FEED Validator

Congratulations!

This is a valid RSS feed.

Recommendations

This feed is valid, but interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations.

• line 12, column 88: Self reference doesn't match document location [help]

  ... rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
                                               ^

Source: http://feeds.feedburner.com/Ipwatchdog

1. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
2. xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
3. xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
4. xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
5. xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
6. xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
7. xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
8. >
9.  
10. <channel>
11. <title>IPWatchdog.com | Patents &amp; Intellectual Property Law</title>
12. <atom:link href="https://ipwatchdog.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
13. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com</link>
14. <description>Trusted on intellectual property law. News and commentary on patents, innovation policy, trade secrets, copyrights and trademarks.</description>
15. <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 18:48:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
16. <language>en-US</language>
17. <sy:updatePeriod>
18. hourly </sy:updatePeriod>
19. <sy:updateFrequency>
20. 1 </sy:updateFrequency>
21. <generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.3</generator>
22. <item>
23. <title>Other Barks and Bites for Friday, May 17: Senate AI Working Group Releases AI Policy Roadmap; Voice Actors Accuse AI Company of Stealing Their Voices; USPTO Accidentally Publishes Patent Application Titles</title>
24. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/17/barks-bites-senate-ai-working-group-releases-policy-roadmap-voice-actors-accuse-ai-company-stealing-voices/id=176636/</link>
25. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/17/barks-bites-senate-ai-working-group-releases-policy-roadmap-voice-actors-accuse-ai-company-stealing-voices/id=176636/#respond</comments>
27. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Alec Pronk]]></dc:creator>
28. <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 20:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
29. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
30. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
31. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
32. <category><![CDATA[other barks and bites]]></category>
33. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176636</guid>
34.  
35. <description><![CDATA[This Week in Other Barks and Bites: two voice actors file a class action lawsuit against an AI company accusing the firm of stealing their voice; the NMPA sends a cease-and-desist letter to Spotify asking the streaming company to pull unlicensed content from their platform; and the Senate AI Working Group releases a roadmap for Senate AI policy with scant attention to intellectual property.]]></description>
37. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/17/barks-bites-senate-ai-working-group-releases-policy-roadmap-voice-actors-accuse-ai-company-stealing-voices/id=176636/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
38. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
41. </item>
42. <item>
43. <title>MLC Expands Blanket License Enforcement Campaign With Lawsuit Against Spotify</title>
44. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/17/mlc-expands-blanket-license-enforcement-campaign-lawsuit-spotify/id=176627/</link>
45. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/17/mlc-expands-blanket-license-enforcement-campaign-lawsuit-spotify/id=176627/#respond</comments>
47. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></dc:creator>
48. <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2024 18:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
49. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
50. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
51. <category><![CDATA[Licensing]]></category>
52. <category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
53. <category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
54. <category><![CDATA[copyrights]]></category>
55. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
56. <category><![CDATA[Mechanical Licensing Collective]]></category>
57. <category><![CDATA[music licensing]]></category>
58. <category><![CDATA[Music Modernization Act]]></category>
59. <category><![CDATA[Spotify]]></category>
60. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176627</guid>
61.  
62. <description><![CDATA[On May 16, the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC), a non-profit entity responsible for administering blanket licenses enacted by the Music Modernization Act (MMA), filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York alleging that Swedish streaming media company Spotify has failed to meet its royalty obligations for MMA blanket licenses. The MLC alleges that Spotify’s recent decision to reclassify its Premium subscription service as a bundled subscription offering, leading the streaming company to reduce service revenue reported to the MLC by nearly 50%, is based on a faulty rationale that violates Spotify’s revenue reporting responsibilities for the service.]]></description>
64. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/17/mlc-expands-blanket-license-enforcement-campaign-lawsuit-spotify/id=176627/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
65. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
68. </item>
69. <item>
70. <title>Industry Tells USPTO Biden March-In Proposal Undermines Inquiry to Improve IP Commercialization</title>
71. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/industry-tells-uspto-biden-march-proposal-undermines-inquiry-improve-ip-commercialization/id=176587/</link>
72. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/industry-tells-uspto-biden-march-proposal-undermines-inquiry-improve-ip-commercialization/id=176587/#respond</comments>
74. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Eileen McDermott]]></dc:creator>
75. <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 21:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
76. <category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
77. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
78. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
79. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
80. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
81. <category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
82. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
83. <category><![CDATA[Bayh-Dole Act]]></category>
84. <category><![CDATA[Biden march-in framework]]></category>
85. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
86. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
87. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
88. <category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
89. <category><![CDATA[request for comments]]></category>
90. <category><![CDATA[RFC]]></category>
91. <category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
92. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176587</guid>
93.  
94. <description><![CDATA[Two days after comments closed on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) Request for Comments titled “Unlocking the Full Potential of Intellectual Property by Translating More Innovation to the Marketplace,” several groups have weighed in to urge the Office not to ignore the link between this topic and the Biden Administration’s recent proposal on march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act.]]></description>
96. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/industry-tells-uspto-biden-march-proposal-undermines-inquiry-improve-ip-commercialization/id=176587/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
97. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
100. </item>
101. <item>
102. <title>Vidal Addresses &#8216;Patent Examiner&#8217; Reddit Issue with USPTO Personnel</title>
103. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/vidal-officially-responds-patent-examiner-reddit-issue/id=176569/</link>
104. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/vidal-officially-responds-patent-examiner-reddit-issue/id=176569/#comments</comments>
106. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Eileen McDermott]]></dc:creator>
107. <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 18:17:22 +0000</pubDate>
108. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
109. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
110. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
111. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
112. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
113. <category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
114. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
115. <category><![CDATA[Kathi Vidal]]></category>
116. <category><![CDATA[Patent Examination]]></category>
117. <category><![CDATA[patent examiner Reddit]]></category>
118. <category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
119. <category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
120. <category><![CDATA[Reddit]]></category>
121. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176569</guid>
122.  
123. <description><![CDATA[As we have reported recently, IPWatchdog broke news last week about a Reddit thread dedicated to purported patent examiners in which one examiner asked their peers for advice on how to approach examination of patents that have purposes they may fundamentally disagree with politically--specifically, a patent geared toward Israeli military technology. At the time the story broke, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) indicated that it does not, as a general practice, comment on "unverified statements by anonymous commenters on Reddit or any other social media platform.”]]></description>
125. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/vidal-officially-responds-patent-examiner-reddit-issue/id=176569/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
126. <slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
129. </item>
130. <item>
131. <title>CAFC Dismisses Bid for PREP Act Protection Due to Lack of Jurisdiction Under Collateral Order Doctrine</title>
132. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/176531/id=176531/</link>
133. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/176531/id=176531/#respond</comments>
135. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Susan Smigielski Acker]]></dc:creator>
136. <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 15:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
137. <category><![CDATA[Courts]]></category>
138. <category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
139. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
140. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
141. <category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
142. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
143. <category><![CDATA[CAFC]]></category>
144. <category><![CDATA[collateral order doctrine]]></category>
145. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
146. <category><![CDATA[jurisdiction]]></category>
147. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
148. <category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation]]></category>
149. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176531</guid>
150.  
151. <description><![CDATA[The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Tuesday, May 14, in a precedential opinion, dismissed an appeal by Puritan Medical Products of a district court denial of its partial motion to dismiss a patent infringement case brought by Copan Italia S.p.A and Copan Diagnostics Inc. The case involved “flocked” swabs “for collecting biological specimens.” The claims cover “a rod [with] a tip covered with fiber with hydrophilic properties” that can absorb biological specimens.  Copan holds several patents on flocked swabs and methods of using them.]]></description>
153. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/176531/id=176531/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
154. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
157. </item>
158. <item>
159. <title>Patent Filings Roundup: Samsung Challenges Key Patent Innovations Patent, Theseus LF Asset Holdings Entity Launches New Campaign</title>
160. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/patent-filings-roundup-samsung-challenges-key-patent-innovations-patent-theseus-lf-asset-holdings-entity-launches-new-campaign/id=176546/</link>
161. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/patent-filings-roundup-samsung-challenges-key-patent-innovations-patent-theseus-lf-asset-holdings-entity-launches-new-campaign/id=176546/#comments</comments>
163. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Kelly Hughes]]></dc:creator>
164. <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 12:15:42 +0000</pubDate>
165. <category><![CDATA[Courts]]></category>
166. <category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
167. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
168. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
169. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
170. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
171. <category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
172. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
173. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
174. <category><![CDATA[America Invents Act]]></category>
175. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
176. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
177. <category><![CDATA[inter partes review]]></category>
178. <category><![CDATA[IPR]]></category>
179. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
180. <category><![CDATA[patent filings roundup]]></category>
181. <category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation]]></category>
182. <category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
183. <category><![CDATA[Patent Trial and Appeal Board]]></category>
184. <category><![CDATA[PTAB]]></category>
185. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176546</guid>
186.  
187. <description><![CDATA[It was a slow week for new patent filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and above average week for district courts. This week saw only 15 new filings at the PTAB (one PGR and 14 inter partes reviews (IPRs)). Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc. filed one third of the IPRs at the PTAB, challenging three Dexcom Inc. Patents in five IPRs. Amazon filed two IPRs against one Nokia Technologies OY [associated with Nokia Corporation] patent while Voltage LLC filed two IPRs challenging two Shoals Technologies Group, LLC patents. Pictiva Displays International Ltd. [associated with Key Patent Innovations Limited] had one patent challenged in an IPR by Samsung (discussed below).]]></description>
189. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/patent-filings-roundup-samsung-challenges-key-patent-innovations-patent-theseus-lf-asset-holdings-entity-launches-new-campaign/id=176546/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
190. <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
193. </item>
194. <item>
195. <title>Juristat is Seeking an IDS/Patent Specialist</title>
196. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/16/juristat-seeking-ids-patent-specialist-2/id=176510/</link>
198. <dc:creator><![CDATA[JobOrtunities Help Wanted]]></dc:creator>
199. <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2024 09:15:17 +0000</pubDate>
200. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
201. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
202. <category><![CDATA[JobOrtunities Job Board]]></category>
203. <category><![CDATA[Juristat]]></category>
204. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176510</guid>
205.  
206. <description><![CDATA[Juristat is seeking a highly motivated and organized individual to join its data team as IDS Patent Specialist. This group provides a personalized human level of input to Juristat's AI software and is a critical component of its team. This team member will work with proprietary automation software to prepare patent application disclosures, e-file Information Disclosure Statements (“IDSs”) with the USPTO, manage patent literature, upload information to databases, and confidentially maintain client information and files. This role is 100% remote with optional office space for in-person meetings/gatherings at the St. Louis, MO, headquarters and may be available in additional locations as Juristat grows.]]></description>
210. </item>
211. <item>
212. <title>Panelists Push for Predictability at IPWatchdog’s 2024 Patent Litigation Masters Program</title>
213. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/panelists-push-predictability-ipwatchdogs-patent-litigation-masters-program/id=176503/</link>
214. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/panelists-push-predictability-ipwatchdogs-patent-litigation-masters-program/id=176503/#respond</comments>
216. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Eileen McDermott]]></dc:creator>
217. <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 19:15:47 +0000</pubDate>
218. <category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
219. <category><![CDATA[Courts]]></category>
220. <category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
221. <category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
222. <category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
223. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
224. <category><![CDATA[International]]></category>
225. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
226. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
227. <category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
228. <category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
229. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
230. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
231. <category><![CDATA[CAFC]]></category>
232. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
233. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
234. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
235. <category><![CDATA[patent infringement]]></category>
236. <category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation]]></category>
237. <category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation Masters]]></category>
238. <category><![CDATA[Patent Trial and Appeal Board]]></category>
239. <category><![CDATA[Patentability]]></category>
240. <category><![CDATA[patentability requirements]]></category>
241. <category><![CDATA[PTAB]]></category>
242. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176503</guid>
243.  
244. <description><![CDATA["Make it happen.” That was the request U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Judge Pauline Newman made of attendees of IPWatchdog’s Patent Litigation Masters 2024 program on Monday, imploring them to “think creatively” to solve the intellectual property problems of today. Pointing to developments such as the Unified Patent Court (UPC), Newman said “it’s a time of change and flux, and we can learn a good deal, not only from the UPC, but the way the law is developing in jurisdictions like Japan and China.”]]></description>
246. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/panelists-push-predictability-ipwatchdogs-patent-litigation-masters-program/id=176503/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
247. <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
250. </item>
251. <item>
252. <title>Tillis, Issa, Kiley Ask Vidal to Investigate Issues Raised by ‘Patent Examiner&#8217; Reddit Thread</title>
253. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/tillis-issa-kiley-ask-vidal-investigate-issues-raised-patent-examiner-reddit-thread/id=176533/</link>
254. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/tillis-issa-kiley-ask-vidal-investigate-issues-raised-patent-examiner-reddit-thread/id=176533/#comments</comments>
256. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Eileen McDermott]]></dc:creator>
257. <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 18:15:07 +0000</pubDate>
258. <category><![CDATA[Capitol Hill]]></category>
259. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
260. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
261. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
262. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
263. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
264. <category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
265. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
266. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
267. <category><![CDATA[patent examiner Reddit]]></category>
268. <category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
269. <category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
270. <category><![CDATA[Representative Darrell Issa]]></category>
271. <category><![CDATA[Representative Kevin Kiley]]></category>
272. <category><![CDATA[Senator Thom Tillis]]></category>
273. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176533</guid>
274.  
275. <description><![CDATA[Last week, IPWatchdog’s CEO and Founder Gene Quinn exposed a “Patent Examiner Reddit” thread in which a purported examiner asked peers for advice on how to approach examination of patents that have purposes they may fundamentally disagree with politically. Now, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Representatives Kevin Kiley (R-CA) and Darrell Issa (R-CA) have sent a letter to U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal asking the Office to conduct a review into that matter, as well as “a broader investigation into whether there is a pattern of patent examiners substituting their own preferences and beliefs for the law and USPTO guidance.”]]></description>
277. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/tillis-issa-kiley-ask-vidal-investigate-issues-raised-patent-examiner-reddit-thread/id=176533/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
278. <slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
281. </item>
282. <item>
283. <title>Chestek Takes Challenge of USPTO Domicile Address Rule for Trademark Applicants to High Court</title>
284. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/chestek-takes-challenge-uspto-domicile-address-rule-trademark-applicants-high-court/id=176494/</link>
285. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/chestek-takes-challenge-uspto-domicile-address-rule-trademark-applicants-high-court/id=176494/#comments</comments>
287. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></dc:creator>
288. <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 16:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
289. <category><![CDATA[Courts]]></category>
290. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
291. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
292. <category><![CDATA[Litigation]]></category>
293. <category><![CDATA[Trademark]]></category>
294. <category><![CDATA[US Supreme Court]]></category>
295. <category><![CDATA[domicile address requirement]]></category>
296. <category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
297. <category><![CDATA[In re Chestek]]></category>
298. <category><![CDATA[notice and comment]]></category>
299. <category><![CDATA[rulemaking]]></category>
300. <category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
301. <category><![CDATA[trademark]]></category>
302. <category><![CDATA[trademarks]]></category>
303. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176494</guid>
304.  
305. <description><![CDATA[On May 13, trademark law firm Chestek PLLC filed a petition for writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a challenge to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) promulgation of rules requiring trademark applicants to disclose their domicile address to the agency. According to Chestek’s petition, the Federal Circuit’s lower ruling improperly reads the agency’s notice-and-comment requirement for all general rulemaking out of the relevant statute, here resulting in the unwanted disclosure of sensitive personal information that could put certain trademark applicants at risk of stalking or abuse.]]></description>
307. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/chestek-takes-challenge-uspto-domicile-address-rule-trademark-applicants-high-court/id=176494/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
308. <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
311. </item>
312. <item>
313. <title>Waning Trust in the Judiciary is Threatening Our Nation’s Reputation as a Beacon for Justice</title>
314. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/waning-trust-judiciary-threatening-nations-reputation-beacon-justice/id=176488/</link>
315. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/waning-trust-judiciary-threatening-nations-reputation-beacon-justice/id=176488/#comments</comments>
317. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Hon. Pauline Newman]]></dc:creator>
318. <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 11:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
319. <category><![CDATA[Courts]]></category>
320. <category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
321. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
322. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
323. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
324. <category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
325. <category><![CDATA[CAFC]]></category>
326. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
327. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
328. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
329. <category><![CDATA[Judge Pauline Newman]]></category>
330. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
331. <category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation]]></category>
332. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176488</guid>
333.  
334. <description><![CDATA[IP litigation is becoming more and more complicated—and more and more interesting. It is most important—extremely important to the nation, and all nations—that advances in technology be accompanied by full and fair dispute resolution and by fair and just law. Justice—this is where the judges come in. The target of litigation is the judge. The judge will decide who wins and who loses—that’s what judges do. These elaborate techniques we’re talking about at this meeting have only one purpose—to persuade the judge that you’re right and the opponent is wrong.]]></description>
336. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/15/waning-trust-judiciary-threatening-nations-reputation-beacon-justice/id=176488/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
337. <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
340. </item>
341. <item>
342. <title>USPTO Steps in for Congress in Attempt to Legislate on Terminal Disclaimers</title>
343. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/uspto-steps-congress-attempt-legislate-terminal-disclaimers/id=176484/</link>
344. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/uspto-steps-congress-attempt-legislate-terminal-disclaimers/id=176484/#comments</comments>
346. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Sherry Knowles]]></dc:creator>
347. <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 19:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
348. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
349. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
350. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
351. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
352. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
353. <category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
354. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
355. <category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
356. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
357. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
358. <category><![CDATA[Notice of Proposed Rulemaking]]></category>
359. <category><![CDATA[NPRM]]></category>
360. <category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
361. <category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
362. <category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
363. <category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
364. <category><![CDATA[terminal disclaimers]]></category>
365. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176484</guid>
366.  
367. <description><![CDATA[By now, you are aware that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on May 10, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 40439), that would dramatically alter patent applicant and patentee statutory rights in their patent filings by proposing a draconian change to the requirements for submission of a terminal disclaimer (TD). Several blogs, including IPWatchdog, have reported on it. Comments are due by July 10, 2024.]]></description>
369. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/uspto-steps-congress-attempt-legislate-terminal-disclaimers/id=176484/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
370. <slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
373. </item>
374. <item>
375. <title>Why IP Rights Expire and Why They Must Be Strong While They Last</title>
376. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/ip-rights-expire-must-strong-last/id=176477/</link>
377. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/ip-rights-expire-must-strong-last/id=176477/#comments</comments>
379. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Patrick Kilbride]]></dc:creator>
380. <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 16:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
381. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
382. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
383. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
384. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
385. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
386. <category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
387. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
388. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
389. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
390. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
391. <category><![CDATA[IP rights]]></category>
392. <category><![CDATA[non-rival goods]]></category>
393. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
394. <category><![CDATA[patent infringement]]></category>
395. <category><![CDATA[policy]]></category>
396. <category><![CDATA[rival goods]]></category>
397. <category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
398. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176477</guid>
399.  
400. <description><![CDATA[Imagine building a house and by law, 20 years from completion, all ownership rights to the asset expired permanently whether retained by the original owner or obtained through purchase. Notwithstanding rising real estate values, the ability to reap the benefit of that asset’s appreciation would decrease rapidly for every year the property was owned. After 20 years, as the house passed into the public domain, you might continue to live there, but its investment or resale value would effectively become zero. This is the reality for intellectual property rights, which are time-limited by law, a condition established by the U.S. Constitution.]]></description>
402. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/ip-rights-expire-must-strong-last/id=176477/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
403. <slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
406. </item>
407. <item>
408. <title>A Creeper: Absorbing Generative AI into the Inventive Process</title>
409. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/creeper-absorbing-generative-ai-inventive-process/id=176466/</link>
410. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/creeper-absorbing-generative-ai-inventive-process/id=176466/#comments</comments>
412. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Raina Haque]]></dc:creator>
413. <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 11:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
414. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
415. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
416. <category><![CDATA[Inventors Information]]></category>
417. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
418. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
419. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
420. <category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
421. <category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
422. <category><![CDATA[artificial intelligence]]></category>
423. <category><![CDATA[generative AI]]></category>
424. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
425. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
426. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
427. <category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
428. <category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
429. <category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
430. <category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
431. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176466</guid>
432.  
433. <description><![CDATA[The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) recent Request for Comments (RFC) on the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) highlights a critical juncture in intellectual property law—evaluating the impact of generative AI (GenAI) on the non-obviousness standard. As GenAI technologies integrate deeply with human intellect, possibly even enhancing cognitive capacities, we must reassess what constitutes “progress” and the constitutional value that intellectual property law was envisioned to advance.]]></description>
435. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/14/creeper-absorbing-generative-ai-inventive-process/id=176466/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
436. <slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
439. </item>
440. <item>
441. <title>Making Licensing Harder Doesn’t Boost U.S. Manufacturing</title>
442. <link>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/13/making-licensing-harder-doesnt-boost-u-s-manufacturing/id=176473/</link>
443. <comments>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/13/making-licensing-harder-doesnt-boost-u-s-manufacturing/id=176473/#comments</comments>
445. <dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph Allen]]></dc:creator>
446. <pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2024 20:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
447. <category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
448. <category><![CDATA[Capitol Hill]]></category>
449. <category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
450. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
451. <category><![CDATA[Inventors Information]]></category>
452. <category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
453. <category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog Articles]]></category>
454. <category><![CDATA[Licensing]]></category>
455. <category><![CDATA[Patents]]></category>
456. <category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
457. <category><![CDATA[Bayh-Dole Act]]></category>
458. <category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
459. <category><![CDATA[domestic manufacturing]]></category>
460. <category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
461. <category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
462. <category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
463. <category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
464. <category><![CDATA[R&D]]></category>
465. <category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
466. <guid isPermaLink="false">https://ipwatchdog.com/?p=176473</guid>
467.  
468. <description><![CDATA[While it’s appropriate to lament the lack of bipartisan cooperation in Washington, just because something’s bipartisan doesn't mean it’s a good idea. Exhibit A could be Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Senator J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) “Invent It Here, Make It Here” bill. Despite the name and its good intentions, it condemns promising federally funded inventions to waste away without doing a thing to build our domestic manufacturing base. It’s scheduled to be considered this Thursday in the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.]]></description>
470. <wfw:commentRss>https://ipwatchdog.com/2024/05/13/making-licensing-harder-doesnt-boost-u-s-manufacturing/id=176473/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
471. <slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
474. </item>
475. </channel>
476. </rss>
477.  
478. <!-- plugin=object-cache-pro client=phpredis metric#hits=9233 metric#misses=68 metric#hit-ratio=99.3 metric#bytes=6373515 metric#prefetches=742 metric#store-reads=63 metric#store-writes=4 metric#store-hits=750 metric#store-misses=61 metric#sql-queries=11 metric#ms-total=270.08 metric#ms-cache=37.40 metric#ms-cache-avg=0.5666 metric#ms-cache-ratio=13.9 -->
479.  

If you would like to create a banner that links to this page (i.e. this validation result), do the following:

1. Download the "valid RSS" banner.

2. Upload the image to your own server. (This step is important. Please do not link directly to the image on this server.)

3. Add this HTML to your page (change the image src attribute if necessary):

   <a href="http://www.feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A//feeds.feedburner.com/Ipwatchdog"><img src="valid-rss-rogers.png" alt="[Valid RSS]" title="Validate my RSS feed" /></a>

If you would like to create a text link instead, here is the URL you can use:

http://www.feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A//feeds.feedburner.com/Ipwatchdog

Home · About · News · Docs · Terms