AI Image Generators and Copyright: Eligibility in the U.S., UK, EU, and More; Fair Use, Derivative Works, Liability

April 6th, 2023|Categories: CLE OnDemand, Intellectual Property, Mass Torts|Tags: , |

AI Image Generators and Copyright: Eligibility in the U.S., UK, EU, and More; Fair Use, Derivative Works, Liability AI programs are now readily available for all. Stability AI, Lensa, and other AI image creation tools create original works of art, raising the question of IP protection for such art. The United States requires human authorship in order to obtain copyright protection, and so far, the U.S. Copyright Office has declined to grant copyright registrations for AI-created works of art based on a lack of human authorship (one of these decisions is being challenged in Thaler v. Perlmutter (D.D.C. filed June 2, 2022)). While some countries take a similar approach to the US, others treat the issue of copyright eligibility for AI-generated art quite differently and provide at least some protection of computer generated works. Questions have also been raised as to whether AI-generated images constitute derivative works and whether such images and the AI generation tools used to create them infringe third-party copyrights, or whether the fair use doctrine or other defenses may apply. The first lawsuits involving image generators have now been filed raising copyright claims in addition to other claims. Listen as our authoritative panel of IP attorneys examines AI image generators and the associated copyright issues. The panel will discuss eligibility in the U.S. and the recent actions by the Copyright [...]

Discovery Strategies in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions Before and After Certification of Putative Class

February 15th, 2023|Categories: Class Actions, CLE OnDemand, Mass Torts|Tags: , , , , |

Discovery Strategies in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions Before and After Certification of Putative Class Strategically Limiting Discovery, Resolving Discovery Disputes Wage and hour class and collective actions are complex and discovery intensive. Discovery requests are often burdensome, seeking information concerning a broad swath of workers. This causes the discovery process to sometimes linger for years and creates a significant expense for employers.In recent years, courts have emphasized that parties must rein in extensive and expensive discovery requests. Employment litigators are increasingly raising proportionality arguments as a basis for objecting to opposing counsel's discovery requests. Drafters are responding by tailoring requests to anticipate such challenges. Drafting discovery requests that are likely to withstand burden and proportionality challenges and objections to broad discovery requests is critical for litigators representing employers in wage and hour class and collective actions. Employment litigators must develop and implement effective discovery strategies both before and, as applicable, after certification of the putative class. These strategies often must anticipate the possibility of a future summary judgment motion, further certification practice, and trial on the merits. Listen as our authoritative panel of employment law attorneys explains effective strategies for pursuing or objecting to discovery requests in wage and hour collective and class actions and resolving discovery disputes that arise during litigation. Questions Addressed: What are the most common discovery [...]

Data-Driven Legal Guidance with Ed Walters

November 26th, 2022|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, Emerging Litigation & Risk, News|Tags: , , , |

Today we’re going to talk about the weather. But only for a minute. Mostly we’re going to talk about the use of big data in the practice of law. There is a reason IBM acquired the digital assets of The Weather Channel, and it's not because they are climate nerds. They bought it to put weather data to work to “operationalize [the] understanding of the impact of weather on business outcomes.” Think about the economic impact of snowstorms, hurricanes, and even less dramatic weather conditions, or the impact on the durability of manufacturing or building materials as temperatures rise or fall outside the norm. While we all crave meteorological precision, we also crave precision when making legal and business decisions. Clients ask questions like these all the time: What is our case worth? What size award will we get? Where should I file? Will the judge grant summary judgment? Should I even bring this suit?  Lawyers will draw on experience to offer their best advice, providing ranges followed by caveats and usually preceded by the most lawyerly of lawyer answers: “It depends.”  As my guest points out, lawyers also get business-related questions. Business-related answers may begin with "it depends," but must end with a number. When a CEO asks how much revenue your project will generate, "more" is not the [...]

Robojudges: If Machines Could Make Judicial Decisions, Should They?

March 3rd, 2022|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Tort Notes, Journal, News, Technology Law|Tags: , |

The Author A leading academic and practitioner, Joshua P. Davis (davisj@usfca.edu) is a nationally recognized expert on legal ethics and class actions, as well as on artificial intelligence in the law, antitrust, civil procedure, free speech, and jurisprudence. He has published more than 30 scholarly articles and book chapters on these subjects and is currently writing a book on AI titled Unnatural Law, which will be published by Cambridge University Press. He is Research Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of Law, and a Shareholder of the Berger Montague PC law firm and Manager of its new San Francisco Bay Area Office. Before taking these posts, for more than 20 years Davis was a tenured Professor of Law at University of San Francisco Law School, where he also served as the Director of the Center for Law and Ethics. Davis is also a member of the Editorial Board of Advisors for the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, published by Fastcase Full Court Press. Tom Hagy, Editor in Chief. You can also listen to Josh on the Emerging Litigation Podcast! Robojudges: If Machines Could Make Judicial Decisions, Should They? By Joshua P. Davis Abstract: As artificial intelligence makes its way into every aspect of our daily lives—including [...]

The Rise of Robojudges with Josh Davis

December 15th, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, HB Tort Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , |

The Rise of Robojudges with Joshua Davis The good news for all of us, not the least of which are the robe and wig industries,  is that we still have time. Artificial intelligence is advancing rapidly, but it's still not able to think like a learned jurist. We can say it will have flaws, but so do our human deciders. So it will be a tradeoff, right? What are the risks? What are the upsides? Will robojudges be able to absorb infinitely more information quickly? Will they hand down decisions free from the influence of bias? Wouldn't it be great to eliminate conflicts of interest?  Joining me to discuss this not-so-out-there concept is Joshua P. Davis, a nationally recognized expert on legal ethics, class actions, and artificial intelligence in the law. He is Research Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of Law, and Shareholder and Manager of Berger & Montague, P.C.'s new San Francisco Bay Area Office. For more than 20 years Josh was a tenured Professor of Law at the University of San Francisco Law School, where he also served as the Director of the Center for Law and Ethics. Josh is authoring two books, one titled Unnatural Law, dealing with AI and the law, and a second on the important issue of class action ethics.  Finally, [...]

Putting an AI App to Work to Protect IP with Jan-Diederik Lindemans and Judith Bussé

November 1st, 2021|Categories: ELP, Emerging Litigation & Risk, Intellectual Property, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , , |

Putting an AI App to Work to Protect IP with Jan-Diederik Lindemans and Judith Bussé They are Crowell & Moring partner Jan-Diederik Lindemans and Judith Bussé, both part of the firm’s Technology & Intellectual Property Department in Brussels. And, working with Neotalogic, they developed an interactive app that takes you through a set of attorney-crafted questions that, depending on your answers, take you to other questions. The app applies a layer of artificial intelligence to enhance the information gathering process. Listen to what these innovators had to say about the Crowell & Moring IP Check-Up application, and take it for a test drive yourself.  Or, here is a quick video of someone using the app. This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation*, a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the legal news folks at Law Street Media, and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Docket Alarm and Judicata. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our projects, or want to tell me how insightful our guests are, please drop me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com. Tom Hagy Host of the Emerging Litigation Podcast * Highly regarded insurance and reinsurance industry attorney Laura Foggan of Crowell & Moring's Washington, DC, office is on the Editorial Advisory Board. Thanks to Laura for connecting me with J.D. and Judith.  An organization’s intellectual property is [...]

How Artificial Intelligence is Changing Litigation and Even Preventing it with Arthur Crivella

July 8th, 2021|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, ELP, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: |

How Artificial Intelligence is Changing Litigation and Even Preventing it with Arthur Crivella Artificial intelligence has the capability to truly revolutionize how litigators work, and also how companies can avoid litigation in the first place.  It can not only do the work of hundreds of people in mere seconds but can be used to predict liabilities before they become liabilities, and outcomes when disputes arise.  Joining me to discuss the incredible present-day applications of AI in law and business, as well as the potential to do much more if humans will let it, is Arthur Crivella of Crivella Technologies Limited.  For decades Art has been a leader in developing and applying advanced software engineering, systems engineering and AI methodologies, and holds numerous foundation patents in the field.  Art has helped create nationally recognized engineering achievements in weaponry as well as in the metals, rubber and food industries. He was  principal design engineer in developing advanced weapons direction systems and wrap-around simulation systems for naval guided missiles. Crivella Tech supports  corporations in managing  risk and law firms in assessing liabilities. The company also supports law firms in  class action and mass tort litigation. This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law [...]

Facial Recognition: How It Works and How It Doesn’t

January 14th, 2021|Categories: Class Actions, HB Risk Notes, News, Technology Law|Tags: , , |

Debbie Reynolds Founder, CEO & CDPO Debbie Reynolds Consulting Website Martin T. Tully Founding Partner Actuate Law Website Facial Recognition: Benefits & Risks Editor's Note: Imagine how great technology would be if it weren't for people. Since the beginning of time man has developed remarkable solutions to common problems. But leave it to nefarious, despicable, criminal or just plain dumb people to ruin them for the rest of us. You know, like gun powder, nuclear power, and the internet. Facial recognition programs and collection of biometric data would appear to have more benefits than risks, but those risks are there. As use of the technology proliferates we can expect more litigation as additional states follow Illinois -- the first to enact a state Biometric Information Privacy Act. Martin T. Tully of Actuate Law LLC and Debbie Reynolds of Debbie Reynolds Consulting LLC, outline these risks and how regulation and litigation is responding in their article: Facial Recognition Proliferation: Litigation and Legal Implications of Biometric Technologies. Below are a couple excerpts from their article, published in the January 2021 edition of the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation. --Tom Hagy Some FR technologies use a scanner to identify 4,500 different points of facial geometry to create a map of a person's face. The application doesn’t [...]

Dr. Babyl: Artificial Intelligence Could Save Lives, Time and Money — TheDailyBeast.com

May 27th, 2019|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

Itchy throat? Headache? Upset stomach? There's an app for that. There is a new AI healthcare system called Babylon UK’s National Health Service which features an AI-driven app that is reportedly able to separate “run-of-the-mill” illnesses from more life-threatening ones, while saving time, money, and anxiety for patients and doctors alike. Babylon offers more than diagnostic assistance; it is accessible to people in remote areas. "For example, Babyl, the Rwandan version of Babylon, offers remote appointments with clinicians, fills prescriptions, orders lab tests, and issues referrals.” Babyl enables affordable, personalized healthcare, combined with “the brains of thousands of doctors at once” to reach patients who cannot get to a doctor’s officer. In addition to assisting doctors with everyday check-ups and treating the common cold, the AI’s abilities extend to clinical trials. “In 2018 the Mayo Clinic partnered with IBM’s Watson to match patients with breast cancer to accessible clinical trials covered by their health plans. The matching program increased the enrollment of breast cancer sufferers in Mayo Clinic’s own clinical trials by 80%." Questions are being raised, however, about how to mitigate risks posed by hacking or by nefarious manipulation of the system. Read about this and more in the complete post by Joelle Renstrom on TheDailyBeast.com. 

Artificial Intelligence: DeepMind on Debugging Learned Predictive Models

May 9th, 2019|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

DeepMind, an artificial intelligence research company, in a recent blog post discusses three ways to eliminate bugs in learned predictive models. The company was founded in London in 2010. Google acquired it in 2014. In addition to London they have research centers in Edmonton and Montreal, Canada, and a DeepMind Applied team in Mountain View, California. "Bugs and software have gone hand in hand since the beginning of computer programming," the post reads. "Over time, software developers have established a set of best practices for testing and debugging before deployment, but these practices are not suited for modern deep learning systems. Today, the prevailing practice in machine learning is to train a system on a training data set, and then test it on another set. While this reveals the average-case performance of models, it is also crucial to ensure robustness, or acceptably high performance even in the worst case. In this article, we describe three approaches for rigorously identifying and eliminating bugs in learned predictive models: adversarial testing, robust learning, and formal verification." Read the complete post here! 

Mitigating Operational Cyber Risk: As Business Technology Changes, So Does Your Risk Profile

December 6th, 2018|Categories: Corporate Compliance, HB Risk Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

By Tom Hagy The various risks of doing business in our digitally connected world continue to evolve.  So must the approach organizations take in confronting those risks, for failing to do so in the current risk landscape can be far more dangerous than in prior years. I spoke with Nick Galletto, Global Cyber Risk Leader at Deloitte, who traced the evolution of the dangers of doing business in a digitally connected world. Early on, our focus in the cyber risk management space was on how to protect websites from being defaced, he explained. Organizations had to make sure websites were functioning properly, that data was secure, and the integrity was maintained. Galletto went on to say that we’ve moved from an era of compliance and risk management to an era of complexity.  From an organization’s perspective, their focus was on making sure the company was compliant with new and evolving regulations, and risk management meant having policies, procedures and effective controls in place. “While compliance is a necessity, it is not the silver bullet that’s going to protect us from any potential breaches," Galletto said. "So organizations must look at conducting their business in this connected world not merely from a compliance perspective but from a risk perspective. A clear example of this is the number of PCI-compliant companies that were still getting breached." “Now as organizations move into an era of complexity, they need to be proactive in detecting anomalies and suspicious behavior and be prepared so their teams have [...]

Oracle Health Sciences on Pharmacovigilance and Artificial Intelligence

August 22nd, 2018|Categories: Complex Business Litigation, HB Risk Notes, HB Tort Notes, Technology Law|Tags: , , , , |

"The potential to use artificial intelligence methods increasingly for the analysis of the increasing amounts of pharmacovigilance data is well understood and many companies are moving (or planning to move) there, and we can predict that routine tasks in pharmacovigilance will in the future be increasingly automated. It will be crucial, however, for regulatory authorities to very clearly provide a position about the use of AI as well as the acceptable level of quality from AI applications. But in parallel with the shaping of those definitions, given the massive increase in their AE case workloads that most companies are currently experiencing, the industry will out of necessity proceed swiftly with the adoption of AI and cloud technologies to reduce their costs and increase their efficiencies. "Like other industries, the pharmaceutical business and in particular the pharmacovigilance field will see a massive change in their processes in the near future, away from tedious, repetitive manual tasks towards a better utilization of scarce resources, in particular medical and scientific knowledge, for value-adding tasks. It is imperative for all stakeholders – industry, service providers and regulators – to provide an environment in which such a transformation can take place without ever compromising public health or the safety of the individual patient, and ideally providing additional benefit for patients." A quote from Addressing the Data [...]

Go to Top