Blog
Purpose
1. to provide the legal and business communities a curated series of articles …
… to keep pace with the rapid and sweeping societal changes initiated by the rise of AI while mitigating the risks of government overreach or excessive litigation.
2. to provide a private forum for members of The Sedona Conference Working Group 13 on AI Law to engage in an ongoing dialogue…
… advancing its efforts to draft consensus, nonpartisan commentaries, including Principles and Best Practice recommendations to move the law forward “in a reasoned and just way.”
*Note: Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice or the formation of any attorney-client relationship. See Disclaimers.
Sponsors
AIVN
The Sedona Conference
Interested in sponsoring the Ko IP & AI Law blog? Contact us at webhost@koailaw.com.
-
Parsing the Blame: How AI slips through the cracks of third-party liability law [Part 2 of 4 – Negligence & Contract Law]
Who will be liable when an AI implementation harms either its users or unrelated third parties? In Part 1 of this series last week, we explored how software is presumptively treated as a “service”—not a “product”—and thus is not subject to strict product liability law. So what theories of liability are applicable when software output…
-
Parsing the Blame: How AI slips through the cracks of third-party liability law [Part 1 of 4 – Product liability law]
Explore the complexities of AI liability in the evolving legal landscape. From product liability to on-presmises software to software-as-a-service (SaaS), uncover how laws for tangible goods differ from those governing intangible services like AI. Delve into key cases, challenges, and the implications for accountability in our interconnected AI age.
-
Does the LLMperor Have New Clothes? Some Thoughts on the Use of LLMs in eDiscovery
By Maura R. Grossman, Gordon V. Cormack, and Jason R. Baron I. Introduction: A Parable As Hans Christian Andersen’s parable goes, an emperor was—above all else—obsessed with showing off his new clothes. Approached by a pair of swindlers, who purported to be weavers of the most magnificent and uncommonly fine fabrics, he was convinced by…
-
The Sedona Conference Launches Dialogue on Artificial Intelligence and the Law
The Sedona Conference, one of the nation’s leading nonpartisan think-tanks on issues of law and technology, will be launching its Working Group 13 on Artificial Intelligence and the Law in January, building on its long-standing reputation in the areas of eDiscovery, digital records management, patent litigation, trade secrets, cybersecurity, data privacy, and cross-border data transfers.…
-
The Sedona Conference publishes article on Testing the Limits of the IP Legal Regimes: The Unique Challenges of AI
When Paul R. Michel was approached about co-authoring a paper on the substantive issues that generative artificial intelligence poses to intellectual property law, the retired chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit didn’t think the challenges were all that formidable. But as Judge Michel and co-author Jim W. Ko began…
-
Sedona’s patent law working groups tackle the puzzle of GenAI and “inventorship”
I will be in Tampa next week, trading the record-breaking heat of Phoenix for the humidity of Florida. But I’m not flying east for the weather. I’ll be attending joint annual meeting of The Sedona Conference’s Working Groups 9 (patent damages and remedies) and 10 (patent litigation best practices) at the Hotel Haya. I’m looking…
-
Ko-Michel article on IP and AI law forthcoming
Jim W. Ko is co-authoring a paper on Testing the Limits of the IP Legal Regimes: The Unique Challenges of Artificial Intelligence with former Chief Judge Paul Michel of the Federal Circuit, in conjunction with The Sedona Conference’s upcoming Conference on AI and IP Law . Can the policy objectives behind the current intellectual property…
-
Regulating the regulators: Ensuring patent examiners use AI “responsibly”
The patent examination process—whereby the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office reviews patent applications and issues or grants those that meet the requirements for patentability—is tailor-made for the implementation of AI. But what are the risks to the quality and fairness of the patent examination process when the USPTO implements AI? And what policies and procedures…
-
Privacy-enhancing technologies: Will AI providers be held accountable too?
[Privacy-Enhancing Technologies] could usher in a paradigm shift in how we as a society protect privacy while deriving knowledge from data. However, there are also risks that PETs could provide a false veneer of privacy, misleading people into believing that a data sharing arrangement is more private than it really is. Alexander Macgillivray & Tess…
-
Jim W. Ko has joined the Wood Phillips IP firm
Pleased to announce that I am folding my solo practice focused on IP & AI law into Wood Phillips (www.woodphillips.com), a boutique IP firm based in Chicago, effective February 1, 2024. Thrilled to be joining such a terrific, experienced team (but also to be staying put here in Phoenix, in particular this time of year!).