Laws, Vol. 14, Pages 67: Religious Actors as Friction Creators Shaping the AI Dialogue Laws doi: 10.3390/laws14050067 Authors: Whittney Barth The unfolding story of AI
is just as much a story about us as it is about technology, and the complete arc of this story remains to be seen. [...]
AbstractThe human right to science, including the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress, is by far the least understood human right despite its central role in
shaping scientific innovation. Research into innovative cancer therapies and biotechnologies has been pivotal in the realization of much of these advancements. [...]
AbstractThis article examines how the principle of ‘the best interests of the child’, as enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), is interpreted, constructed,
and applied in court cases involving child custody disputes. These disputes provide a globally relevant example of the CRC’s social dynamics, as they often involve [...]
AbstractOutput based on artificial intelligence (AI) has been the subject of animated debate in recent years. This article focuses on one facet of these discussions, namely
the search for a legal framework for AI-based work-like output. Amid ongoing debates over whether copyright law or alternative (IP) regimes should reward or incentivise [...]
AbstractThe article explores how patent law can play a key role in addressing climate change. Since incentivizing the development of green technologies by intervening in upstream
patentability requirements or procedures, or in the scope of patent rights, proves challenging, an alternative lies in facilitating the dissemination of patented [...]
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, Art. 6bis; Law of Ukraine No. 3689-XII dated 15 December 1993 ‘On the Protection of Rights to Marks for Goods
and Services’, Art. 25 – Citramon [...]
AbstractOn 23 October 2024, in Case T-25/23, the General Court of the EU, for the first time found, in essence, that a registered EU design which consists of views that are
not conclusive and present at least two different designs must be deemed invalid. [...]
