Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • TRADE SECRETS—E.D. Mich.: Jury award of $105 million against Ford Motor Co. over trade secrets tossed
    • COPYRIGHT—N.D. Cal.: In ISP lawsuit, unnamed Reddit commentators are protected by the First Amendment
    • PATENT—Fed. Cir.: Hormel Foods defeats patent inventorship ruling on appeal
    • STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES: AI-human collaboration examined in new article by Vinson and Elkins IP team
    • TRADE SECRETS—C.D. Ill.: Inevitable disclosure doctrine supports trade secret misappropriation claims under federal and Illinois law
    • TRADEMARK—TTAB.: Specialty wine mark RAO’S not confusable with registered mark RAO’s for restaurant services
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    IP Law Daily, STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES: AI-human collaboration examined in new article by Vinson and Elkins IP team, (May 2, 2023)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Vinson & Elkins LLP
    Organizations Mentioned:Vinson & Elkins, LLP

    By WK Editorial Staff

    Recent developments in copyright and patent law raise more questions than answers.

    An article appearing in The Licensing Journal by Vinson and Elkins intellectual property attorneys Eric Klein, Parker Hancock and Briana Falcon examines whether creativ ...

    By WK Editorial Staff

    Recent developments in copyright and patent law raise more questions than answers.

    An article appearing in The Licensing Journal by Vinson and Elkins intellectual property attorneys Eric Klein, Parker Hancock and Briana Falcon examines whether creative works and useful inventions developed in collaboration with artificial intelligence tools are entitled to copyright and patent protection.

    Where AI systems allegedly work alone, the USPTO and Copyright Office agree that their work product is neither copyrightable nor patentable for lack of a human creator. However, it remains unclear whether inventions and creative works are entitled to protection where humans and AI work collaboratively. Drawing on recent Copyright Office actions, the authors advise that “AI tools should be limited in their application to valuable creative works to ensure at least some valuable portion retains copyright protection.” Patent applicants must name a human inventor and “be prepared to explain why any AI tool used in the invention’s development did not contribute to the conception of the invention.”

    The article, “Your New AI Coworker: How Working with AI Raises New Patent and Copyright Challenges,” appears in The Licensing Journal, Vol. 43, No. 4, April 2023.

    Attorneys: Eric Klein, Parker Hancock and Briana Falcon (Vinson & Elkins LLP).

    MainStory: Copyright IndustryNewsTrends Patent TechnologyInternet USPTO

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use