Disney Deal Shows the Way for Responsible AI Development

While artificial intelligence (AI) companies have long maintained that copyright law poses a significant barrier to innovation, it’s getting harder for them to make that argument with a straight face. It was one thing to claim that early text-based chatbots were magical boxes that didn’t really depend on the copyrighted works used to train them—a pretense that doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. But it’s quite another to make such claims when their systems are spitting out nearly perfect audiovisual renditions of Disney’s copyrighted characters, including Buzz Lightyear from Toy Story, Darth Vader from Star Wars, and Elsa from Frozen. That’s what Midjourney was doing when Disney sued it for infringement, and it’s also what OpenAI was doing when it struck a licensing deal with Disney.

Patent Monetization: Markets, Misaligned Incentives, and the AI Inflection Point | IPWatchdog Unleashed

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, my conversation with patent broker Louis Carbonneau centers on a fundamental breakdown in the economic engine that has historically driven innovation. While innovation itself has not disappeared, the incentive structure that once enabled a repeatable cycle—innovate, patent, monetize, reinvest—has eroded. Large market participants increasingly operate under a “use now, pay later (if ever)” model, which disproportionately disadvantages individual inventors and smaller entities. As a result, many innovators are unable to sustain continued development beyond an initial breakthrough, leading to a systemic drag on long-term innovation output. This shift is reinforced by a broader cultural normalization of “free” access to intellectual property, which has migrated from the copyright into the patent and innovation industry.

Federal Circuit Affirms ITC Refusal to Block Import of Marine Air Conditioner Products

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Dometic Corp. v. International Trade Commission, affirming a final determination that Citimarine, L.L.C., and other intervenors did not violate Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The CAFC determined that the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) correctly concluded that Dometic Corp. and Dometic Sweden AB failed to prove a violation through the import of certain marine air conditioning systems. The court affirmed the ITC finding that several claims of the asserted patent are invalid for anticipation and that the accused products do not infringe the remaining claims.

SCOTUS Says Fifth Circuit Must Reconsider Contributory Infringement Ruling for Record Labels after Cox v. Sony

The U.S. Supreme Court today granted certiorari to a petition brought by internet service provider (ISP) Grande Communications Networks LLC, appealing from a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decision that upheld a jury verdict holding Grande Communications liable for contributory infringement against a group of major U.S. record labels. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and then vacated the judgment and remanded the case to the Fifth Circuit for reconsideration under the Court’s recent opinion in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment.

Is Your AI Investment Actually Paying Off? What Every IP Professional Needs to Know in 2026

If 2025 was the year every IP practice rushed to adopt AI, 2026 is the year the bill comes due — and a striking number of organizations are discovering they have no reliable way to read it. That was the organizing message from IPWatchdog LIVE 2026’s session: The Business Impact of AI in Practice: Calculating ROI in the AI Era.

Navigating Recent Developments in Generative AI and Trade Secret Protection

Two recent federal district court decisions highlight the significant risks of sharing confidential information with a generative AI platform. In Trinidad v. OpenAI, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s trade secret claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) because the plaintiff had voluntarily disclosed her allegedly proprietary frameworks to OpenAI while using ChatGPT to create them.Then, Judge Rakoff in United States v. Heppner held that documents created using publicly available generative AI are not protected by the attorney-client privilege—in part because communications memorialized through an AI platform are not confidential when the platform is not contractually bound to keep them secret.

Other Barks & Bites for Friday, April 3: Trump EO Sets 100% Tariffs on Patent Pharmaceutical Imports; Squires Vacates TikTok IPRs Under Tianma Microelectronics; and Kallay Voices DOJ’s Preference for FRAND Obligations

This week in Other Barks & Bites: the Federal Circuit rules that the omission of a co-inventor from a patent invalidates those patent claims if inventorship cannot be corrected; President Donald Trump signs an executive order placing 100% tariffs on drug companies who do not onshore production of patented pharmaceuticals; and more.

Subscribe to IPWatchdog

This is the best way to stay informed. We send a daily roundup of our latest news, press releases, and events.

Get Email Updates