Category: Blog Posts Page 2 of 75

Strategic Patenting Stifles Antibiotic Innovation

By: Brian Wilmans

Antibiotics are one of humanity’s greatest discoveries. They’ve made it possible to eradicate instances where a cut on a finger could turn fatal due to bacterial infection.

However, today, antibiotics are losing their efficacy. The CDC tracked seven different strains of antibiotic-resistant bacteria from 2019-2022, and six out of the seven increased their prevalence by 20 percent.[1] Overprescription of antibiotics is certainly a contributing factor in the increase in resistance, but another factor is the decreased number of new antibiotic classes being brought to market. Since the first antibiotic, penicillin, was discovered in 1940, the largest gap between new types of antibiotics being invented had been 13 years.[2] We are now in year 15 since the last novel class of antibiotic was created. There are myriad reasons for that, from funding for R&D to decreased profit margin for pharmaceutical companies. However, another reason for it that may be more on the periphery: pharmaceutical companies’ practice of strategic patenting.

Who Owns GMOs?

By Joseph Noser

On January 30, 2025

In Blog Posts

Who Owns GMOs?

By: Brian Wilmans

Genetically modified organisms (GMO) have been around since the early 1970s and have steadily grown to impact all forms of commerce. From food to healthcare, the growing impact of GMOs has been felt around the world but very heavily in the United States specifically. As the landmass and population of the U.S. are significantly larger than that of most other countries and most of its farming is done on a larger, industrial scale, the U.S. has leaned more heavily on the use of GMOs to provide security for the country’s food supply.[1] In the U.S., it is estimated that over ninety percent of crops are genetically modified and that up to ninety-five percent of meat and dairy products feed on genetically modified crops.[2]

This has led to questions surrounding the ownership of those GMOs. If the organism could be obtained naturally, how do you determine that someone is the owner?

NFL and UFC Mobilize the Feds Against Illegal Streams

By Joseph Noser

On January 30, 2025

In Blog Posts

NFL and UFC Mobilize the Feds Against Illegal Streams

By: Donovan Sbiroli

Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)

Image via Homeland Security Investigations *HSI) and WIBX.

For fans of the National Football League (NFL) to have access to most out-of-market games throughout a season, they need to purchase “NFL Sunday Ticket.” The product, which is sold by Alphabet, Inc. under its YouTube TV service, costs $479 at the start of the season.[1] In lieu of paying the base price of $479, millions of fans have turned to piracy and illegal streams.

Domain names of such illegal streams can be seized, however. Section 2323 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code provides for civil asset forfeiture and seizure. Paragraph (a) of the section reads:

“The following property is subject to forfeiture to the United States Government: any article, the making or trafficking of which is prohibited under section 506 of title 17… any property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part to commit or facilitate the commission of an offense referred to in subparagraph (A)…For seizures made under this section, the court shall enter an appropriate protective order with respect to discovery and use of any records or information that has been seized . . . the court shall order that any property forfeited under paragraph (1) be destroyed.”[2]

Artificial Intelligence in the Law Classroom: Good? Bad? Or Maybe Both?

By Joseph Noser

On January 30, 2025

In Blog Posts

Artificial Intelligence in the Law Classroom: Good? Bad? Or Maybe Both?

By: Nadia Farashahi

Whether we like it or not, artificial intelligence has taken its place in our society. Law schools are no exception.[1] With the rise in artificial intelligence, law schools are faced with the challenge of adapting to this new technology.

Bloomberg Law’s Spring 2024 Path to Practice survey encompassed data from more than 150 U.S. Law schools.[2] This survey reflected that the status quo is changing: “technological advancements have pushed law schools to address longstanding gaps in tech skill development, specifically by embracing and offering more AI-focused courses.”[3] Faculty respondents were asked whether their law schools “asked or encouraged them” to update their courses to reflect these new technological advancements in the legal field, and more than a third of the respondents said “yes.”[4] The survey also inquired about AI specific courses that are available to law students. Around 40% of respondents indicated that the courses give students “practical experiences using AI for legal work.”[5]

The American Bar Association Task Force on Law and Artificial Intelligence conducted a similar survey.[6] The survey, completed by 29 law school deans or faculty members in 2023 to 2024, showed that AI is steadily establishing a firm presence in the law school classroom. Around 55% of the law school respondents reported that they have classes centered around teaching students about AI, and around 83% reported having curricular opportunities that allowed students to learn to use AI effectively.[7]

AI in Contract Drafting: Transforming Legal Practice

By JOLT

On October 22, 2024

In Blog Posts

AI in Contract Drafting: Transforming Legal Practice

By: Audrey Zhang Yang

Introduction

The legal profession is experiencing an unprecedented transformation driven by the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into various aspects of legal practice. Among these changes, the evolution of contract drafting and management stands as a particularly significant development. As law firms and legal departments navigate the opportunities and challenges presented by evolving legal technologies, understanding how AI is reshaping contract drafting becomes crucial for legal practitioners and law school students. This paper examines the current state of AI in contract drafting, its practical applications, and its implications for the legal profession.

The EU AI Act: Pioneering Regulatory Framework for Artificial Intelligence

By JOLT

On July 23, 2024

In Blog Posts

The EU AI Act: Pioneering Regulatory Framework for Artificial Intelligence

By Audrey Zhang Yang

Introduction

On July 12, 2024, the European Union marked a significant milestone in Artificial Intelligence (AI) regulation with the official publication of Regulation 2024/1689, commonly known as the EU AI Act, in the Official Journal of the European Union.[1] This landmark legislation, comprising 180 recitals, 113 Articles and 13 annexes, establishes a comprehensive framework for the development, deployment, and use of AI systems within the EU.[2] The Act aims to safeguard fundamental rights, ensure public safety, and promote ethical, trustworthy, and human-centric AI innovation.

This work examines the key provisions of the EU AI Act, its scope of application, the risk-based classification system, and the implementation timeline. It also explores the potential impact on various stakeholders in the AI ecosystem and considers the challenges and opportunities presented by this groundbreaking regulation.

Google’s Geofencing Stance: an Ode to Apple in 2016

By JOLT

On July 15, 2024

In Blog Posts

Google’s Geofencing Stance: an Ode to Apple in 2016

By Michael Mellon

In 2016 Apple faced off with the federal government, who had obtained an order to compel Apple to create software which would allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) to unlock a cellphone used by a suspected terrorist.^[1] The software was needed because Apple had recently redesigned its operating system, making it impossible for anyone to access information stored on one of their devices.^[2] The government maintained that the All Writs Act justified the compulsion because it “empower[s] judges to order that something be done, even if the legislative body (here, Congress) hasn’t officially said that it should be.”^[3] It further relied on a test established in United States v. New York Telephone Co. concerning the same.^[4] Apple was prepared to challenge this, but the issue became moot when the United States Attorney’s Office indicated it had found another means of entry into the phone.^[5] This situation may very well have been the inspiration for Google’s recent stance related to mobile devices.

Satellite States: China and America’s National Security in Space

By JOLT

On May 18, 2024

In Blog Posts

Satellite States: China and America’s National Security in Space

By Samuel Naramore

Introduction

Over sixty years ago, in April of 1961, the Soviet Union successfully left the terrestrial safety of Earth and entered outer space (“space”) for the first time.[1] The Soviets entering space initiated the Cold War’s Space Race, prompting the U.S. to devote extraordinary amounts of resources towards developing its space capabilities––to beat the Soviets to the Moon.[2] After reaching the Moon in 1969 as part of NASA’s Apollo program, the United States (“U.S.”) claimed the position as the World’s premier space power.[3]

Since the “Space Race” of the Cold War, the U.S. has led the world in public and private expenditure in space.[4] Even though direct spending on space initiatives by the U.S. government has waned under recent presidential administrations, compared to other space-faring nations, the U.S. still invests more in its space program than any other country.[5] This expenditure since 1961 helped the U.S. establish itself as the dominant presence in space and leading the world in technological advancements––many of which American citizens increasingly rely on.[6]

Can AI-Generated Output Be Protected Under Intellectual Property Law?

By JOLT

On May 17, 2024

In Blog Posts

Can AI-Generated Output Be Protected Under Intellectual Property Law?

By Audrey Zhang Yang

Introduction

AI-generated output represents a groundbreaking integration of technology and creativity that increasingly challenges established norms in the legal world. Inevitably, it raises the question on whether law and policy on intellectual property protection should evolve and adapt to recognize this changing innovation trend. The Progress Clause of the Constitution gives Congress the power to “promote the Progress of Science…by securing for limited Times to Authors…the exclusive Right to their…Writing.”[i] Pursuant to this authorization, the Copyright Act extends copyright protection for “original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression.”[ii] The Copyright Act neither defined “authorship” not “works of authorship.”[iii] Traditionally, courts assigns authorship to individuals who create original works. However, determining authorship is more challenging in the case of artificial intelligence (AI). Some believe that since AI systems are tools programmed by humans, the programmers are entitled to authorship rights.[iv] Also, when someone instructs AI to solve a problem, that person might qualify as an investor if she formulates a problem in a manner that requires inventive skill.[v] However, laws on intellectual property, patent, and copyright were not originally passed with AI in mind. Therefore, there is no law specifically addressing AI-generated invention in any jurisdiction.