In this episode, we discuss the intricate landscape of patent eligibility in the United States, twin patent law decisions from the Supreme Court, and the proposed Patent Eligibility Restoration Act and how -- if passed -- it could unlock new opportunities for innovation amid the challenges posed by judicial exceptions with seasoned patent attorney, Ryan N. Phelan of Marshall Gerstein. Listen now!
In this episode, we discuss the evolving landscape of NFTs – or non-fungible tokens – which have taken the digital world by storm – or perhaps just a downloadable picture of a storm – promising to revolutionize not only the way we perceive, protect, purchase, and own digital assets, but how we might even buy a house or other assets in the real world. Guest Cameron Pick of Marshall Gerstein draws on his expertise in intellectual property law to provide insights into the changing dynamics of NFTs and the legal issues that accompany them. Tune in now!
Take this webinar featuring Perkins Coie LLP attorneys Lisa Ortiz and Sean West to gain a better understanding of the challenge of determining human authorship in AI-generated works, the guidance and disclosure rules established by the Copyright Office, the importance of addressing copyright ownership and usage rights in AI-related license agreements, and the implications of joint ownership of AI models and output. Learn about the categories of work in which AI is being applied in the practice of law, e.g., legal research, document drafting, deposition preparation, and discovery review. Understand the various risks associated with AI, e.g., biased and inaccurate outputs, unauthorized disclosures of private data, and intellectual property infringement. Get an overview of governmental regulation and guidance. Finally, start your journey to develop best practices in establishing AI governance teams and processes with an eye toward complying with regulations and mitigating risk. Check it out!
In this CLE webinar, Anderson Kill attorneys, Cort Malone and John Leonard discuss the state of biometric privacy litigation, the regulatory landscape, and insurance coverage considerations and rulings.
Everyone knows that price fixing is against the law, chiefly Section 1 of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Competitors may not collude to set prices. However, there are relatively new price-calculation tools that some companies maintain take them out of the equation. With these tools, shared across an industry, firms do not have to directly swap private information with competitors. Instead, they feed their data to a third-party which uses algorithms to come up with prices. In this episode, we discuss what algorithmic or software-facilitated pricing is, what the law says about price collusion, how this new pricing mechanism violates the law, and recent developments in litigation. Our guest highly regarded antitrust attorney Jonathan Rubin, Partner and Co-Founder of MoginRubin LLP.
Every week, the PFAS litigation and regulatory landscape changes dramatically. The EPA presses forward full steam ahead with numerous PFAS regulations, while the states have proposed hundreds of pieces of legislation related to PFAS in the last three years. Meanwhile, class action litigation, environmental pollution litigation, and greenwashing suits are being filed against companies at a dramatically increasing rate year after year. In this CLE webinar, CMBG3 Law attorney John Gardella discusses the latest on regulatory and litigation issues related to PFAS and how they will impact corporations.
In this episode, we discuss mitigating greenwashing litigation risks with guest Ramya Ravishankar, General Counsel at HowGood, an independent research firm that helps the world’s largest food brands meet their sustainability commitments. Listen and learn more!
In this episode, we discuss litigation automation and another case in which innovators are using artificial intelligence to transform legal operations with guest James M. Lee, co-founder and CEO of LegalMation. Listen and learn more!
The medical monitoring tort remedy – allowing for medical monitoring without physical injury – is recognized in 14 states and not allowed in 23. The law is divided in two states while the rest have not specifically addressed the issue. States that allow medical monitoring to do so when a group of claimants is at increased risk of disease or injury due to exposure to a known hazardous substance or a dangerous product as the result of a defendant’s conduct. Under this tort remedy, claimants are tested periodically, for an agreed or decided period, usually between 10 and 40 years. In this CLE webinar, Gentle Turner & Benson LLC attorneys Edgar (“Ed”) C. Gentle III and Katherine (“Kip”) A. Benson discuss the evolution of the medical monitoring tort, related cases, tests to determine whether the tort should be applied, types of monitoring, and the arguments for an against medical monitoring.
On this CLE webinar, Duane Morris LLP Attorneys Alex W. Karasik, Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., and George J. Schaller discuss two novel artificial intelligence lawsuits, recent governmental guidance related to AI use, the business risks associated with AI, and mitigation strategies.
The authors, Graham Reynolds, Robin Sagstetter, and Damon W.D. Wright discuss recent court cases which have brought to the forefront the top legal risks associated with the use of Generative AI.
In this episode, Sara Lord of Legal Metrics speaks with Lenora Gray of Redgrave Data about eDiscovery in the practice of litigation and how it has been transformed by technology-assisted review tools – or TAR, and how these tools work. Every litigator needs to understand how eDiscovery tools work. They should be able to answer questions around the approach being used, why that approach was chosen, the reliability of the assisted review, what human oversight was implemented, and more. Listen and learn. PLUS: Watch the video for outtakes and bonus content!
