TCS Reports Current Patent Laws Are Inadequate for AI-related IP

TCS Reports Current Patent Laws Are Inadequate for AI-related IP

Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), India’s largest software exporter in association with the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), has recently reported that despite the evolution of Patent Laws in India and abroad, the increasing proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) across the world requires new policies for Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) enforcement.

The report found that the current patent laws treat AI software-based inventions as logical algorithms implemented in the computer systems. Although patent eligibility of algorithms is valid, there is not enough about how to handle inventions with heuristic nature.

What is Heuristic?

In AI, heuristic refers to a technique to solve problems faster than the classical methods. The report cited that AI software is no longer bound to traditional rule-based systems, and in fact, has increasingly turned heuristic, thus showing higher intelligence over classical systems.

The report explained that as per the current patent laws – someone, typically a natural person (in legal terms – an individual instead of one associated with a public or private body) who only applies the logic to make anything workable cannot be an inventor.

It also clarified that machines are frequently deriving solutions to problems autonomously or in conjunction with a natural person, thus bringing the definition of a ‘natural person’ in question. Besides, it emphasized that this issue needs to be addressed by state laws and enterprises. Moreover, data-privacy and data-ownership issues, which would have severe legal implications, are other aspects that require fresh debates.

The report further noted that in the global ecosystem involving multiple players, data is not just accessed but also moved across jurisdictions many times. The data ownership holder or the data owner or the AI scientist who owns the IP rights on an invention is at the forefront of the debate.

It then revealed that AI is helping to develop new mechanisms and doctrines for future IP ecosystems. As the study recommended – the present administrators of Intellectual Property Right in India and outside have to address the IP management at three levels.

  • At the data level: In the form of access to accurate and high-quality data
  • At the IP system level: For enabling the IP systems with AI-based solutions
  • At the people level: To empower people to realize the merits of AI in the IP domain.

At last, the report informed that IBM, Microsoft, Toshiba, Samsung, and NEC were the top five patent applicants. Nonetheless, the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS), dealing in deep learning (DL) with 235 patent families, held the largest patent portfolio worldwide – the report found. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com

Don’t forget to follow us on social media:

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/

Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv

Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/

Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/

Tumblr – https://trademarkmaldives.tumblr.com/

Why Intellectual Property Law in South Africa Needs a Revision?

Why Intellectual Property Law in South Africa Needs a Revision?

Like many other nations, the immense umbrella of Intellectual Property Law in South Africa (SA) also encompasses the legislation that involves patents, trademarks, industrial designs, and copyright protection. Intellectual property (IP) refers to intangible assets that are created through human intellect. Although beneficial to the owner (creator/ producer) in many ways, these IP assets are vulnerable to exploitation by third parties and should be protected by a powerful means. IP law is one of the best ways famous for protecting intangible IP that can hold immense value. It is a crucial source used to restrict the unlawful use of inventors’ unique assets, and thus, ensure the Intellectual Property Protection in South Africa and other regions worldwide.

Another main objective of the administrators, attorneys, etc., taking care of the IP law in South Africa is to encourage the creators to create more and more intellectual goods. Unfortunately, as the Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) provided under the IP law allow the owners to prevent others from using their assets, they often confer negative rights. Hence, it is essential to revise the IP law in South Africa to ensure that people seeking access to healthcare shouldn’t be denied healthcare lifesaving drugs.

One considerable fact about IP law in SA when it comes to the healthcare area is that the granted IPR, i.e., patent enables the pharmaceutical companies to prohibit others from manufacturing and selling the same medicines. The patent, no matter whether for the protection of medications or anything else, lasts for around 20 years in most of the nations globally. It bestows the companies with a monopoly to determine and set the price of medicines produced by them on their own. The highly-priced drugs often push the people in desperate and fatal situations, thus making it vital to revise the Patent Law of South Africa that lead to the granting of excessive licenses fueling pharmaceutical monopolies.

Measures South Africa is Taking or Should Take

Concerning the call to revise IP law in SA and several other nations, the World Health Organization (WHO) has provided some rules and stated that the public health principles related to access to medicines are sustained by the Constitution of WHO along with a wide range of national and international legal policies. Besides, Intellectual Property Rules from the human rights viewpoint must be supervised under principles supporting not just the public health goals but access to medicines as well.

Still, several pharmaceutical firms focus on monopolizing the production of drugs, especially for TB, cancer, and hepatitis C that are the most leading cause behind deaths in SA, only for making profits.

A physician named Dr. Eric Goemaere, who introduced HIV treatment in SA in 2017, said that the treatments for HIV and cancer are very complicated and expensive. That’s why people are afraid of even looking at them. The most disconcerting thought revolves around the resistance put up by big pharmaceutical companies on the creation and availability of these treatments when the patient is dying. The Treatment Action Campaign is the biggest organization that came up to provide relief in such instances by ensuring that all people in South Africa can access suitable medical treatment. By making the large pharmaceutical firms grant licenses to small companies for manufacturing generic ARV (antiretroviral) and numerous other relevant things, it ensures that the appropriate medical facilities are available to all South Africans.

No doubt that the rapidly advancing technology has provided us with numerous new medicines and antiretrovirals, but the concerning fact is that all these are very expensive. Hence, it is recommended that the government, pharmaceutical organizations, and IP Attorneys in South Africa should work on new research and development (R&D) models to delink the cost of R&D from the total cost for drugs or treatments. South Africa should likewise think about the approaches for incentivizing R&D through cash prizes, grants, and more, instead of supporting patent monopolies leading to excessive pricing. The nation should also advocate worldwide leadership by funding people for initiatives like researches. It even needs to invest in the development of drugs for the future rather than just thinking about the intellectual property market in South Africa or outside.

Ordinary People of South Africa

For ordinary people in South Africa, the present scenario means that they can anytime face the situation when it will be essential for them to get unaffordable medicines that are secured under patents preventing other manufacturers from coming up with an affordable alternative. It also means that human rights, constitutional rights, and health are commodified, allowing firms with patents to deploy human sufferings for extracting profits. In short, it suggests that the right to access to health for common residents of South Africa is being undermined, and therefore, the nation needs to think about – of course – the difficulties related to IP law, but while emphasizing the violation of human rights. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com

Don’t forget to follow us on social media:

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/

Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv

Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/

Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/

Tumblr – https://trademarkmaldives.tumblr.com/

Europe’s Top Court Adviser Says Amazon Must Check for Trademark Infringements

Europe’s Top Court Adviser Says Amazon Must Check for Trademark Infringements

An adviser to Europe’s top court has recently said that Amazon, the US online retail giant is not liable for unconsciously stocking products causing Trademark Infringement for third-party sellers, but should be careful in checking whether the products are legal or not.

The adviser gave his opinion on a case pitting Amazon against the US cosmetics firm Coty. The dispute reflects one of the many battles amid online platforms like Amazon, eBay, etc., fighting against online business barriers and luxury products firms seeking to preserve their branding and exclusivity. The opinion from Manuel Campos Sanchez-Bordona, the advocate general at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), came in response to a case concerning Coty’s German subsidiary. It is the subsidiary that took Amazon to a German court for stocking its Davidoff perfume for third-party sellers.

Coty said that such practices infringe on its trademark rights, and Amazon should be responsible for stocking trademark infringing products.

Campos Sanchez-Bordona said that the companies, which are unaware of trademark infringements, cannot be held liable for storing such products for third-party sellers. He also raises the question of the online platforms’ responsibility for the content transmitted or products sold on their sites. He even said that if the firms actively participate in disseminating the products and operate schemes like Amazon’s, then they must show diligence in checking the legality of products advertised or sold on their platforms.

Amazon’s Scheme

The US online retail giant under its scheme known as “Fulfilled by Amazon” stores and delivers products for third-party sellers and this is one of the main features of its whole business model.

Campos Sanchez-Bordona continued by saying that the companies should be aware that they cannot absolve themselves of responsibility. They must understand that without this control, their platforms can serve as a channel for advertisement and sale of counterfeit, stolen, illegal, or unethical products.

Amazon, in regards to this, said that it made efforts to combat fake products on its platform. The company added that they continuously invest heavily in battling against bad actors and are committed to turning counterfeits to zero on their platform. Moreover, courts have ruled in their favor in the first two instances of this action, and they are now expecting preliminary legal clarification from the CJEU.

Nonetheless, Coty did not immediately respond to the request, but the Luxembourg-based court, which looks in the majority of cases related to such non-binding recommendations, would normally provide a verdict in the next two to four months. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com

Don’t forget to follow us on social media:

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/

Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv

Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/

Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/

Tumblr – https://trademarkmaldives.tumblr.com/

China to Reinforce Protection for Intellectual Property Rights

China to Reinforce Protection for Intellectual Property Rights

The Chinese government, through the medium of a document it issued earlier this week, has revealed its desire to improve the protection of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), an issue reflecting at the center of trade matters with the United States (US).

The document launched recently is a joint directive by the General Offices of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the Chinese State Council, aimed at strengthening the protection of Chinese IPRs between accusations from the US stating that China has stolen the American IP.  The directive laid out China’s goal of reinforcing IPRs protection over the next two years by raising the upper limits for compensation related to the infringement of such rights.

According to the excerpts provided by the Chinese State Council, the directive reads that increasing IPRs protection is one of the most significant ways to improve the IPR system and to boost up the economic competitiveness of China. The new guidelines also revealed that China would multiply its efforts to enhance international cooperation on the protection of IPR, promote communication between foreign and domestic rights holders, and provide support in overseas IPR disputes.

The document also discussed China’s plan to increase the protection of trade secrets, confidential business data, and source codes and speed up the procedure to introduce a punitive compensation system for violation of patents, copyrights, or other IPRs.

The measures came after considering that the disputes over the theft of Intellectual Property (IP) have roiled the trade negotiations amid the world’s two largest economies, i.e., the U.S. and China scramble to reach phase-one of a trade deal.  The development came as investors have been scaling back their hopes for a phase-one agreement amid Beijing and Washington before the end of this year, i.e., 2019. This sort of deal was expected to provide the stage for dealing with chief concerns like a complaint made by the U.S against China, alleging that China steals intellectual property.

In an investigation made by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative last year, it was found that the intellectual-property theft by China compels the U.S to face a loss between $225 billion and $600 billion a year.

Ultimately, the document claimed that by 2022, China would be making progress in matters that have affected IPRs enforcement, like high costs, low compensation, and the difficulty of proof. And also that by 2025, the nation would have implemented an upgraded system of IPR protection. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com

Don’t forget to follow us on social media:

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/

Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv

Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/

Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/

Tumblr – https://trademarkmaldives.tumblr.com/

Newer Posts