Artificiële Intelligentie & Recht
Innovation, Technology & Law

Blog over Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum, Deep Learning, Blockchain en Big Data Law

Blog over juridische, sociale, ethische en policy aspecten van Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum Computing, Sensing & Communication, Augmented Reality en Robotica, Big Data Wetgeving en Machine Learning Regelgeving. Kennisartikelen inzake de EU AI Act, de Data Governance Act, cloud computing, algoritmes, privacy, virtual reality, blockchain, robotlaw, smart contracts, informatierecht, ICT contracten, online platforms, apps en tools. Europese regels, auteursrecht, chipsrecht, databankrechten en juridische diensten AI recht.

Berichten met de tag Intellectual Property
Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law
Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law

Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2021

New Stanford University Beyond IP Innovation Law research article: “Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law”.

By Mauritz Kop

Citation: Kop, Mauritz, Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law (April 8, 2021). Berkeley Technology Law Journal 2021, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp 101-115, February 8, 2022, https://btlj.org/2022/02/quantum-computing-and-intellectual-property-law/

Download the article here: Kop_QC and IP Law BTLJ

Please find a short abstract below:

Intellectual property (IP) rights & the Quantum Computer

What types of intellectual property (IP) rights can be vested in the components of a scalable quantum computer? Are there sufficient market-set innovation incentives for the development and dissemination of quantum software and hardware structures? Or is there a need for open source ecosystems, enrichment of the public domain and even democratization of quantum technology? The article explores possible answers to these tantalizing questions.

IP overprotection leads to exclusive exploitation rights for first movers

The article demonstrates that strategically using a mixture of IP rights to maximize the value of the IP portfolio of the quantum computer’s owner, potentially leads to IP protection in perpetuity. Overlapping IP protection regimes can result in unlimited duration of global exclusive exploitation rights for first movers, being a handful of universities and large corporations. The ensuing IP overprotection in the field of quantum computing leads to an unwanted concentration of market power. Overprotection of information causes market barriers and hinders both healthy competition and industry-specific innovation. In this particular case it slows down progress in an important application area of quantum technology, namely quantum computing.

Fair competition and antitrust laws for quantum technology

In general, our current IP framework is not written with quantum technology in mind. IP should be an exception -limited in time and scope- to the rule that information goods can be used for the common good without restraint. IP law cannot incentivize creation, prevent market failure, fix winner-takes-all effects, eliminate free riding and prohibit predatory market behavior at the same time. To encourage fair competition and correct market skewness, antitrust law is the instrument of choice.

Towards an innovation architecture that mixes freedom and control

The article proposes a solution tailored to the exponential pace of innovation in The Quantum Age, by introducing shorter IP protection durations of 3 to 10 years for Quantum and AI infused creations and inventions. These shorter terms could be made applicable to both the software and the hardware side of things. Clarity about the recommended limited durations of exclusive rights -in combination with compulsory licenses or fixed prized statutory licenses- encourages legal certainty, knowledge dissemination and follow on innovation within the quantum domain. In this light, policy makers should build an innovation architecture that mixes freedom (e.g. access, public domain) and control (e.g. incentive & reward mechanisms).

Creating a thriving global quantum ecosystem

The article concludes that anticipating spectacular advancements in quantum technology, the time is now ripe for governments, research institutions and the markets to prepare regulatory and IP strategies that strike the right balance between safeguarding our fundamental rights & freedoms, our democratic norms & standards, and pursued policy goals that include rapid technology transfer, the free flow of information and the creation of a thriving global quantum ecosystem, whilst encouraging healthy competition and incentivizing sustainable innovation.

Meer lezen
Intellectual Property, Innovation, Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Computing, Quantum Technology, StanfordMauritz KopStanford Law SchoolQuantum Computing, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Technology, Deep Learning, Software, Hardware, Patents, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Trade Dress, Public Domain, Regulation, Antitrust Law, Democracy, Human Rights, Innovation Policy, Security, State Secrets, technology transfer, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Stanford Law School, University of California Berkeley, Mauritz Kop
Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology
Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology

Yale Law School, Yale Journal of Law & Technology (YJoLT) The Record 2021

New peer reviewed cross-disciplinary Stanford University Quantum & Law research article: “Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology”.

By Mauritz Kop

Citation: Kop, Mauritz, Establishing a Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Technology (March 2, 2021). Yale J.L. & Tech. The Record 2021, https://yjolt.org/blog/establishing-legal-ethical-framework-quantum-technology

Download the article here: Kop_Legal-Ethical Framework for Quantum Tech-Yale

Please find a short abstract below:

What is quantum technology?

Quantum technology is founded on general principles of quantum mechanics and combines the counterintuitive physics of the very small with engineering. Particles and energy at the smallest scale do not follow the same rules as the objects we can detect around us in our everyday lives. The general principles, or properties, of quantum mechanics are superposition, entanglement, and tunnelling. Quantum mechanics aims to clarify the relationship between matter and energy, and it describes the building blocks of atoms at the subatomic level.

Raising Quantum Awareness

Quantum technologies are rapidly evolving from hypothetical ideas to commercial realities. As the world prepares for these tangible applications, the quantum community issued an urgent call for action to design solutions that can balance their transformational impact. An important first step to encourage the debate is raising quantum awareness. We have to put controls in place that address identified risks and incentivise sustainable innovation.

Connecting AI and Nanotechnology to Quantum

Establishing a culturally sensitive legal-ethical framework for applied quantum technologies can help to accomplish these goals. This framework can be built on existing rules and requirements for AI. We can enrich this framework further by integrating ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) associated with nanotechnology. In addition, the unique physical characteristics of quantum mechanics demand universal guiding principles of responsible, human-centered quantum technology. To this end, the article proposes ten guiding principles for the development and application of quantum technology.

Risk-based Quantum Technology Impact Assessment Tools

Lastly, how can we monitor and validate that real world quantum tech-driven implementations remain legal, ethical, social and technically robust during their life cycle? Developing concrete tools that address these challenges might be the answer. Raising quantum awareness can be accomplished by discussing a legal-ethical framework and by utilizing risk-based technology impact assessment tools in the form of best practices and moral guides.

Mauritz Kop is a Stanford Law School TTLF Fellow, Founder of MusicaJuridica and strategic intellectual property lawyer at AIRecht, a leading 4th Industrial Revolution technology consultancy firm based in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The author is grateful to Mark Brongersma (Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Stanford University), Mark Lemley (Stanford Law School), and Suzan Slijpen (Slijpen Legal) for valuable cross-disciplinary comments on an earlier version of this article. Thank you Ben Rashkovich and the Yale Journal of Law & Technology for excellent suggestions and editorial support. This article benefitted from comments at the World Economic Forum Quantum Computing Ethics Workshop.

Meer lezen
Artificial Intelligence, Data processing, Law of AI, Nano Engineering, Policy, Regulering, Research, Quantum Technology, Quantum Computing, Machine LearningMauritz KopYale Law SchoolQuantum Technology, AI, Nanoethics, ELSI, quantum mechanics, machine learning, big data, Legal-Ethical Framework, Innovation, Risks, Guiding Principles, technology impact assessment, code of conduct, moral guide, best practices, Asilomar AI Principes, world economic forum, regulation, superposition, entanglement, tunnelling, subatomic scale, string theory, physics, constructor theory, matter, energy, Mauritz Kop, Stanford University, Yale Law School, Yale Journal of Law & Technology, Human-Centered Quantum Computing, Intellectual Property, Regulation, 4IR, Quantum Computing, YJoLT (Yale)
Safeguards for accelerated market authorization of vaccines in Europe
Safeguards for accelerated market authorization of vaccines in Europe

by Suzan Slijpen & Mauritz Kop

This article has been published by the Stanford Law School ‘Center for Law and the Biosciences’, Stanford University, 15 March 2021. link to the full text: https://law.stanford.edu/2021/03/15/safeguards-for-accelerated-market-authorization-of-vaccines-in-europe/

Download the article here: Slijpen_Kop_Manufacturing Licenses and Market Authorization Vaccines EU-Stanford Law

The first COVID-19 vaccines have been approved

People around the globe are concerned about safety issues encircling the accelerated introduction of corona vaccines. In this article, we discuss the regulatory safeguards for fast-track market authorization of vaccines in Europe. In addition, we explain how the transmission of European Union law into national Member State legislation works. We then clarify what happens before a drug can be introduced into the European market. We conclude that governments should build bridges of mutual understanding between communities and increase trust in the safety of authorized vaccines across all population groups, using the right messengers.

Drug development normally takes several years

Drug development normally takes several years. The fact that it has been a few months now seems ridiculously short. How is the quality and integrity of the vaccine ensured? That people - on both sides of the Atlantic - are concerned about this is entirely understandable. How does one prevent citizens from being harmed by vaccines and medicines that do not work for everyone, because the admission procedures have been simplified too much?

The purpose of this article is to shed a little light upon the accelerated market authorization procedures on the European continent, with a focus on the situation in the Netherlands.

How a vaccine is introduced into the market

In June 2020, the Dutch government, in close cooperation with Germany, France and Italy, formed a Joint Negotiation Team which, under the watchful eye of the European Commission, has been negotiating with vaccine developers. Its objective: to conclude agreements with drug manufacturers at an early stage about the availability of vaccines for European countries. In case these manufacturers are to succeed in developing a successful vaccine for which the so-called Market Authorization (MA) is granted by EMA or CBG, this could lead to the availability of about 50 million vaccines (for the Netherlands alone).

Who is allowed to produce these vaccines?

Who is allowed to produce these vaccines? The Dutch Medicines Act is very clear about this. Only "market authorization holders" are allowed to manufacture medicines, including vaccines. These are parties that have gone through an extensive application procedure, who demonstrably have a solid pharmaceutical quality management system in place and have obtained a pharmaceutical manufacturing license (the MIA, short for Manufacturing and Importation Authorisation). This license is granted after assessment by the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate of the Ministry of Health, Welfare & Sport (IGJ) – by Farmatec. Farmatec is part of the CIBG, an implementing body of the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (VWS). The M-license is mandatory for parties who prepare, or import medicines.

Read more at the Stanford Center for Law and the Biosciences!

Read more on manufacturing licenses, fast track procedures and market authorization by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the EC, harmonisation and unification of EU law, CE-markings, antigenic testing kits, mutations, reinfection, multivalent vaccines, mucosal immunity, Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP), pharmacovigilance, the HERA Incubator, clinical trials, compulsory vaccination regimes and continuous quality control at Stanford!

Meer lezen
Ethics, European Law, Farmaceutica, Healthcare, Grondrechten, Innovation, Licenties, Medicine, Medische Producten, Stanford, VaccinsMauritz KopAIRechtVaccines, Corona, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Medication, Law and Biosciences, Stanford Law School, Suzan Slijpen, Mauritz Kop, Stanford University, Marked Authorization, RIVM, Europe, USA, Pharmaceutical Manufacturing License, Dutch Medicines Act, Slijpen Legal, AIRecht, CIBG, Farmatec, EudraGMDP, IGJ, CBG, EMA, FDA, Warp Speed, EUA, fast-track, herd immunity, CHMP, GMP, quality management system, pharmacovigilance, Healthcare, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, clinical trials, innovation, democracy, ethics, fundamental rights, technology transfer, HERA Incubator, harmonisation, unification, reception, EU law, compulsory vaccination regimes, multivalent vaccines, CE-marking, mutations, reinfection, antigenic testing kits, nasal spray, mucosal immunity
Een Juridisch-Ethisch Kader voor Quantum Technologie
Een Juridisch-Ethisch Kader voor Quantum Technologie

Een bewerkte versie van deze bijdrage is gepubliceerd op platform VerderDenken.nl van het Centrum voor Postacademisch Juridisch Onderwijs (CPO) van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. https://www.ru.nl/cpo/verderdenken/columns/we-nederland-voorbereiden-kwantumtoekomst/

Nederland moet zich voorbereiden op de toepassing van kwantumtechnologie, zegt jurist en Stanford Law School Fellow Mauritz Kop. Op het gebied van regulering, intellectueel eigendom en ethiek is er nog veel werk aan de winkel.

De Quantum Age roept veel juridische vragen op

Het gedrag van de natuur op de kleinste schaal kan vreemd en contra-intuïtief zijn. Hoe kunnen beleidsmakers de toepassingsgebieden van kwantumtechnologie, zoals quantum computing, quantum sensing en het quantum internet op een maatschappelijk verantwoorde manier reguleren? Dienen ethische kwesties een rol te spelen in regulering? De Quantum Age roept veel juridische vragen op.

Hoe kunnen we kwantumtechnologie reguleren?

Regulering van transformatieve technologie is een dynamisch, cyclisch proces dat de levensduur van de technologie en de toepassing volgt. Het vraagt om een flexibel wetgevend systeem dat zich snel kan aanpassen aan veranderende omstandigheden en maatschappelijke behoeften.

De eerste regelgevende stap om te komen tot een bruikbaar juridisch-ethisch kader is het koppelen van de Trustworthy AI-principes aan kwantumtechnologie. Die vullen we vervolgens aan met horizontale, overkoepelende regels die recht doen aan de unieke natuurkundige eigenschappen van quantum. Aan deze horizontale kernregels voegt de wetgever tenslotte verticale, industrie- of sectorspecifieke voorschriften toe. Die verticale voorschriften en gedragscodes zijn risk-based en houden rekening met de uiteenlopende behoeftes van economische sectoren waar het duurzame innovatiestimuli betreft. Zo ontstaat een gedifferentieerde, sectorspecifieke benadering aangaande incentives en risks.

Bewustwording van ethische, juridische en sociale aspecten

Een belangrijk onderdeel van het synchroniseren van onze normen, waarden, standaarden en principes met kwantumtechnologie is het creëren van bewustwording van de ethische, juridische en sociale aspecten ervan. De architectuur van systemen die zijn uitgerust met kwantumtechnologie moet waarden vertegenwoordigen die wij als samenleving belangrijk vinden.

Vooruitlopend op spectaculaire doorbraken in de toepassing van kwantumtechnologie is de tijd nu rijp voor regeringen, onderzoeksinstellingen en de markt om regulatoire en intellectuele eigendomsstrategieën voor te bereiden die passen bij de power van de technologie.

Nederland moet zich voorbereiden op een kwantumtoekomst, want die komt eraan.

Meer lezen
Artificiële Intelligentie, Intellectueel Eigendom, Innovation, Machine Learning, Policy, Quantum Technology, Quantum Computing, Recht, Scholarship, Wetgeving, ReguleringMauritz KopAIRechtQuantum Technology, Machine Learning, AI & Quantum Computing Hybrids, Software, Intellectual Property, Patents, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Public Domain, Standardisation, Regulation, Technology, Certification, Ethics, ELSA, Competition Law, Democracy, Human Rights, Innovation Policy, Mauritz Kop, CPO, Radboud Universiteit, VerderDenken, Stanford Law School, NEN, ISO, IEC, TU Delft, Quantum Delta, Normcommissie Quantum Technologieën, Living Labs
Regulating Transformative Technology in The Quantum Age: Intellectual Property, Standardization & Sustainable Innovation
Regulating Transformative Technology in The Quantum Age: Intellectual Property, Standardization & Sustainable Innovation

Stanford - Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, Transatlantic Antitrust and IPR Developments, Stanford University, Issue No. 2/2020

New Stanford cutting edge tech law research: “Regulating Transformative Technology in The Quantum Age: Intellectual Property, Standardization & Sustainable Innovation”.

Download the article here: Kop_Regulation Standardization Innovation Quantum Age-Stanford Law

Quantum technology has many legal aspects

The behavior of nature at the smallest scale can be strange and counterintuitive. In addition to unique physical characteristics, quantum technology has many legal aspects. In this article, we first explain what quantum technology entails. Next, we discuss implementation and areas of application, including quantum computing, quantum sensing and the quantum internet. Through an interdisciplinary lens, we then focus on intellectual property (IP), standardization, ethical, legal & social aspects (ELSA) as well as horizontal & industry-specific regulation of this transformative technology.

The Quantum Age raises many legal questions

The Quantum Age raises many legal questions. For example, which existing legislation applies to quantum technology? What types of IP rights can be vested in the components of a scalable quantum computer? Are there sufficient market-set innovation incentives for the development and dissemination of quantum software and hardware structures? Or is there a need for open source ecosystems, enrichment of the public domain and even democratization of quantum technology? Should we create global quantum safety, security and interoperability standards and make them mandatory in each area of application? In what way can quantum technology enhance artificial intelligence (AI) that is legal, ethical and technically robust?

Regulating quantum computing, quantum sensing & the quantum internet

How can policy makers realize these objectives and regulate quantum computing, quantum sensing and the quantum internet in a socially responsible manner? Regulation that addresses risks in a proportional manner, whilst optimizing the benefits of this cutting edge technology? Without hindering sustainable innovation, including the apportionment of rights, responsibilities and duties of care? What are the effects of standardization and certification on innovation, intellectual property, competition and market-entrance of quantum-startups?

The article explores possible answers to these tantalizing questions.

Meer lezen
Quantum Technology, Policy, Innovation, Certification, Standardization, University, ScholarshipMauritz KopStanford Law SchoolQuantum Technology, Machine Learning, AI & Quantum Computing Hybrids, Software, Intellectual Property, Patents, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Public Domain, Standardisation, Regulation, Technology, Certification, Ethics, ELSA, Competition Law, Democracy, Human Rights, Innovation Policy, Mauritz Kop, Stanford-Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, Stanford Law School
The Right to Process Data for Machine Learning Purposes in the EU
The Right to Process Data for Machine Learning Purposes in the EU

Harvard Law School, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology (JOLT) Volume 34, Digest Spring 2021

New interdisciplinary Stanford University AI & Law research article: “The Right to Process Data for Machine Learning Purposes in the EU”.

Download the article here: Kop_The Right to Process Data-Harvard

Data Act & European data-driven economy

Europe is now at a crucial juncture in deciding how to deploy data driven technologies in ways that encourage democracy, prosperity and the well-being of European citizens. The upcoming European Data Act provides a major window of opportunity to change the story. In this respect, it is key that the European Commission takes firm action, removes overbearing policy and regulatory obstacles, strenuously harmonizes relevant legislation and provides concrete incentives and mechanisms for access, sharing and re-use of data. The article argues that to ensure an efficiently functioning European data-driven economy, a new and as yet unused term must be introduced to the field of AI & law: the right to process data for machine learning purposes.

The state can implement new modalities of property

Data has become a primary resource that should not be enclosed or commodified per se, but used for the common good. Commons based production and data for social good initiatives should be stimulated by the state. We need not to think in terms of exclusive, private property on data, but in terms of rights and freedoms to use, (modalities of) access, process and share data. If necessary and desirable for the progress of society, the state can implement new forms of property. Against this background the article explores normative justifications for open innovation and shifts in the (intellectual) property paradigm, drawing inspiration from the works of canonical thinkers such as Locke, Marx, Kant and Hegel.

Ius utendi et fruendi for primary resource data

The article maintains that there should be exceptions to (de facto, economic or legal) ownership claims on data that provide user rights and freedom to operate in the setting of AI model training. It concludes that this exception is conceivable as a legal concept analogous to a quasi, imperfect usufruct in the form of a right to process data for machine learning purposes. A combination of usus and fructus (ius utendi et fruendi), not for land but for primary resource data. A right to process data that works within the context of AI and the Internet of Things (IoT), and that fits in the EU acquis communautaire. Such a right makes access, sharing and re-use of data possible, and helps to fulfil the European Strategy for Data’s desiderata.

Meer lezen
Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, Innovation, Intellectual Property, Internet of Things, Scholarship, TTLFMauritz KopHarvard Law SchoolRight to Process Data, Data Sharing Access and Re-Use, Ius Utendi (usus) et Fruendi (fructus), Quasi Usufruct, Locke, Kant, Machine Learning, AI, Intellectual Property, European Data Act, Training Datasets, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Property Paradigm, Public Domain, Open Innovation, Mauritz Kop, Stanford University, Harvard Law School, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology
Machine Learning & EU Data Sharing Practices
Machine Learning & EU Data Sharing Practices

Stanford - Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, Transatlantic Antitrust and IPR Developments, Stanford University, Issue No. 1/2020

New multidisciplinary research article: ‘Machine Learning & EU Data Sharing Practices’.

Download the article here: Kop_Machine Learning and EU Data Sharing Practices-Stanford University

In short, the article connects the dots between intellectual property (IP) on data, data ownership and data protection (GDPR and FFD), in an easy to understand manner. It also provides AI and Data policy and regulatory recommendations to the EU legislature.

As we all know, machine learning & data science can help accelerate many aspects of the development of drugs, antibody prophylaxis, serology tests and vaccines.

Supervised machine learning needs annotated training datasets

Data sharing is a prerequisite for a successful Transatlantic AI ecosystem. Hand-labelled, annotated training datasets (corpora) are a sine qua non for supervised machine learning. But what about intellectual property (IP) and data protection?

Data that represent IP subject matter are protected by IP rights. Unlicensed (or uncleared) use of machine learning input data potentially results in an avalanche of copyright (reproduction right) and database right (extraction right) infringements. The article offers three solutions that address the input (training) data copyright clearance problem and create breathing room for AI developers.

The article contends that introducing an absolute data property right or a (neighbouring) data producer right for augmented machine learning training corpora or other classes of data is not opportune.

Legal reform and data-driven economy

In an era of exponential innovation, it is urgent and opportune that both the TSD, the CDSM and the DD shall be reformed by the EU Commission with the data-driven economy in mind.

Freedom of expression and information, public domain, competition law

Implementing a sui generis system of protection for AI-generated Creations & Inventions is -in most industrial sectors- not necessary since machines do not need incentives to create or invent. Where incentives are needed, IP alternatives exist. Autonomously generated non-personal data should fall into the public domain. The article argues that strengthening and articulation of competition law is more opportune than extending IP rights.

Data protection and privacy

More and more datasets consist of both personal and non-personal machine generated data. Both the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Regulation on the free flow of non-personal data (FFD) apply to these ‘mixed datasets’.

Besides the legal dimensions, the article describes the technical dimensions of data in machine learning and federated learning.

Modalities of future AI-regulation

Society should actively shape technology for good. The alternative is that other societies, with different social norms and democratic standards, impose their values on us through the design of their technology. With built-in public values, including Privacy by Design that safeguards data protection, data security and data access rights, the federated learning model is consistent with Human-Centered AI and the European Trustworthy AI paradigm.

Meer lezen
Artificial Intelligence, Big data, Data delen, Machine Learning, Privacywetgeving, Policy, Tech Startups, Intellectueel EigendomMauritz KopAIRechtData Sharing, Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, Training Corpora, Mixed Dataset, Sui Generis Database Right, Copyright, Patent, Trade Secret, Data Ownership, Property Law, Public Domain, Res Publicae ex Machina, Policy, AI-Regulation, Technology, Data Protection, Privacy, GDPR, FFD, Data-Driven Economy, Machine Legibility, Federated Learning, Future, Vision, Design, Values, Trustworthy AI, Human-Centered AI, Open Data, Legal Reform, Trade Secret Directive, Database Directive, EU Copyright Directive, Antitrust, Competition Law, Stanford University
AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain
AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain

New peer reviewed research article: ‘AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain’ (download)

By Mauritz Kop

Link & citation at Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal (TIPLJ): 28 Tex. Intell. Prop. L. J. 297 (2020)

Link SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3409715

The article has been published in the Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal (2020, 28). TIPLJ is published in cooperation with the State Bar of Texas three times per year at the University of Texas School of Law. The Journal is the official journal of the State Bar of Texas Intellectual Property Law Section.

Res Publicae ex Machina (Public Property from the Machine)

Building upon the doctrinal body of knowledge, the article introduces a new public domain model for AI Creations and Inventions that crossed the autonomy threshold (i.e. no sufficient amount of human intervention that can be linked to the output): Res Publicae ex Machina (Public Property from the Machine). It includes examples.

Intellectual property framework AI systems

Besides that, the article describes the current legal framework regarding authorship and ownership of AI Creations, legal personhood, patents on AI Inventions, types of IP rights on the various components of the AI system itself (including Digital Twin technology), clearance of training data and data ownership.

Compact Artificial Intelligence & IP overview analysis

Main goal of this research is to offer an accessible, relatively compact Artificial Intelligence (AI) & IP overview analysis and in doing so, to provide some food for thought to interdisciplinary thinkers and policy makers in the IP, tech, privacy and freedom of information field.

Meer lezen
Artificiële Intelligentie, Intellectueel Eigendom, Informatierecht, Internet of Things, Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Wetgeving, PolicyMauritz KopAIRecht.nlArtificial Intelligence, Robotics, Intellectual Property, Copyright, Authorship, AI Creations & Inventions, Public Domain, Autonomy Threshold, Human Intervention, Legal Personhood, Roman Property Paradigm, Res Publicae ex Machina, Human Rights, Patents, Data Ownership, Trade Secrets, Ethics, Policy, Public Property from the Machine, Mauritz Kop
AI Trade Mission to Boston with Prime Minister Mark Rutte
AI Trade Mission to Boston with Prime Minister Mark Rutte

AIRecht.nl lawyers Mauritz Kop and Suzan Slijpen joined the Dutch AI trade mission to Boston, Massachusetts led by Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Minister Bruno Bruins. It was a big success. We visited leading companies in health care, climate, and robotics and AI and participated in high quality meetings and events at -inter alia- Harvard Wyss Institute, MIT, IBM Watson, Amazon Robotics, Humatics and Philips Healthworks R&D HQ USA.

AI-Chefsache interview

During debriefing at the Museum of Fine Arts & Koch Gallery, Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Mauritz Kop reflected on AI becoming Chefsache, the concept of Trustworthy AI, exporting European ethical values to the USA via the Dutch AI Impact Assessment (ECP), and building a strong and vibrant AI ecosystem in The Netherlands.

AIRecht.nl website included in IBM Watson presentation

We were honoured and thrilled to see that Nicola Palmarini, Global Manager AI for Healthy Aging IBM Research - MIT/IBM Watson AI Lab Cambridge and Tedx Speaker, included our AIRecht.nl website in his presentation about the moral, legal and ethical implications of AI, at IBM Watson Health Experience Centre.

Building on shared expierences

Learning and building on shared experiences is a two way street. During the mission, we gathered knowledge of the technological state of the art in Robotics & AI. We shared our own latest research insights on AI & IP, open access, public domain and ethics that facilitate innovation with influential academic institutions and ambitious, frontrunning entrepreneurs. This blog contains a photo report of our economic mission to the beautiful city of Boston.

Meer lezen
Artificiële Intelligentie, Intellectueel Eigendom, RoboticaMauritz KopArtificiële Intelligentie & RechtAIRecht.nl, Suzan Slijpen, Mauritz Kop, Mark Rutte, Bruno Bruins, AI Trade Mission, Boston, Massachusetts, Health Care, Climate Resilience, Robotics, Chefsache, Ethics, IBM Watson, Trustworthy AI, Intellectual Property, Open Access, Copyright, Patent, Trade Sectret, Brandname, Artificial Intelligence Impact Assessment, ECP, Philips Healthworks, Clinical Pathways, Machine Learning, Humatics, Veo Robotics, MIT The Engine, MIT CSAIL, Hyperlight, autonomous driving, flying cars, Greensight Agronomics, Neurala, Lifelong-DNN, Continual Learning, Affectiva, Smartvid, Harvard Wyss Institute, Nature inspired inventions, Industrial Exosuits, Bioinspired robot swarms, Boston Consulting Group, skills agenda, Watsonized, Star Trek, Boston Dynamics, Spot, Position paper Task Force AI, Invest and Collaborate, Holland Trade Dinner, U-Mass Club, RightHand Robotics, Philips Breakthrough Program, Museum of Fine Arts Boston, Koch Gallery, Van Otterloo and Weatherbie art donation, Business Delegation, Hans de Boer, VNO-NCW, Holland Innovation Attaché Network, Dutch AI companies, Transatlantic relationships, Company Profile, Law, Strategy, Contracts