Feinstein: Trump trademark in China may violate Constitution; Politico, February 17, 2017

Kyle Cheney, Politico; 

Feinstein: Trump trademark in China may violate Constitution

"A decision by the Chinese government to grant President Donald Trump a trademark for his brand could be a breach of the U.S. Constitution, a senior Democratic senator warned Friday.

“China’s decision to award President Trump with a new trademark allowing him to profit from the use of his name is a clear conflict of interest and deeply troubling,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in a statement. “If this isn’t a violation of the Emoluments Clause, I don’t know what is.”

The Emoluments Clause of the Constitution prohibits federal officials — including the president — from accepting payments from foreign governments. Trump’s critics have argued that Trump’s opaque and byzantine business network could run afoul of this principle.

“The fact that this decision comes just days after a conversation between President Trump and President Xi Jinping where President Trump reaffirmed the U.S. policy of ‘One China’ is even more disturbing as it gives the obvious impression of a quid pro quo,” said Feinstein, ranking member of the Judiciary Committee."

When Machines Create Intellectual Property, Who Owns What?; Intellectual Property Watch, February 16, 2017

Bruce Gain, Intellectual Property Watch; 

When Machines Create Intellectual Property, Who Owns What?

"The concept of machines that can think and create in ways that are indistinguishable from humans has been the stuff of science fiction for decades. Now, following major advances in artificial intelligence (AI), intellectual property created by machines without human input is fast becoming a reality. The development thus begs the question among legal scholars, legislative bodies, and judiciary branches of governments worldwide of who owns the intellectual property that humans did not create."

Was ‘Weird Al’ the real star all along?; Washington Post, February 16, 2017

Geoff Edgers, Washington Post; Was ‘Weird Al’ the real star all along?

"As his friend Miranda has reminded him, he doesn’t have to get permission from artists. Parody is protected by the First Amendment. But Yankovic has built his reputation on respecting artists’ wishes.

“I don’t want to hurt anybody’s feelings,” Yankovic says. “I don’t want to be embroiled in any nastiness. That’s not how I live my life. I like everybody to be in on the joke and be happy for my success. I take pains not to burn bridges.”

Prince never agreed to let him parody one of his songs, so he didn’t. Paul McCartney dissuaded Yankovic from turning “Live and Let Die” into “Chicken Pot Pie.” The former Beatle, a vegetarian and animal rights activist, suggested “Tofu Pot Pie.” Somehow, that didn’t have the same ring to it."

Winston Churchill's views on aliens revealed in lost essay; BBC News, February 15, 2017

Paul Rincon, BBC News; 

Winston Churchill's views on aliens revealed in lost essay

"Dr Livio told BBC News that there were no firm plans to publish the article because of issues surrounding the copyright. However, he said the Churchill Museum was working to resolve these so that the historically important essay can eventually see the light of day."

Don't get too excited about Amazon's drone delivery patent; CNet, February 14, 2017

Sean Hollister, CNet; 

Don't get too excited about Amazon's drone delivery patent

"Like with most patents, the specifics don't matter -- Amazon's lawyers wrote down as many possible ways of building such a thing (again, compressed air, steering fins) so Amazon has a better chance of defending the idea in court.

Ready for me to rain on the parade? The other thing about patents, particularly ones that have been granted, is that they describe old ideas -- ideas that may have been discarded.

Amazon applied for this particular patent in June 2015, and yet Amazon's first drone deliveries, in December 2016, didn't use such a system."

America as a Place of Innovation: Great Inventors and the Patent System: Thursday, February 16, 2017

America as a Place of Innovation: Great Inventors and the Patent System: 

[Kip Currier: Looking forward to attending this panel discussion at the Smithsonian National Museum of American History.]

DATE AND TIME

Thu, February 16, 2017

1:00 PM – 2:30 PM EST

LOCATION

National Museum of American History

1300 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, D.C 20013

DESCRIPTION

The Lemelson Center for the Study of Invention and Innovation at the Smithsonian Institution and the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property (CPIP) at Antonin Scalia Law School invite you to a panel discussion at the National Museum of American History.

This panel will explore the history of innovation and the broader social, political, and legal context for inventors in late nineteenth century America. The panel will address the historical role of patents, research-intensive startups, litigation, and licensing during an important period of disruptive innovation.

• Speakers:

  • Prof. Ernest Freeberg, University of Tennessee, discussing Thomas Edison and how the invention of the electric light impacted American culture. Professor Freeberg is the author of the book The Age of Edison: Electric Light and the Invention of Modern America(Penguin, 2014)
  • Prof. Christopher Beauchamp, Brooklyn Law School, discussing Alexander Graham Bell and the legal disputes that erupted out of Bell’s telephone patent. Professor Beauchamp is the author of the book Invented by Law: Alexander Graham Bell and the Patent That Changed America (Harvard University Press, 2015)
  • Prof. Adam Mossoff, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, discussing early American innovation by Charles Goodyear, Samuel Morse, and Joseph Singer.Professor Mossoff is the author of the influential article “The Rise and Fall of the First American Patent Thicket: The Sewing Machine War of the 1850s.”
  • Moderator: Arthur Daemmrich, Director, Lemelson Center for the Study of Invention and Innovation
  • Closing Remarks: Alan Marco, Chief Economist, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office

Open Science: Beyond Open Access webinar; Library Journal, February 21, 2017

Library Journal; Open Science: Beyond Open Access webinar

"Open Science: Beyond Open Access

Presented by: Dove Press & Library Journal

Event Date & Time: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017, 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM ET / 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM PT

Collaboration can be a major driver for success. When data is shared among researchers, analysts and stakeholders, the opportunities for innovation and development increase exponentially, particularly in the medical and science fields. To be most effective, the Open Science framework demands more than simply sharing data–it requires dedication, transparency and responsible publishing.

Join this webcast to learn from our panel of experts as they discuss the challenges and benefits of Open Science in the context of global health and medical concerns. They will explain how the disruptive concept of Open Data can reshape and improve the nature of research and results.

Panelists

• Dr. Eric Little, VP of Data Science, OSTHUS
• Dr. Robin Bloor, Chief Analyst, The Bloor Group
• Andrew Johnson, Research Data Librarian/Assistant Professor, University of Colorado Boulder

Moderator

• Rebecca Jozwiak, Editorial & Research Director, The Bloor Group"