News

Undoubtedly, the intersection of intellectual property and artificial intelligence becomes increasingly relevant with the wide dissemination of technologies derived from it.

With 2024 beginning to take shape, the various areas of intellectual property are once again positioned as catalysts for transformation, with particular emphasis and attention being given to the intersection of intellectual property with artificial intelligence and the use of intellectual property as a tool for sustainable development.

Regarding the intersection of intellectual property with artificial intelligence, there is no doubt that this topic becomes increasingly relevant with the wide dissemination of technologies derived from it, such as ChatGPT, Jasper, and DALL-E2, creating a perspective for a society in which creativity and innovation, once characteristics unique to human beings, now involve collaboration between humans and machines.

In this sense, it is clear that this change of scenario raises crucial questions regarding how intellectual property can be applied to creations that result from joint efforts between humans and artificial intelligence, making it necessary to highlight issues involving ownership and authorship of creations and generated through these technologies, as well as the definition of legal responsibilities.

Regarding ownership and authorship, there is no consensus among jurists and different legislation on the subject, as some consider works created through collaboration between humans and artificial intelligence to be the property of the company that developed them. The technology algorithm, while another portion understands that the work would be owned and authored by the human interacting with the artificial intelligence.

Such discussions can and should be discussed this year and in the coming years in the National Congress, which regulates artificial intelligence in our country and defines a national fake intelligence policy through which parameters and guidelines for this technology will be described. , creating legal security for using, researching, and developing different types of artificial intelligence in the country.

About intellectual property as a driver of sustainable development, it is clear that this trend has already been observed by the Interministerial Group on Intellectual Property, which established, through its national strategy, a set of more than 200 actions to encourage an effective, balanced intellectual property system that encourages creativity, investments in innovation and access to knowledge.

Among these actions is the intention to conduct matchmaking in green technologies and training in the Amazon region, aiming to generate income from intellectual property assets, such as geographical indications and collective trademarks.

The trend of “green intellectual property” is not new. Still, it will undoubtedly expand in 2024, with the National Intellectual Property Institute announcing the establishment of the sustainability and biotechnology commission, which will focus on green patents, mentoring in geographical indications, a sustainable logistics program, and technological radars focusing on sustainable development.

Considering the relevance of environmentally responsible business for companies, another point of attention for this year will be the use of intellectual property as a vector for protecting products and services that incorporate ethical and sustainable principles, once again highlighting the convergence of intellectual property with governance environmental.

Thus, the prospects for intellectual property for this new year reveal a dynamic panorama, considering that it will be a tool to boost sustainable development and, at the same time, it will be essential to promote a balanced approach to the evolution of the intersection scenario with artificial intelligence.

Source: Correio Braziliense

If 2023 was the year that artificial intelligence changed everything, 2024 may be remembered as the year that US copyright law changed regarding AI.

The explosion of generative AI and the popularity of Microsoft-backed initiatives such as OpenAI, Meta, Midjourney, and others have resulted in several copyright cases brought by writers, artists, and other copyright holders who claim that AI has had success only thanks to their work.

Judges have so far been skeptical of plaintiffs’ claims of infringement based on AI-generated content. However, the courts have yet to address the more complicated and potentially billion-dollar question of whether AI companies are infringing on a massive scale by training their systems with vast amounts of images, writings, and other data obtained from the internet.

Tech companies warn that lawsuits could create significant obstacles for the growing AI industry. The plaintiffs claim the companies owe them for using their work without permission or compensation.

Several groups of authors filed class action lawsuits this year over the use of their texts in AI training. This includes writers like John Grisham and “Game of Thrones” author George R.R. Martin, comedian Sarah Silverman and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

Tech companies have hired legions of lawyers from some of the biggest law firms in the US to take on the cases. They defended AI training in comments to the US Copyright Office, comparing it to how humans learn new concepts and arguing that their use of the material qualifies as “fair use” under copyright law.

What comes next?

An ongoing lawsuit involving Thomson Reuters – the parent company of Reuters News – could be one of the first significant AI indicators copyright issues.

The company accused Ross Intelligence in 2020 of illegally copying thousands of “headnotes” from its Westlaw legal research platform. The portal summarizes court decisions and was used to train an AI-based legal search engine.

A federal judge ruled in September that the Delaware case must go to trial to determine whether Ross violated the law. The lawsuit could set an essential precedent for fair use and AI copyright litigation issues. A jury could begin hearing the case as early as August.

Source: Forbes

2024 started with something special for Disney’s iconic Mickey Mouse: the mouse became public domain (a transition that took place on January 1st). But detail: only the character’s first appearances in “Steamboat Willie” and “Plane Crazy” are in this new situation.

These animations date from 1928 and were Mickey’s debut to the public, together with his partner Minnie. The little mouse bears a lot of similarity to the current version. But, in addition to being black and white (and having other different details), the behavior is more mischievous and ruder (in fact, during most of the scenes in “Steamboat Willie”, Mickey has fun forcing animals to be musical instruments).

So, there are 95 years of animation history and, according to US law, the copyright on them has expired. And a lot of people were waiting for it.

Using Mickey sparingly

Despite Mickey Mouse’s entry into the public domain, copyright law in this regard remains complex. For example, newer design changes or depictions like Wizard Mickey from “Fantasia” are not included.

It is also not permitted to create works that falsely imply that they are from Disney, as Mickey is also a registered trademark of the company. To get a better idea of the differences between the “Mickeys”, check out the recent trailer for “Steamboat Silly”, the final episode of “The Wonderful World of Mickey Mouse” which is part of the 100th-anniversary celebration of The Walt Disney Company:

Challenges and possible legal battles

Experts point out that creators who dare to use more recent elements of the character may receive legal warnings. In other words, putting the mouse in red shorts or white gloves goes beyond what is permitted.

Mickey Mouse is also a registered trademark. Kembrew McLeod, professor of communication and intellectual property scholar at the University of Iowa (USA), recalls that trademark law in the country deals entirely with the protection of trademarks, logos, and names – such as Mickey Mouse in the logo or, simply, the name Mickey Mouse.

“And, of course, there is no end to trademark law,” adds Ruth Okediji, a professor at Harvard Law School. She says that Disney and other companies use trademarks to increase control over intellectual property. “As long as the trademark remains distinctive in the provision of goods and services, the registered trademark owner can protect it.”

Source: Olhar Digital

Leia em português aqui.

After extensive negotiations, the European Union reached a historic agreement to regulate artificial intelligence (AI), a milestone on the global technological scene. European Commissioner Thierry Breton, responsible for a series of laws on the continent, including those governing social media and search engines, announced the agreement, highlighting its historic character. This pact puts the European Union ahead of the United States and Brazil in the race to regulate AI and protect the public from risks associated with the technology.

Establishing rules to control the use of programs of this type is complex. AI has been incorporated into science, the financial system, security, health, education, advertising, and entertainment, most of the time without the user realizing it. Regulation in any country that proposes it must balance reducing the risks of misuse, avoiding discrimination against minority groups, and guaranteeing privacy and transparency for users.

Through Secretary of State for AI Carme Artigas, Spain played a tie-breaking role in the negotiations, with support from France and Germany, despite concerns from technology companies in those countries about lighter regulations to foster innovation.

An essential aspect of the agreement is the ban on real-time surveillance and biometric technologies, including emotional recognition, with specific exceptions. These technologies can only be used by the police in exceptional situations, such as terrorist threats, searching for victims, or investigating severe crimes.

The agreement is based on a risk classification system, where the strictest regulation applies to machines that pose the most significant risk to health, safety, and human rights. This new definition directly impacts models such as GPT-4 from OpenAI, which would be included in the highest-risk category.

The agreement also imposes significant obligations on AI services, including ground rules on disclosing data used to train machines. The European Parliament and the Commission have sought to ensure that the development of AI in Europe occurs human-centered, respecting fundamental rights and human values.

Brazil’s regulatory framework

Brazil was one of the pioneers in proposing the regulation of artificial intelligence. The Chamber of Deputies began discussing law in February 2020, even before ChatGPT shed light on the power of technology and the European Union started its internal debate. However, the country has failed to pass the legislation so far.

The discussions evolved with the intervention of a commission of jurists, which reformulated the original 2020 project. The Senate is deliberating on a new proposal, reported by Senator Eduardo Gomes (PL-TO).

However, the dynamism of innovation in artificial intelligence poses clear challenges to Brazilian legislators. Technological acceleration highlights the need for constant updates to legislation, and there is even room for an imaginative process of what could happen in a few years. Lawmakers need to consider that AI has opened a field of exponential evolution different from what was experienced with Moore’s Law. This concept establishes that the processing power of computers doubles every 18 months.

The proposal seeks a normative approach, establishing guidelines for various AI applications, from credit scoring to facial recognition in public security, the latter with a ban.

From a global perspective, Taiwan, starting its discussions in 2019, has not yet consolidated a regulatory framework. The island, home to TSMC, a world leader in the production of chips and semiconductors and a supplier to Nvidia, opted for laws to encourage technological development, exempting AI companies from specific regulations and taxes.

China is the only country with a regulatory framework on AI, implemented by its internet regulatory body and not via legislation. Based on studies by the Cyberspace Administration of China, its rules focus on AI platforms’ morality, ethics, transparency, and responsibility.

Countries like Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Israel, Mexico, Panama, the Philippines, and Thailand are also developing regulations.

The discussion about federal AI legislation in the United States is not yet a reality, with responsibility being delegated to the states. President Joe Biden brought together AI industry leaders in July to discuss technological security and reliability.

Globally, 21 countries have already implemented specific laws for AI, emphasizing Chile in combating AI fraud, Sweden in autonomous cars, and Spain against discriminatory bias. Additionally, 13 countries have jurisprudence related to AI, covering everything from copyright to privacy. Despite being a pioneer in the discussion, Brazil is still not among these nations.

Source: Exame

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

One of the aspects that begets more hatred in discussions about blockchain is its high adaptability to different purposes and situations, which can be implemented in any economic sector. Furthermore, the possibility of interoperability is a relevant factor.

This concept refers to the ability of different systems, devices, or components to integrate, interact, and work together efficiently and effectively.

This way, you now have at your disposal a malleable technology, which operates as a digital “ledger” capable of storing any transactions and records in an immutable way and visible to everyone.

The events sector and its great enemy

One of the most cited examples of tokenization and its use cases is the events and ticketing sector. This segment, representing 3.8% of Brazilian GDP, has experienced notable growth, US$59.3 billion.

However, proportional to its growth, cases of scams and fraud are emerging, along with increased purchasing bots intended for resale. Measures against currency exchange, despite existing, prove to be inefficient and result in double losses, both for customers and for producers, organizers, and artists.

A problem that is not only solved with blockchain but also brings with it new ranges of possibilities.

Security, practicality, and new layers of interaction

When transforming a ticket into an NFT or digital collectible, the magic of interoperability happens, simultaneously allowing countless benefits and actions. Starting with the unique registration of the visa issued, which cannot be duplicated, guaranteeing its security and legitimacy.

Decentralization grants the buyer absolute ownership of this item, which becomes an asset capable of resale in a safe secondary market. Mediated by the organizer, this market can also allow the collection of royalties, opening up the possibility of a new source of income for artists.

Due to its transparent registration, verifying and monitoring this user becomes possible, allowing more effective monitoring and access to more comprehensive data on the entire consumer journey and their preferences, which can serve as valuable material in optimizing experiences.

This ticket becomes not just a token but also a true collectible, enabling the development of unique and commemorative art. This rescues the memorabilia element, previously present in physical tickets, but, unlike these, it does not deteriorate or get lost.

This element also allows extensive customization, offering exclusive content, benefits, and promotions to specific holders, expanding the layers of interaction, and constructing an entire community around the platform, artists, and these mechanics.

All of this happens in a context that is culturally accessed by an audience that is naturally engaged and interested in collecting and being impacted by experiences related to the events of which they are fans.

With examples from all over the world, the largest is from Brazil

Getting off the ground, countless events worldwide have already experimented with and benefited from ticket tokenization. Renowned festivals, such as the Coachella Festival Formula 1 in Monaco, and specific artists, such as Milton Nascimento’s farewell tour and Avenged Sevenfold’s exclusive access club, are some examples of events that used blockchain to develop unique experiences.

Large platforms, including Ticketmaster, have taken the first steps in adoption, carrying out test ticket issuances using NFTs.

In Brazil, the first central platform to enter this market is Sympla, which is starting its plans by tokenizing its tickets. Initially, the focus is on improving security and the possibility of resale, emphasizing user experience.

With 15 million users and 44 million tickets sold registered last year, this adoption and its possibilities will represent the most significant use case of ticket tokenization in the world, solidifying Brazil as one of the exponents of this technology.

Leia em português aqui.

“Carne de Onça” (Jaguar Meat), one of the symbols of Curitiba (one of the Brazilian cities), is expanding its borders.

The recipe is simple, but the flavor is unmatched. Cornbread with lean ground beef, white onion, and finely chopped green onion, seasoned with extra virgin olive oil, salt, and black pepper. From bar patrons to the most refined restaurants, people from all over the world want to taste the famous Carne de Onça when they come to Curitiba.

But now, in addition to being famous in the capital of Paraná, the delicacy already has international relevance, as it recently entered the ranking of the ten best raw meat dishes in the world.

Because it is famous and is part of the culture and history of Curitiba, Carne de Onça – which is already considered the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Curitiba – had a application for recognition of Geographical Indication (GI) filed with the Brazilian Patent Office (BPTO), in the Indication of Origin modality.

The search for recognition became notorious due to the location’s importance in producing this specific product, valuing its traditions, history, and culture.

More than 200 restaurants in Curitiba offer “Carne de Onça” on the menu.

History of Jaguar Meat

According to history, in the 1940s, Ronaldo Abrão – “Ligeirinho”, owner of Ligeirinho’s Bar in the center of Curitiba – was part of the Britânia football team (ten-time champion at the time), whose director, Cristiano Schmidt, was also the owner of a bar in Marechal Deodoro, called “Buraco do Tatu.” During Britânia’s heyday as a winning team, to celebrate their achievements, Schmidt prepared a peculiar mixture as a prize (football was practically amateur): raw meat on slices of cornbread, served to the players.

On a particular day, the goalkeeper of the Britânia team, known as “Duaia”, expressed his discontent: “Wow, Schmidt, you only serve this meat, which even jaguars don’t eat!” This is how the name “Carne de Onça” came about.

But some say that the name is due to bad breath (in Portuguese we have the expression “bafo de onça”, literally translated it would be jaguar’s breath) the onion left on people.

Another trend directed the creation of the snack to Leonardo Werzbitzki, “Onha”, who served the specialty in his restaurant in the 1950s. But his was more elaborate, containing egg yolks and other ingredients.

Source: CBN

Leia em português aqui

It was recently reported that YouTube will warn you when a video contains AI-generated content. Still, the platform wants to go further and announced that it will ban deepfakes that improperly impersonate real people and musicians.

The new turn against content produced by artificial intelligence is due to unprecedented sets of guidelines related to copyright and extra rules applied to other categories.

Labels on videos

One of the new requirements made by YouTube requires content creators to signal the use of AI or similar tools in their materials so that viewers are not misled into believing that the content is authentic.

According to the platform, anyone who does not comply with the new guideline will be subject to having their video removed, demonetized, or even banned from the Partnership Program, in addition to other forms of punishment.

To make it clear to the viewer, the video will present a label signaling that the content is produced by artificial intelligence. Depending on the degree of sensitivity of the content, this same label will be even more prominent in the interface — reinforcing the use of AI tools. Despite the warnings, there is no guarantee that the video will be free from removal if it violates the platform’s rules.

Siege against deepfakes

YouTube also reinforced the fight against deepfakes that improperly simulate a person’s face, voice, and other identifiable characteristics. Punishment may be applied through deletion requests made by users.

However, the social network guarantees that not all material will be subject to removal, as, in some instances, it may be that certain content is a parody, for example, and does not present any violation of the video service’s rules.

In the music segment, YouTube announced that it wants to implement a feature that allows music partners to request the removal of videos generated by artificial intelligence that imitate an artist’s voice or song without authorization.

This new reporting category will be exclusive to record labels and distributors of artists enrolled in YouTube’s AI music testing program. Still, it will be enabled for other companies in the segment in the future.

Source: CanalTech

Clique aqui e leia em português.

On October 13, 2023, the headquarters of Starbucks Corp. in Seattle, in the United States, sent a document to the trademark’s operator in Brazil that was decisive for the Brazilian company’s request for judicial recovery submitted to the Court on Tuesday (31).

The most famous coffee shop in the world delivered, on that date, the “Notice of Termination of Licensing Agreements.”

Without receiving royalties for using the trademark in Brazil, the multinational announced the termination of the contract that allowed SouthRock Capital to explore the Starbucks brand in Brazil. The end of the agreement took effect immediately.

Two contracts were suspended. One licensing the trademark in Brazil, and another granted SouthRock Capital the right to be the master Starbucks licensee in the country – that is, the operator of the stores. The information is contained in the documentation submitted by SouthRock in the request for judicial recovery.

This decision by headquarters accelerated the urgency of the request for judicial recovery.

SouthRock’s lawyers argue that these contracts “are essential to maintaining the applicants’ activities and, consequently, enabling the restructuring of their liabilities.”

“The exploration and operation of Starbucks stores/cafeterias on the national scene – not only is it essential to the activities of the applicants as already mentioned, but it also consists of one of their greatest assets,” they mention in the document delivered to the São Paulo Court.

The company also argues that SouthRock had adopted, before the end of the contract, “operational and financial measures aimed at restructuring its operations to equalize its economic situation.” And that the Brazilian company was negotiating with the multinational to try to renegotiate the contracts, including some additions already signed.

The objective was that “payment conditions reflect your current financial capacity.”

Currently, the gross revenue of the Starbucks trademark in Brazil exceeds U$10 million per month.

To CNN, SouthRock said it “continues to operate the Starbucks trademark in Brazil” and is “committed to working closely with its commercial partners to develop the trademarks in its portfolio in Brazil.” In a note to CNN, the company says that “alignments on licenses are part of the judicial recovery process and are carried out directly with these partners.”

In the request for judicial recovery, however, the company says that “the notification of termination (of licensing) was received by the applicants with absolute surprise since the relationship and negotiations maintained between the parties until then had never indicated that there would be the possibility of immediate termination of the Starbucks License Agreements.”

Source: CNN