Rebalancing our regulatory response to Deepfakes with performers’ rights

Law experts have been actively looking for solutions within the law to control Deepfakes since their emergence in 2017. This article puts forward performers’ rights as a suitable regulatory tool for Deepfakes, defined as synthetic performances produced using artificial intelligence systems. In many respects, performers’ rights represent a more sophisticated response to the challenges posed by Deepfake technology compared to existing legal remedies and reform proposals introduced to regulate Deepfakes. In making its case for performers’ rights as suitable regulatory response to Deepfakes, this article uncovers a tension: performers’ rights are an attractive solution to regulate Deepfakes but this technology challenges their scope of application. This is because Deepfakes uses content protected by performers’ rights (performances) in a way unforeseen by intellectual property policy-makers at the time these rights were introduced into law. Despite this limitation, performers’ rights remain one of the most attractive legal remedies in regulating Deepfakes, if adequately reformed. This article proposes two routes for the reform of performers’ rights to address this gap. The first involves an ad hoc modification of performers’ rights to ensure that performances manipulated by Deepfakes are covered. The second and preferred recommendation replaces the regime of performers’ rights with a regime of performers’ copyright. This small, yet important, change in legal regimes can be the difference between piecemeal, uneven and, therefore, ineffective protection against unauthorized Deepfakes and a harmonized international approach to the technology.

Strategizing with Hardware Rich Open Source Ecosystems

Companies are increasingly adopting open source strategies to develop and exploit complex infrastructures and platforms that combine software, hardware and standard interfaces. Such strategies require the development of a vibrant ecosystem of partners that combines the innovation capabilities of hundreds of companies from different industries. Our aim is to help decision makers assess the benefits and challenges associated with creating or joining such ecosystems. We use a case study approach on six major collaborative ecosystems that enable the development of complex, high cost infrastructures and platforms. We characterize their strategy, governance, and their degree of intellectual property (IP) openness. We offer a three-dimensional framework that helps managers characterize such ecosystems. Although all the ecosystems studied aim at scaling up innovative solutions, their strategy, governance and IP openness vary. An upstream strategy aimed at replacing supplier proprietary design with open substitutes requires a democratic governance and an intellectual property policy that maximize the attractiveness of the ecosystem. A downstream strategy aimed at carving a space in new markets requires an autocratic governance and an intellectual property policy that combine attractiveness and value capture opportunities.

Intellectual property policy of universities: specific regulation

This article considers the formation and implementation of a policy in relation to intellectual property in the activities of a higher education institution. Nowadays the creation, protection and commercialization of intellectual property objects are especially relevant for universities. The comprehensive solution of such issues stipulates the need for the development, adoption and implementation of university policies in relation to intellectual property objects as local regulatory acts. This study aims at analyzing intellectual property management policies in higher education institutions. The authors of the article have highlighted the key aspects of an intellectual property object as an object of management. To prove the relationship between intellectual property law and regulation that allows a university to own and freely dispose of its intangible assets, the article dwells on the best practices of European and US universities in terms of issuing local legal acts. The authors have concluded that it is inexpedient to copy the US university policy in Russia due to different approaches to intellectual property. They have developed the concept of strategic management of intellectual property based on the national legislation on the protection and disposal of intellectual property and local regulations of higher education institutions.

Public Perception Analysis of Hot Topics in Intellectual Property Based on Microblog Data

Public opinion is a crucial factor for government policy making, implementation, evaluation, and social development. This paper analyzes the public opinion perception of intellectual property subject based on microblog data and puts forward the concept and calculation model for the breadth, depth, and comprehensive value of public perception. Then, taking the opinion evaluation in microblog platform as an example, this paper studies the public perception of intellectual property subject and illustrates the changing trend of public perception through related events in microblog. The results show that the four topics of trademark, intellectual property, copyright, and patent are the hot topics of public perception, the breadth, depth, and comprehensive value of public perception for the four topics fluctuated greatly, on the whole. In addition, when the content of microblog is related to personal benefits, business benefits, and personal interests, it can cause widespread public concern. Additionally, the public mainly participate in the dissemination of public opinion on intellectual property subject through forwarding. Finally, this paper puts forward some suggestions from the perspective of how to maximize the effect of intellectual property policy.

Policy in the IP Field in Academic Institutions and Higher Education Institutions

Introduction. Along with the creation of intangible objects, their effective introduction into production and other spheres of public relations to satisfy both the private interest of creators, the persons who have invested the funds in their creation, and the public interest acquire the particular importance.Problem Statement. The study of intellectual property policy in the activities of universities and research organizations now receives serious attention, in particular by institutions such as the World Intellectual Property Organization and the European Union.Purpose. The purpose of this research is to identify regulatory requirements and scientific approaches to the formulation of intellectual property policy of higher education establishments and R&D institutions of Ukraine, as well as proposing measures to improve the effectiveness of this policy.Materials and Methods. Analytical analysis of current regulations and scholarly research works in order to develop proposals for improving the effectiveness of intellectual property policy in the activities of higher education establishments and R&D institutions of Ukraine.Results. It is disputable that in the case of the conveyance of intellectual property rights as a contribution to the authorized capital of legal entities, such property rights “shall be held by a state-owned R&D institution or university, academies, institutes”. After all, if any assets are conveyed as a contribution to the authorized capital of a corporation, the titles to these assets are transferred to the corporation.Conclusions. The positive legislative trends in the educational field provide for strengthening the positions of education establishments and R&D institutions in terms of the commercialization of scholarly research and R&D results.

Intellectual property policy formulation in Africa

This article examines continental, sub-regional and national initiatives in the formulation of intellectual property policy Africa. The article is divided into seven parts. The first looks at the relationship between IP and economic development. The second part examines the role of IP regional integration and trade. The third part looks at African regional trade agreements. Next, the article surveys the activities of sub-regional IP systems in Africa: the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) and the Organisation Africaine de la Propriété (OAPI). The fifth part looks at the recent formation of the Pan African Intellectual Property Organization (PAIPO) and its relationship with ARIPO and OAPI. The sixth part gives a brief overview of the efforts made in designing national IP polices. The concluding section summarizes the IP policy-making process in Africa.