I co-cordinated the Year in Review session on Patents, Trademarks, Copyright, Industrial Designs and Trade Secrets.at the annual meeting of the American Intellectual Property Lawyers Association
In September 2019 , at the annual meeting of the Intellectual Property Institute of Canada, I organized and chaired a session on the topic of "On-LIne Tension between Owners Rights and User Rights'
As Chairman of the AIPPI Canadian Group Copyright Committee I led our group's report on copyright in works created by artifical intelligence. This report was considered with the other national reports at the conference in London UK in September 2019 where I participated in the formulation of the final resolution. The Canadian group's report and the final resolution is available on request.
I also participated in the patent committee and the debates on that topic concerning utility and plausibility.
In May 2017 I reported on the trial decision of Mr. Justice Russell, in The Governors of the University of Alberta and Alberta Health Services v.
Post sale rights post Lexmark. Implications for U.S. and foreign patent owners and licensees.
The Supreme Court disallows post sale restrictions
The Supreme Court of the United States in Lexmark v. Impression Products 581 U.S. 1523 (2017) May 30, 2017 has disallowed any patent post sale restrictions following the sale of a patented article from the patent owner or any licensee from the patent owner.
Claim Interpretation and Patent Infringement
What’s the big deal?
It’s only words, and as lawyers we are used to reading words.
Words inherently imprecise.
If it’s a contract we try to look at surrounding circumstances to see what the parties intended?
Can we do that in a patent specification?
Does it matter what the inventor intended? If not way not?
A patent claim has a public function. It is not a matter of interpreting the party’s intention.