketing technique, helping businesses gain credibility in an economy that increasingly values reputation.

The editor-in-chief of Wired magazine, Anderson is the author of The Long Tail. Previously, he was U.S. business editor at The Economist."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106347439