Articles 2024

Personality rights of deceased celebrities have been the subject of debate for many years due to the continued popularity of these individuals beyond their death. Recently, two events have sparked renewed discussions on the matter. These events raise ethical and legal issues related to publicity, privacy, and intellectual property. This article will explore these issues through the lens of prior case law.

Last month, Gucci found itself on the losing side of a trademark battle in Japan. The Italian luxury goods company had been in an ongoing dispute with the brand Parodys, owned by Nobuaki Korukawa. Kurokawa makes t-shirts with parodies of famous brands like Chanel, Balenciaga, Adidas and of course, Gucci.

Hollywood-esque special effects that allow anyone to become any person with the click of a few buttons: this is the reality of deepfakes. Deepfakes are a form of technology that uses artificial intelligence (“AI”) to allow a person to impersonate someone else’s appearance and voice. A person only needs a phone or a computer, and an image or video of the desired target.

In recent years, the CIPO has received criticism for its approach in claim construction, particularly in the context of assessing the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. It has been especially difficult for patent applications involving computer-implemented inventions to overcome CIPO’s “problem-solution” approach, as CIPO examiners have generally deemed computer elements as non-essential, often resulting in the rejection of such inventions on grounds of ineligible subject matter.

In this ongoing series, we will profile each of the members of the OBA IP/ IT Law Section Executive to learn about them in five minutes or less. It’s five minutes or less because we know that a lot of you docket in six minute increments!

In this ongoing series, we will profile each of the members of the OBA IP/ IT Law Section Executive to learn about them in five minutes or less. It’s five minutes or less because we know that a lot of you docket in six-minute increments!

In the pharmaceutical industry, patentees occasionally find new uses for patented drugs. In those cases, courts have long held that they can obtain new patents on subsets of their old patents – called “selection patents” – if those subsets have “special advantages” not disclosed in the old patents. But what happens if the patentee doesn’t find a new use, but finds that a subset is more effective for its original uses?