Kimberly K. Barlow, University of Pittsburgh; Pitt Rises to 21st in Annual Global Patent Ranking
"The University of Pittsburgh has continued its rise among the Top 100 Worldwide Universities Granted U.S. Utility Patents.
A utility patent, or patent for invention, protects the rights of the
creator of a new or improved product, process or machine. Pitt
innovators were granted 94 such patents in calendar year 2017 to rank No. 21 worldwide, continuing a three-year ascent in the annual rankings. Pitt ranked No. 35 in the 2015 report and No. 27 in 2016.
The rankings, compiled by the National Academy of Inventors and the Intellectual Property Owners Association, are based on United States Patent and Trademark Office data. The
report, which highlights the vital role patents play in university
research and innovation, ranks the top 100 universities named as the
first assignee on utility patents granted by the office."
My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology" was published on Nov. 13, 2025. Purchases can be made via Amazon and this Bloomsbury webpage: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/ethics-information-and-technology-9781440856662/
Friday, June 8, 2018
BBC; Copyright law could put end to net memes, June 8, 2018
BBC; Copyright law could put end to net memes
"Digital rights groups are campaigning against the Copyright Directive, which the European Parliament will vote on later this month.
The legislation aims to protect rights-holders in the internet age.
But critics say it misunderstands the way people engage with web content and risks excessive censorship.
The Copyright Directive is an attempt to reshape copyright for the internet, in particular rebalancing the relationship between copyright holders and online platforms."
"Digital rights groups are campaigning against the Copyright Directive, which the European Parliament will vote on later this month.
The legislation aims to protect rights-holders in the internet age.
But critics say it misunderstands the way people engage with web content and risks excessive censorship.
The Copyright Directive is an attempt to reshape copyright for the internet, in particular rebalancing the relationship between copyright holders and online platforms."
Thursday, June 7, 2018
Copyright Term: When Does a Work Enter the Public Domain?; Lexology, May 24, 2018
Workman Nydegger - J. Dustin Howell, Lexology; Copyright Term: When Does a Work Enter the Public Domain?
"Years ago, there was a radio show that featured a lawyer who would take calls from listeners and answer their legal questions. A man called into the show and said he had obtained some photographs of warplanes from a museum. A cable network had contacted the man about using the photographs as part of a documentary it was making. This man was wise enough to know that the photographs may very well be protected by copyright. He wanted to know how to find out if the photographs were still protected by copyright and who owned them, because without owning the copyrights himself or having a license from the copyright owner, the man could not authorize the cable network to use the photographs. Whether a work (e.g., photograph, literature, music, sculpture, movie, etc.) is protected by copyright or whether it is in the public domain for anyone to use can depend on a variety of factors."
"Years ago, there was a radio show that featured a lawyer who would take calls from listeners and answer their legal questions. A man called into the show and said he had obtained some photographs of warplanes from a museum. A cable network had contacted the man about using the photographs as part of a documentary it was making. This man was wise enough to know that the photographs may very well be protected by copyright. He wanted to know how to find out if the photographs were still protected by copyright and who owned them, because without owning the copyrights himself or having a license from the copyright owner, the man could not authorize the cable network to use the photographs. Whether a work (e.g., photograph, literature, music, sculpture, movie, etc.) is protected by copyright or whether it is in the public domain for anyone to use can depend on a variety of factors."
Wednesday, June 6, 2018
When Scientists Develop Products From Personal Medical Data, Who Gets To Profit?; NPR, May 31, 2018
Richard Harris, NPR; When Scientists Develop Products From Personal Medical Data, Who Gets To Profit?
"If you go to the hospital for medical treatment and scientists there decide to use your medical information to create a commercial product, are you owed anything as part of the bargain?
That's one of the questions that is emerging as researchers and product developers eagerly delve into digital data such as CT scans and electronic medical records, making artificial-intelligence products that are helping doctors to manage information and even to help them diagnose disease.
This issue cropped up in 2016, when Google DeepMind decided to test an app that measures kidney health by gathering 1.6 million records from patients at the Royal Free Hospital in London. The British authorities found this broke patient privacy laws in the United Kingdom. (Update on June 1 at 9:30 a.m. ET: DeepMind says it was able to deploy its app despite the violation.)
But the rules are different in the United States."
"If you go to the hospital for medical treatment and scientists there decide to use your medical information to create a commercial product, are you owed anything as part of the bargain?
That's one of the questions that is emerging as researchers and product developers eagerly delve into digital data such as CT scans and electronic medical records, making artificial-intelligence products that are helping doctors to manage information and even to help them diagnose disease.
This issue cropped up in 2016, when Google DeepMind decided to test an app that measures kidney health by gathering 1.6 million records from patients at the Royal Free Hospital in London. The British authorities found this broke patient privacy laws in the United Kingdom. (Update on June 1 at 9:30 a.m. ET: DeepMind says it was able to deploy its app despite the violation.)
But the rules are different in the United States."
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
Data mining: why the EU’s proposed copyright measures get it wrong; The Conversation, May 24, 2018
Martin Kretschmer
Data mining: why the EU’s proposed copyright measures get it wrong
"Data that is mined with the help of machine learning techniques has been a rapid area of technological advancement – with good and bad consequences for everyone. And EU copyright law is currently caught in the crossfire.
Cambridge Analytica and Facebook’s recent data scandal, which involved the profiling of users from their online behaviour facilitated by social networks, brought important issues to the surface about web privacy, only after it was reported that millions of people had their data harvested and improperly shared with a political consultancy.
But the same data mining technique also offers great societal benefit in fields such as traffic prediction, natural language processing and the identification of potential cures for diseases.
Many people think that regulating the use of data is a matter of data protection or privacy laws. However, where the raw material subjected to analysis is not “personal data” but material protected under copyright law, such as texts or certain structured databases, another set of legal norms come into play. This has far reaching and little understood consequences."
Professor of Intellectual Property Law, University of Glasgow and Thomas Margoni
Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property and Internet Law, University of Glasgow,
The Conversation; Data mining: why the EU’s proposed copyright measures get it wrong
"Data that is mined with the help of machine learning techniques has been a rapid area of technological advancement – with good and bad consequences for everyone. And EU copyright law is currently caught in the crossfire.
Cambridge Analytica and Facebook’s recent data scandal, which involved the profiling of users from their online behaviour facilitated by social networks, brought important issues to the surface about web privacy, only after it was reported that millions of people had their data harvested and improperly shared with a political consultancy.
But the same data mining technique also offers great societal benefit in fields such as traffic prediction, natural language processing and the identification of potential cures for diseases.
Many people think that regulating the use of data is a matter of data protection or privacy laws. However, where the raw material subjected to analysis is not “personal data” but material protected under copyright law, such as texts or certain structured databases, another set of legal norms come into play. This has far reaching and little understood consequences."
Judge Denies Author Attempt to Trademark 'Cocky' ; Publishers Weekly, June 4, 2018
Jim Milliot, Publishers Weekly; Judge Denies Author Attempt to Trademark 'Cocky'
"Although Hopkins had obtained her trademark, the law
only allows trademarks in limited cases. The law prevents individual
titles from being trademarked, only series titles, and allows that
common words cannot be trademarked at all, unless they develop an
association in the minds of the public with a particular source...
In
denying Hopkins’ motion for an injunction, Judge Hellerstein found that
the injunction was unlikely to proceed on the merits, noting that
“cocky” is a common word and a weak trademark."
Rapunzel, Rapunzel let down your trademark restrictions; The Boston Globe, June 5, 2018
Maria Cramer, The Boston Globe; Rapunzel, Rapunzel let down your trademark restrictions
"Companies pay the Patent and Trademark Office a small fee to register for a trademark, and generally it is not unusual for trademark applications to go unchallenged, said Jennifer Rothman, a law professor at Loyola Law School in California who teaches trademark law and is not connected to the case.
“The Patent and Trademark Office doesn’t have a lot of time to review these things,” Rothman said. “If no one opposes it, they approve it.”
Some companies take advantage of the less-than-robust screening process to snap up well-known names, then file complaints against businesses that have used the names for their products to leverage payments, Rothman said."
"Companies pay the Patent and Trademark Office a small fee to register for a trademark, and generally it is not unusual for trademark applications to go unchallenged, said Jennifer Rothman, a law professor at Loyola Law School in California who teaches trademark law and is not connected to the case.
“The Patent and Trademark Office doesn’t have a lot of time to review these things,” Rothman said. “If no one opposes it, they approve it.”
Some companies take advantage of the less-than-robust screening process to snap up well-known names, then file complaints against businesses that have used the names for their products to leverage payments, Rothman said."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)