Send us a text

This week we journey into the world of Artificial Intelligence. The term Artificial Intelligence itself has largely become the generic term used to describe a variety of related but different concepts, often wrapping together AI, Machine Learning and Generative AI as if they all relate to the same thing, or as if there is a single technology that is, in fact, AI. These related but different technologies differ in scope, function, techniques used, and they also differ in terms of trustworthiness and reliability. But generally speaking, AI focuses on techniques and applications that create the appearance of human cognition in or from a machine. Machine learning focuses on the development of algorithms and statistical models that enable computers to perform tasks without being explicitly programmed for those tasks. And generative AI focuses on creating new data, such as images, music, and writings, that mimic the patterns presented in the training data. 

Much of what will discuss today will tackle the technical issues that face the industry and innovators in this space. Specifically, we will discuss the various practical manifestations of AI, ML, and Generative AI as they currently exist in 2024, and are likely to exist in the near future. We will attempt to separate fact from fiction with respect to what these technologies can currently do, what the technology does well versus what the technology struggles with, and what the industry can expect moving forward. 

We will also discuss the thorny problem of hallucinations, the impact of AI learning from learning from its own creations, the steps that are being taken to ensure reliability and accuracy, and how to verify that AI is safe, secure and trustworthy.

Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.

You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text

For this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn speaks with Brad Watts, who is Vice President for Patents and Innovation Policy at the Global Innovation Policy Center at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Recently Brad has written a number of articles posted to the GIPC blog which focus on Biden Administration proposals regarding march-in rights, federal funding for innovation, and biopharma patent and innovation policy. This conversation addresses those issues generally, but also specifically discuss the recently release FDA and USPTO report relating to inaccurate, misleading data that is often misused as a part of IP policy debates on Capitol Hill, the need to properly incentivize innovation, U.S. innovation leadership, and how a strong patent system encourages risk-taking and greater innovation. 

Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.

You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text

Ordinarily patent practitioners do not need to really think about prosecution laches, but laches has become a rather hot topic as the United States Patent and Trademark Office and courts have initiated what can only be characterized as an assault on an applicant’s statutory right to seek and file additional claims if those claims are supported by the initial disclosure. 

Prosecution laches is only supposed to apply in egregious cases of unreasonable and unexplained delay in prosecution. And a finding of prosecution laches is supposed to require that the accused infringer suffered prejudice as a result of egregious applicant delay by proving investment in, work on, or use of the claimed technology during the period of delay. Last year the Federal Circuit ignored the requirement of prejudice when it found that PMC engaged in egregious and unreasonable delay, which result in a finding of laches in Apple's favor despite the fact that Apple did not even start any infringing activity until years after the delay ended.

Join Gene Quinn, President & Founder of IPWatchdog, Dean Geibel, Chief Patent Counsel for Samtec, and Eric Foster, Intellectual Property Counsel for First Solar. 

Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.

You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text

This week we venture into the world of patent monetization from the viewpoint of a patent owner and non-practicing entity. Our conversation is with Brad Close, a one-time patent prosecution attorney, one-time patent broker, and current patent owner engaged in patent monetization efforts, licensing and, of course, litigation. 

Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.

You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text

This week our conversation is with Scott McKeown, a shareholder with Wolf Greenfield in the firm's DC office, and Steve McBride, a partner with Carmichael IP. In this wide ranging conversation we tackle what is happening at the United States Patent and Trademark Office and on Capitol Hill. We specifically address the proposed changes to terminal disclaimers and double patenting, and also the pending bills in Congress relating to patent eligibility and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.

You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text

This week our conversation will take us to Europe where the Unified Patent Court has just celebrated its first anniversary. And based on early indications the UPC seems comfortable granting preliminary and permanent injunctive relief to stop patent infringement.  Special guest: Tobias Wuttke.

Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte

Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com.

You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.