By Katy Pearson
A patent property right gives the patentee the “right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, and importing the invention into the country [for a statutory period of time].”[1] The quid pro quo for a private right to exclusion is that the patentee provides “a clear and enabling disclosure” of the invention to the public “for the benefit of society.”[2]
By Jack Sherwood
Although artificial intelligence (AI) is nearly old enough to be a baby boomer[1], it wasn’t until recently that mainstream media and society alike deemed it potentially threatening to the working class as we know it. While most of the concern regarding AI is the potential for replacement of human jobs, such as tax accountants, web developers, and sales managers[2], what are we to think when AI is actually hiring for those jobs?
By Samuel Naramore
In November 2023, a District Court Judge in Colorado held that former President Trump had used his social media between 2020 and 2023 to incite lawless action.[1] With the 2024 election cycle looming, this judge’s ruling is incredibly timely. As social media’s attention turns towards the political discourse, the passion around contentious topics and groups will likely increase. It is critically important to understand what incitement to lawless action on social media is, to prevent future acts of political lawlessness like those on January 6, 2021.
By Kaitlin Carroll
The United States is in a drug-pricing crisis.[1] One in four Americans report that they simply cannot afford to take their medication as prescribed.[2] Part of what has led to this crisis is the pharmaceutical industry’s manipulation of the patent system to keep generic alternatives from entering the market.[3] Once generic brands enter the market, drug prices can drop by up to 90%.[4] However, drug manufacturers have been manipulating the patent system to extend their monopolies for years, namely through the use of patent thickets and pay-for-delay agreements.[5]
By Caroline Kropka
On October 2, 2023, a driverless vehicle traveled down a San Francisco street.[1] The taxi was one of around 950 autonomous Cruise (a robotaxi service owned by General Motors) vehicles operating across the United States by October of that year.[2]
Ahead, a driver-operated car struck a pedestrian, throwing her into the Cruise’s path. The Cruise braked, unable to avoid hitting the pedestrian, still came to a complete stop. But the Cruise then suddenly pulled out of traffic, dragging the pedestrian twenty feet and eventually pinning her beneath its tire.[3]
By Savannah Throneberry
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has substantially impacted the music scene in the last few years. Individuals have used AI to impersonate popular artists, like Drake, both in sound and style, leaving listeners perplexed as to whether they are listening to a published piece or a well disguised dupe. As a result, artists in the music industry now face the tough task of embracing or rejecting artificial intelligence in music creation.
By Joe Noser
When President Joe Biden and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, met last week in San Francisco, the two leaders had lots to discuss: restoration of military communications, fentanyl controls, and climate change, to name a few.[1]
One issue that likely will not be on the table, however, is coming to a mutual understanding about regulating both nations’ hypersonic weapons programs.
By: Brenna Harman
New York City published final regulations regarding the use of AI-driven hiring tools, and enforcement of the laws went into effect on July 5, 2023.[1] Local Law 144 (“NYC 144”) requires any automated employment decision tool (AEDT) to be audited annually.[2] The audits are performed to check for bias that may be intentionally or unintentionally within the systems.[3] The employer must determine if they are using an AEDT, perform the audit, publish a public summary of the audit, and provide certain notices to applicants or employees who are subject to screening by the tool.[4]
By L. Michelle Ugalde
The da Vinci Robotic Surgical System is said to be catalytic in the advancement of modern medicine since its inception by Silicon Valley’s Intuitive Surgical. [1] While the machine itself is exceedingly complex, a major design component of the da Vinci system is that the system is used and overall conducted by a human surgeon.[2] As it turns out, this is exactly where a vast amount of the recent litigation surrounding the system stems from.[3] This litigation poses some crucial concerns.[4] As errors with using the system increase, so does the amount of litigation discussing whether those mistakes should be attributed to the system, or to the surgeon leading the system.[5] As a result, it appears that many are beginning to question if this new abundance of legal troubles, along with other issues revolving the system, are detrimental to the point where the da Vinci system is exceeding its worth.[6]
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén