The Federal Court recently released its decision in Doan v Clearview Inc, 2023 FC 1612, in which the Court distinguished a situation where there is no basis in fact for proving that two or more class members can be identified for the sake of certifying a proceeding as a class action and a situation where it is merely difficult to identify said class members. Significantly, this case involved a situation where a company potentially ingested publicly available photographs online to aid the use of their technology, which is a circumstance that may become more commonplace with the ever increasing presence of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) in all facets of everyday life. Continue reading to learn about how the Court’s decision in this case could have long lasting effects on the ability of individual plaintiffs to have actions filed against AI-related companies turned into class actions.
Continue readingCategory Archives: Analysis
Voltage Holdings, LLC v Doe #1 and Evidentiary Requirements in Copyright Infringement
The Federal Court of Appeal recently released its decision in Voltage Holdings, LLC v Doe #1, in which the court affirmed the minimum evidentiary requirements to establish direct and authorizing copyright infringement and clarified the extent to which an adverse inference may be drawn in the context of online copyright infringement.
Continue readingOpposition and Cancellation Proceedings Shifting Into Higher Gear in Canada
Until recently, opposition and administrative cancellation proceedings in Canada have been particularly lengthy. It was not uncommon to see decisions being issued in non-use cancellation proceedings before the Canadian Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) 3-4 years after their start. Similarly, in many cases decisions in opposition proceedings would issue 5-6 years after the end of the initial 2 month period to oppose. This is not because these types of proceedings are particularly cumbersome in Canada. Contrary to US oppositions there is no discovery in oppositions and administrative cancellation proceedings, only cross-examinations on affidavit are possible. The availability of very generous extensions of time and long delays to set a hearing or to render a decision on the basis of a written record explain most of these delays. This is changing rapidly.
Continue readingRegulation, Generative AI, and legal considerations
With generative AI’s ability to aid knowledge management, increase efficiency and accelerate development there must be balanced consideration of intellectual property (IP) protection and stakeholder interests.
Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI) are algorithms that can be used to generate text and images that are difficult to distinguish from human generated text and images. It is technology that is fed data (trained) to ultimately recognize relationships and patterns in data. The more data the system is fed, the smarter it becomes. Once trained, it then applies that intelligence to information submitted by end users, to produce new content/products such as videos, photos, and book summaries. Generative AI’s use is growing in popularity because it quickly simplifies and completes tasks for the everyday user once given simple instructions.
Continue readingStudy confirms the critical importance of working with high-quality patent attorney firms
A recent study published by university scholars in The Journal of Industrial Economics[1] confirmed how important it is to work with highly qualified professionals to obtain a patent. Indeed, the results of the study confirmed that a higher-quality patent attorney firm can significantly raise the probability of a patent grant.
Continue reading