The creation ("minting") and sale and use of NFTs raises many IP issues which we have discussed in our previous posts in our IP in NFTs series. However, brand owners and product manufacturers must also be vigilant in monitoring the virtual marketplaces to ensure that third parties are not creating NFTs that infringe their own IP rights.  This is especially true where the company is considering releasing or has released NFTs, because the public will begin to associate the brand with NFTs (which could include infringing NFTs).  There are several strategies that companies could adopt to minimise this risk. Read more

Creating an NFT can give rise to other IP issues, aside from questions of transfer of rights. In particular there is the issue of who in fact has the right to create and release NFTs and whether the NFT infringes third party rights. In this third of our series of NFT IP blog posts, we deal with "minting", ie the creation and sale of NFTs. Read more

As we reported in our first blog post in this series, non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are a new asset class that is being adopted eagerly across all sectors, raising some interesting challenges from an IP perspective. While NFTs have demonstrated themselves to be a powerful tool in the new digital era, they remain poorly understood, in particular in relation to the rights that are (or are not) transferred on purchase of an NFT. Releasing (known as "minting") and purchasing NFTs can give rise to a number of IP-related issues, such as: - Who has the right to create and release NFTs? - Does the NFT infringe third party rights? - What rights are transferred with the NFT (and on resale)? - How this rights transfer is achieved? Read more

Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are one of the hottest IP topics currently. NFTs can be used simply for marketing purposes or as a new form of asset to attract investment or as part of the transfer of products and services into the Metaverse.This new asset class has exploded across all sectors and raises some interesting challenges from an IP perspective. While NFTs have demonstrated themselves to be a powerful tool in the new digital era, they remain poorly understood. In our series of blog posts on NFTs, we explore intellectual property considerations, misconceptions and issues that we are seeing arising in the NFT space, including, in this first blog post, clarifying what NFTs are and how they can create effective control over digital assets and the use of NFTs for provenance and anti-counterfeiting. Read more

The UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has published its response to its consultation on legislative changes needed to accommodate AI, stating that it has accepted the need to create a new data mining exception for copyright and database rights and that this will make it easier to analyse material for machine learning, research and innovation. The exception will apply to text and data mining for any purpose, although rights holders will still have safeguards to protect their content, including a requirement for lawful access. The Government’s decided not to introduce changes to the UK’s patent inventorship criteria or copyright computer generated works provisions at this time, although the law will be kept under review. Read more

HSF technology disputes practitioners Andrew Moir, Rachel Lidgate, Martin Hevey, Kate Macmillan, Peter Dalton, Heather Newton and Rachel Montagnon have recently published a Q&A in Practical Law on Disputes in the Technology Industry covering all aspects of disputes in the sector including current and future trends. Read more

In previous blog posts, we have explored the challenges of processing genetic data in compliance with the GDPR, and in particular in relying on anonymisation, consent and/or the scientific research exemption to do so. We have seen that each of these avenues comes with its difficulties. However, it is clear that genetic data – and sensitive health data more generally – is an invaluable resource for life sciences companies whose business it is to better understand disease, to better diagnose it and to better treat it. Studying and sharing this data can lead to new insights and a huge potential payoff for patients. Read more

In earlier posts, we discussed the challenges in relying on anonymisation and consent as bases for processing genetic data in compliance with GDPR. An alternative ground for processing genetic data, relevant in this area, is the scientific research exemption. Under the GDPR, member states and the EU can further legislate to provide derogations from data subjects' rights to access or rectify the data, or to restrict or object to processing of the data when processing for the purpose of scientific research (Article 89). Read more