As a strong supporter of the food and beverage industry, Fasken is pleased to invite you to view this episode of the Masterclass Series, presented by BC Food & Beverage (BCFB).
This video series features topics that will be of interest to producers, distributors and retailers in BC’s growing agribusiness, food and beverage industry.
Hear from Roger Kuypers and Janine McNeil, Trademark Agents at Fasken who discuss the importance of trademarks and how an effective trademark strategy is critical to your brand’s future growth and success.
In celebration of this year’s theme for World IP Day, IP and Youth: Innovating for a Better Future, we are exploring the IP implications of emerging technologies that may shape our collective future: (A) artificial intelligence, (B) the metaverse, (C) non-fungible tokens, and (D) clean technologies.
Upcoming Changes to Canadian Patent Practice Could Mean Increased Costs. Can you take steps now to mitigate?
As part of the implementation of the patent term adjustment (PTA) obligation in the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (“CUSMA”), the Government of Canada proposed a series of amendments to the Canadian Patent Rules to better streamline the patent examination process.
As noted in our earlier blog post, the proposed amendments provided for a request for continued examination requirement and a new notice from the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (“CIPO”) to applicants named a “conditional notice of allowance”, both of which are designed to streamline the patent examination process.
UPDATE: On April 14, 2022, the Minister of Health announced that the federal government will not proceed with amendments to the Patented Medicines Regulations introducing new pharmacoeconomic factors and requiring that price and revenue information be reported net of all adjustments. The federal government will proceed with amendments establishing a new basket of comparator countries, with a coming-into-force date of July 1, 2022. For more information, see our Life Sciences Bulletin on the Minister’s announcement.
This article provides an update on each of these cases and highlights the growing body of jurisprudence questioning the PMPRB’s price control reasoning.
As reported in an earlier ANGLE post, we discussed how 2021 saw a number of patent office developments with regard to whether a non-human entity could be considered an inventor under various patent regimes. Prior to 2021, several patent offices had considered this issue and found that A.I. could not be considered an inventor. In 2021, however, an Australian Court found that a non-human “inventor” is not inconsistent with inventorship under Australian law and South Africa issued a patent designating an A.I. system as the inventor.
It would appear at the end of 2021 that some patent offices were trending towards recognizing a non-human entity, like A.I. based technology, as an inventor. Could this trend continue?
Maybe not. With a decision just before Christmas of 2021 from European authorities, any such trend may have been stopped in its tracks.