About
Intellectual Property

Intellectual Property

Tracking how courts, the USPTO, and Congress are reshaping patents, copyrights, and trademarks - enforcement, AI inventorship, and cross-border IP.

23 entries in Legal Intelligence Tracker

LawSnap Briefing Updated May 11, 2026

State of play.

  • AI-generated likeness and right-of-publicity enforcement is accelerating on multiple fronts. New York's synthetic performer consent laws take effect June 19, 2026, Dua Lipa has sued Samsung for $15 million over unauthorized image use in TV packaging, and the NO FAKES Act remains pending federally — creating a compliance crunch for brands and agencies operating across jurisdictions .
  • AI training data copyright is at a doctrinal inflection point. Anthropic has argued transformative fair use for Claude's training in California federal court, while the $1.5 billion Bartz v. Anthropic class settlement — covering over 100,000 rights holders — moves toward a fairness hearing, with the outcome likely to set a damages benchmark for the field .
  • The Federal Circuit has closed the appellate door on PTAB real-party-in-interest challenges, ruling in FedEx v. Qualcomm that RPI objections are integral to the institution decision and unreviewable under § 314(d) — a structural shift in IPR strategy that requires front-loading RPI arguments before institution .
  • Cross-border AI-IP divergence is now a compliance planning problem, not a theoretical one. China, the UK/EU, and the US apply materially different standards to AI-generated outputs — with the EU AI Act binding in August 2026 — and no jurisdiction has produced settled guidance on agentic AI ownership .
  • For counsel advising technology companies, entertainment clients, or patent-heavy portfolios, the practical baseline is that AI is simultaneously reshaping the tools of IP practice (USPTO's new image search), the substance of IP doctrine (fair use for training data, synthetic performer consent), and the procedural landscape (PTAB finality), all on overlapping timelines.

Where things stand.

  • AI training data fair use remains unsettled but is generating settlement precedent. Anthropic's transformative fair use argument in California and the Bartz class settlement are the two most immediate data points; approval of the settlement could establish a damages floor that shapes every subsequent AI copyright negotiation .
  • Synthetic performer and digital replica laws are now operative at the state level. New York's Fashion Workers Act and synthetic performer disclosure laws (effective June 19, 2026) require explicit model consent and AI avatar disclaimers; California's AB 2602/AB 1836 operate in parallel; the federal NO FAKES Act is pending; and the White House's preemption push creates a potential collision with state mandates .
  • Right-of-publicity and Lanham Act enforcement is active in federal court. The Dua Lipa v. Samsung complaint — alleging copyright infringement, trademark infringement, right of publicity violations, and false endorsement over a manipulated backstage photograph used on TV packaging — tests the outer boundary of image rights in mass-market consumer goods and the damages exposure when a cease-and-desist is ignored .
  • PTAB institution finality has hardened. The Federal Circuit's precedential ruling in FedEx v. Qualcomm forecloses appellate review of RPI determinations made at the institution stage, eliminating a procedural avenue petitioners had used to challenge unfavorable outcomes .
  • Patent disclosure irrevocably forfeits trade secret protection. The Federal Circuit's ruling in International Medical Devices v. Cornell confirms that dual patent-and-trade-secret strategies on the same subject matter create litigation vulnerability — a portfolio audit trigger for medtech and any patent-heavy sector .
  • AI-generated code ownership is unresolved. Autonomous coding agents capable of producing production-ready software from user specifications are deployed commercially, but no court or regulator has determined whether ownership vests in the user, the AI developer, or neither .
  • Cross-border AI-IP divergence requires jurisdiction-specific governance. China protects AI outputs with meaningful human input; the UK and EU require human authorship; the US relies on human contribution and fair use — and the EU AI Act's August 2026 binding date adds a hard compliance deadline for multinationals .
  • USPTO has deployed AI tools across trademark examination. The beta AI-powered image search tool, a mark description generator, and the Class ACT classification automation tool are now available — supplementing but not replacing comprehensive clearance searches, particularly for design-heavy applications .
  • Federal legislative pressure is building but unresolved. The AI Foundation Model Transparency Act (H.R. 8094) imposes disclosure-only obligations on LLM developers; the Trump America AI Act discussion draft would codify federal preemption of state AI laws; over 600 state AI bills were introduced in Q1 2026 alone .
  • The Musk v. OpenAI trial is testing whether founder commitments are legally enforceable. Musk's testimony that OpenAI's nonprofit-to-for-profit conversion constituted breach of foundational commitments — with OpenAI valued at $852 billion — raises questions about the enforceability of informal founding agreements in high-stakes tech ventures .

Latest developments.

Active questions and open splits.

  • Whether AI training constitutes transformative fair use. Anthropic's California filing and the Bartz settlement are on parallel tracks — a court ruling on the fair use argument and a settlement approval could produce contradictory signals on the same conduct within weeks of each other .
  • Federal preemption vs. state synthetic performer laws. New York and California have enacted consent-based digital replica regimes; the White House preemption push and the pending NO FAKES Act create a collision course — brands complying with state law today may face a different federal standard by year-end .
  • Who owns AI-generated code. No court has resolved whether production-ready software generated by autonomous agents vests ownership in the user, the AI developer, or falls into the public domain — making IP representations in M&A and licensing transactions a live exposure .
  • RPI front-loading as IPR strategy imperative. FedEx v. Qualcomm forecloses appellate correction of PTAB RPI determinations — the open question is how aggressively patent owners will now press RPI objections pre-institution and whether PTAB will develop more rigorous pre-institution RPI procedures in response .
  • Patent-vs.-trade-secret dual protection viability. International Medical Devices v. Cornell confirms that patent disclosure forfeits trade secret status under California's UTSA — but the split on trade secret identification requirements under the DTSA in federal courts remains active, and the interaction between federal DTSA standards and state UTSA applications is unsettled .
  • Cross-border AI-IP governance gap for agentic systems. China, UK/EU, and US apply materially different standards to AI-generated outputs; no jurisdiction has produced guidance on agentic AI specifically; and the EU AI Act's August 2026 binding date creates a hard compliance deadline that may force multinationals to implement governance frameworks before doctrine is settled .
  • Lanham Act false endorsement scope in digital manipulation cases. The Dua Lipa complaint tests whether manipulating and redistributing a celebrity's owned photograph in product packaging — without any licensing relationship — constitutes actionable false endorsement, and what damages theory (profits, statutory, or actual) governs when a cease-and-desist is ignored .

What to watch.

  • The May 14, 2026 Bartz v. Anthropic fairness hearing — approval or rejection will set the damages reference point for AI copyright settlements and signal how courts will treat the fair use argument in parallel litigation.
  • New York's June 19, 2026 effective date for synthetic performer consent laws — expect enforcement guidance from the Department of Labor and early compliance disputes from brands that have already deployed AI avatars.
  • The EU AI Act's August 2026 binding date — the first binding multilateral AI regulation, with €15 million penalty exposure for non-compliant AI-altered content labeling.
  • Samsung's response in the Dua Lipa litigation — the defense theory (third-party licensing, fair use, or consent) will define the litigation posture for celebrity image manipulation cases in the consumer electronics sector.
  • Whether Congress formally introduces the Trump America AI Act or advances H.R. 8094, and whether either bill addresses copyright liability for AI training data in a way that preempts the pending fair use litigation.
  • PTAB's procedural response to FedEx v. Qualcomm — whether the board develops more rigorous pre-institution RPI procedures now that appellate correction is foreclosed.

23 Contributing Entries

Apple sues OpenAI and two ex-employees for stealing trade secrets to build AI hardware

Apple sued OpenAI and two former Apple employees on Friday, July 10, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging coordinated theft of trade secrets to accelerate OpenAI's consumer hardware development. The complaint names Chang Liu and Tang Tan as defendants and accuses OpenAI of orchestrating a campaign to recruit Apple staff and extract confidential project information, including technical drawings and component specifications. Apple alleges that Tan, while still employed there, used insider knowledge of confidential projects to extract proprietary information from job candidates during OpenAI interviews before his departure.

Apple sues OpenAI, alleging coordinated trade secret theft for AI hardware

On July 10, 2026, Apple filed a federal lawsuit in the Northern District of California against OpenAI, former Apple executives Tang Tan and Chang Liu, and io Products, LLC, alleging a coordinated scheme to steal trade secrets and accelerate OpenAI's entry into consumer hardware. The complaint accuses OpenAI of systematically acquiring confidential Apple information—including product designs, manufacturing processes, and supply chain strategies for the iPhone, Apple Watch, and MacBook—to build competing AI devices.

Brands Warn as Creators Flood TikTok Shop with AI Avatar Affiliate Videos

TikTok Shop is being flooded with AI-generated product demonstrations, fake creator personas, and duplicate avatars that are undercutting human creators and eroding consumer trust. Merchants and affiliate creators are using TikTok's built-in AI tools to mass-produce makeup tutorials, clothing reviews, and product showcases without holding inventory—a low-cost strategy that prioritizes algorithmic reach over authenticity. Some operators have deployed synthetic personas, including a fabricated Black creator named "Aliyah," to sell dropshipped goods from retailers like Shein, exploiting algorithmic biases that reward emotional connection to creators.

Fastcase Sues Alexi Over Unauthorized AI Training Using Licensed Case Law

Fastcase Inc., the legal research platform owned by Clio, sued Canadian AI company Alexi Technologies Inc. in federal court in Washington, D.C. on November 26, 2025, alleging breach of a 2021 data license agreement. Fastcase claims Alexi used licensed case law to train commercial generative AI models and display full-text decisions to users—uses explicitly prohibited under the original contract's "internal research purposes" restriction. The agreement permitted Alexi's staff attorneys to prepare client memoranda using the data, not to build a public, competing legal research platform. Fastcase seeks an injunction requiring Alexi to destroy both the datasets and the AI models trained on them, treating the model weights as infringing derivative works.

UN releases 2026 International AI Safety Report warning of enormous benefits and existential risks

The United Nations released the International AI Safety Report 2026, a comprehensive assessment concluding that advanced artificial intelligence presents both transformative opportunities and escalating dangers. The report, led by the UN agency for digital technology, finds that AI can accelerate development in health, education, and financial services in developing nations while simultaneously enabling cyberattacks, deepfake fraud, non-consensual intimate imagery, and biological weapon design. The core finding: AI capabilities in critical fields like biological research are advancing faster than governance frameworks, creating a dangerous gap between what is technologically possible and what remains safe.

Apple Sues OpenAI and Hardware Chief Tang Tan for Alleged Trade Secret Theft to Build Competing Devices

Apple filed a federal lawsuit on July 10, 2026, alleging that OpenAI and its chief hardware officer Tang Tan orchestrated a systematic campaign to steal confidential trade secrets related to unreleased Apple products. According to the complaint, OpenAI encouraged former Apple employees and job candidates to share components, drawings, and internal product information to accelerate OpenAI's own hardware development efforts.

UK lawmaker sues xAI to block Grok from making sexualised images

British Labour MP Jess Asato has filed a High Court claim against xAI, alleging that its Grok chatbot generated and distributed sexually explicit fake images of her without consent. Asato seeks damages, a judicial declaration that the conduct was unlawful, and an injunction prohibiting xAI from using Grok to produce similar images. The claim invokes the UK Data Protection Act and the tort of misuse of private information. According to reporting, the abusive images appeared after Asato publicly criticized Grok in 2026, and her office has documented additional content including a fabricated bikini image and a video depicting her in a sexual assault scenario.

California expands PFAS fraud case against DuPont spinoffs over asset transfers

California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a Second Amended Complaint in the state's PFAS litigation, alleging that DuPont-related companies executed fraudulent asset transfers designed to shield themselves from environmental liability. The complaint targets E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, DuPont de Nemours, Inc., Corteva, Inc., The Chemours Company, and newly created Qnity Electronics. Bonta contends that corporate restructuring and amended agreements shifted the bulk of PFAS-related liabilities onto Chemours while reducing exposure for New DuPont, Corteva, and Qnity Electronics. The filing invokes the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act and the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, and seeks relief in U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina.

Apple Sues OpenAI for Trade Secret Theft Amid Hardware Partnership Rupture

Apple sued OpenAI on Friday, July 10, 2026, alleging that the AI company orchestrated the theft of trade secrets related to unreleased Apple hardware. The complaint names OpenAI, CEO Sam Altman, and two former Apple employees who allegedly retained system access after joining OpenAI and shared confidential product specifications, component designs, and technical drawings. Apple contends OpenAI used this material to accelerate development of competing AI devices.

OpenAI seeks to dismiss Apple’s trade-secrets lawsuit over hardware hiring

OpenAI has moved to dismiss Apple's trade-secrets lawsuit, arguing in a federal filing that Apple failed to identify any protectable trade secrets or demonstrate plausible misappropriation. OpenAI contends it is developing "something entirely new" rather than leveraging Apple's confidential information. The motion represents the latest escalation in a dispute centered on whether OpenAI improperly accessed Apple's consumer-hardware plans through two former Apple employees now working at the company.

ShieldFont launches as an open-source font to poison AI web scrapers

Seneda & Abrucio, a Brazilian creative studio, has launched ShieldFont in collaboration with Danish type foundry PlayType—a typeface designed to deceive AI scrapers while remaining legible to human readers. The font works by substituting the HTML source text with grammatically plausible decoy words while rendering the intended text on-screen through a custom backend. Type designer Jeppe Pendrup adapted the font from PlayType's Optik typeface. The project is open-source and free, accompanied by a published white paper detailing the method and its limitations.

August 10, 2026
Details arrow_forward

California Judge Keeps Flextronics IP-Theft Suit Against Former GC Deputy Alive

A federal judge in California has refused to dismiss a lawsuit accusing Christopher Ricci, former deputy general counsel at Flextronics AP LLC, of orchestrating the transfer of company patents to AutoConnect, a Virginia startup he secretly co-founded. The decision allows Flextronics' claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and trade secret misappropriation to proceed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under case number 5:26-cv-00117-PCP.

OpenAI Rejects Apple’s Injunction Bid in Trade-Secret Fight

Apple has escalated its trade-secret lawsuit against OpenAI by seeking a preliminary injunction in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, asking the court to block OpenAI and several former Apple employees from using or disclosing confidential Apple information. The lawsuit, filed in July 2026, alleges a coordinated pattern of employee poaching and misappropriation of trade secrets to support OpenAI's hardware development efforts. Named defendants include Tang Tan, OpenAI's hardware chief and former Apple design executive, and Chang Liu, a former Apple engineer. Apple also targets io Products, OpenAI's hardware-linked entity, and seeks depositions from additional OpenAI staff. OpenAI has publicly characterized Apple's case as "careless" and "oddly personal," denying it possesses or seeks Apple trade secrets.

Wachtell’s Justin Orr honored after OpenAI recapitalization and fundraising work

Justin Orr of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz has been named to Law360's list of technology attorneys under 40, recognition tied to his central role in OpenAI's October 2025 recapitalization and the company's subsequent record-breaking financing rounds. The recapitalization restructured OpenAI into a for-profit corporation housed within a nonprofit foundation, with the foundation retaining control and significant equity. The transaction also included material revisions to Microsoft's intellectual property rights through 2032. Wachtell simultaneously advised OpenAI on major financing rounds, including a $110 billion raise announced in February 2026 and a subsequent $122 billion round—reported as the largest funding round on record—that valued OpenAI at $852 billion.

Connecticut judge fines attorney $3,500 over AI errors in taco trademark case

A Connecticut federal judge imposed a $3,500 fine on defense attorney Hilary B. Miller and referred him to the Federal Grievance Committee after he filed two motions containing AI-generated errors in a trademark dispute. The filings included misstated case holdings and fabricated citations. Miller represented Tacobarn entities in a trademark infringement case brought by Bartaco, a restaurant chain with approximately 31 locations. The judge struck both motions from the docket and found that Miller's conduct demonstrated subjective bad faith despite his stated remorse and promises to strengthen his verification procedures.

Apple Sues OpenAI for Trade Secret Theft Over AI Hardware Plans

Apple sued OpenAI on July 10, 2026, in federal court in California, alleging the AI company systematically stole trade secrets to build competing consumer hardware and AI devices. The complaint names OpenAI's Chief Hardware Officer Tang Tan and two former Apple employees, accusing them of a coordinated scheme to recruit Apple staff and direct job candidates to bring proprietary components, prototypes, and engineering documents to interviews. Apple seeks damages, injunctions, and an order prohibiting OpenAI from using the stolen information.

Connecticut Judge Fines Lawyer $3,500 Over AI-Fabricated Quotes in Taco Trademark Case

A Connecticut federal judge imposed a $3,500 sanction against defense attorney Hilary B. Miller after finding that two motions he filed in a trademark dispute over a taco restaurant contained AI-generated errors, including fabricated quotations, false citations, and misstatements of law. U.S. District Judge Vernon D. Oliver for the District of Connecticut initially flagged the filings in June, identifying multiple erroneous citations and quotations that did not exist and concluding the submissions relied on generative AI without adequate verification. In the sanctions order, the court acknowledged Miller's apology and stated commitment to revising his verification procedures, yet still found the conduct reflected "subjective bad faith."

AI naming gets harder as startups seek distinctive, legally usable agent names

Generative AI has made producing brand names trivial—but solving the actual problem of finding one that works has not gotten easier. A recent commentary frames this as the "naming trap": founders can now generate hundreds of candidate names in minutes, yet still hit hard walls when it comes to trademark clearance, market differentiation, and legal availability. The real bottleneck has simply shifted from ideation to execution.

Villanova study finds readers often prefer AI-written stories when authorship is hidden

Villanova University researchers have found that readers frequently rate AI-generated short stories as better written and more engaging than human-written ones—particularly when they believe the work came from a person. The study, led by Deena Weisberg and published in Judgment and Decision Making, tested readers against multiple fictional stories and found that AI-generated versions scored higher on quality and reader absorption in blind evaluations. The core finding is not that AI consistently outperforms human writers, but that readers often cannot distinguish between the two and may even prefer AI text when authorship is misattributed.

DOJ Establishes AI Litigation Task Force as Courts Adapt AI Discovery Tools

The Department of Justice announced the establishment of an Artificial Intelligence Litigation Task Force on January 9, 2026, formalizing AI's role in federal legal operations. The Task Force will oversee how the DOJ integrates AI into litigation workflows, marking an institutional shift from experimental adoption to regulated practice. The move reflects broader industry momentum: legal technology firms including Esquire Solutions, Baker Botts, and Lexis+ AI are now advising law firms on AI-assisted discovery and technology competence as standard practice rather than competitive advantage.

mail Subscribe to Intellectual Property email updates

Primary sources. No fluff. Straight to your inbox.

Also on LawSnap