About the Program:

This CLE program provides attorneys with a substantive overview of current developments in U.S. patent law and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) practices as they relate to artificial intelligence (AI) inventions. As AI technologies continue to evolve, patent practitioners must navigate complex issues surrounding subject matter eligibility, claim drafting, and prosecution strategy under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and related guidance.

In this CLE webinar, Robert Plotkin, Software Patent Lawyer & Founding Partner, at Blueshift IP, LLC and Michael Pack, Patent Attorney, at Pack IP Law, will examine recent USPTO guidance and key case law affecting AI-related patent applications. The speakers will focus on practical approaches to drafting and prosecuting claims that address eligibility challenges while preserving claim scope and enforceability. Attendees will gain actionable insights into aligning AI innovations with current examination standards and advising clients on legal risks and strategic considerations in this rapidly evolving area.

Upon completion of this program, attorneys will be able to:

• Identify key legal standards governing patent eligibility for AI inventions, including USPTO guidance and the Alice/Mayo framework
• Analyze common subject matter eligibility issues arising in AI-related patent applications under 35 U.S.C. § 101
• Develop effective claim drafting and prosecution strategies to improve the likelihood of allowance while maintaining enforceable claim scope
• Evaluate USPTO examination practices and tools used in assessing AI-related patent eligibility
• Advise clients on legal risks and strategic considerations when seeking patent protection for AI technologies

Learn more and register, here.

The post Robert Plotkin to Join a Live Webinar “From Algorithms to Assets: Protecting AI Innovations in a Changing Patent World” on June 16, 2026 first appeared on Blueshift IP.

This prestigious international honor recognizes legal professionals who are driving innovation at the dynamic intersection of law and technology. Lawdragon selects individuals through research, peer and client feedback, and robust submissions. The 2026 list features leading voices who are helping to shape the way artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies are regulated, commercialized, and integrated into legal practice and beyond.

With decades of experience in both software patent law and computer science, Robert is widely regarded for his ability to help clients protect cutting-edge AI innovations and build high-value patent portfolios. His work empowers companies to safeguard their intellectual property while maximizing business value in an increasingly competitive tech landscape.

See a full list of the honorees.

The post Robert Plotkin Named to Lawdragon’s 2026 100 Leading AI & Legal Tech Advisors first appeared on Blueshift IP.

During the podcast, Robert discusses regulation for LLMs and legal advice for entrepreneurs. In the newly released compilation, his insights are used to address one of the most pressing issues at the intersection of AI and intellectual property: Who owns what when AI becomes part of the creative or inventive process?

Listen to the full podcast, here.

The post Robert Plotkin Featured in Special Compilation Episode of “AI and the Future of Work” first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Best Law Firms rankings are based on reference evaluations, peer reviews from leading attorneys, interviews with industry leaders, and firm submissions. Achieving a tiered Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” ranking signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise.

For more information about Best Lawyers in America® and the “Best Law Firm” list, click here.

The post Blueshift LLP Included on 2026 U.S. News – Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” List first appeared on Blueshift IP.

The Chambers USA Spotlight Guides, published by Chambers and Partners, features firms with fewer than 75 attorneys that are known for delivering partner-level attention, deep regional knowledge, and cost-effective solutions for sophisticated work. The guide strives to uncover firms that are highly regarded in their communities, excel in region-specific and nationally recognized practices, and demonstrate extensive knowledge of local courts, regulations and business environments.

About Chambers and Partners

Chambers and Partners is the leading independent professional legal research company operating across 200 jurisdictions. The company delivers detailed rankings and insights into the world’s leading lawyers and law firms. Firms recognized in the Chambers USA Spotlight Guides are selected based on independent and in-depth market analysis coupled with an assessment of experience and caliber of talent. Each firm ranked has provided their ability to deliver outstanding results. The full methodology is available here.

The post Blueshift IP Ranked in Chambers USA Spotlight Massachusetts 2025 Guide for Intellectual Property first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Super Lawyers is a patented, peer influenced and research driven process, that highlights the top 5% of attorneys in Massachusetts each year. Both Cynthia and Robert have been honored by Super Lawyers as “Top Rated Intellectual Property Attorneys” since 2021.

Super Lawyers, a Thomson Reuters business, is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, an independent research evaluation of candidates, and peer reviews by practice area. The result is a credible, comprehensive, and diverse listing of exceptional attorneys.

Learn more about the BlueShift IP Super Lawyers here.

The post Cynthia Gilbert and Robert Plotkin Included in 2025 Massachusetts Super Lawyers® List first appeared on Blueshift IP.

INTA is a global association of brand owners and professionals dedicated to supporting trademarks and complementary intellectual property (IP) to foster consumer trust, economic growth, and innovation. The Technology Transformation Committee plays a critical role in shaping IP policy by monitoring digital and technology developments that may impact IP rightsand helping to develop effective advocacy strategies.

Cynthia’s appointment reflects her deep expertise at the intersection of technology, innovation, and intellectual property law. As a patent attorney with a focus on software and artificial intelligence inventions, she brings a unique perspective on how rapid technological change influences both patent and trademark protection.

Read more about INTA

The post Cynthia Gilbert Appointed as a Member of the INTA Technology Transformation Committee for 2026-2027 Term first appeared on Blueshift IP.

In this webinar, we explore:
🔹 Ongoing challenges with AI patent policy post-Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International
🔹 The details of the USPTO's Desjardins decision and it's broader historical context
🔹 What innovators need to know moving forward

The post AI Patents Just Got Easier: What the USPTO’s Shift Means for Protecting Your Innovations first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Click here to learn more.

The post Cynthia Gilbert Named “Go to Lawyer” for Intellectual Property Law first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Robert advises leading technology companies and law firms worldwide on patent protection for cutting-edge software in fields such as artificial intelligence (AI), quantum computing, autonomous vehicles, and speech recognition. He uses his decade of legal and engineering experience to maximize the value of his clients’ patent portfolios – allowing them to realize the largest return on investment. His clients have profitably sold and licensed the software patents he has obtained for them to major corporations around the world.

Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers has become regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer-review evaluation. Lawyers included in the Best Lawyers lists are divided by geographic region and practice area. They are reviewed by their peers and undergo an authentication process to ensure they are in current practice and in good standing.

To learn more about Best Lawyers in America®, click here.

The post Robert Plotkin Included in 2026 edition of The Best Lawyers in America® first appeared on Blueshift IP.

In this webinar, you’ll learn:
🔹 Five key factors to consider when deciding whether to patent your technology.
🔹 The key combinations of factors that weigh heavily in favor of patenting.
🔹 How to go beyond legal considerations to take into account business factors when deciding whether to patent.
🔹 How to focus on filing patents that are likely to provide maximum ROI

The post Beyond Patentability: The 5-Factor Framework for High-value Patent Investment first appeared on Blueshift IP.

This prestigious international honor recognizes legal professionals who are driving innovation at the dynamic intersection of law and technology. The 2025 list features leading voices who are helping to shape the way artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies are regulated, commercialized, and integrated into legal practice and beyond.

With decades of experience in both software patent law and computer science, Robert is widely regarded for his ability to help clients protect cutting-edge AI innovations and build high-value patent portfolios. His work empowers companies to safeguard their intellectual property while maximizing business value in an increasingly competitive tech landscape.

See a full list of the honorees.

The post Robert Plotkin Named to Lawdragon’s 2025 100 Leading AI & Legal Tech Advisors first appeared on Blueshift IP.

“Has the widespread adoption of AI tools fundamentally changed what constitutes ‘ordinary skill’…?,” Robert posits in the article. “This question resonates across the innovation landscape, as AI tools become standard equipment in research and development, revolutionizing how inventors approach problems and effectively raising the baseline capabilities of skilled practitioners. Patent law must adapt to this new reality, particularly in its concept of a ‘person having ordinary skill in the art’ (PHOSITA) – the cornerstone of patent law’s nonobviousness requirement.”

The piece goes on to explore how existing legal frameworks can adapt to accommodate the consideration of AI capabilities in assessing ordinary skill while also acknowledging challenges in implementing such changes, such as variation in access to AI tools among inventors.

Robert goes on to emphasize how the nonobviousness analysis should continue to prioritize the human element of inventorship, including human creativity, and how adjusting the PHOSITA standard to include AI capabilities should be balanced to ensure that the patent system remains accessible to inventors regardless of their resources.

He concludes by iterating that the integration of AI into patent law's nonobviousness analysis is an ongoing process that requires careful consideration to uphold the patent system's purpose of promoting innovation while adapting to technological advancements.

You can read “AI and the Level of Ordinary Skill: Why Patent Law Must (and Can) Adapt to AI-Augmented Invention” here.

The post Robert Plotkin Authors Article on AI’s Potential to Impact ‘Obviousness’ first appeared on Blueshift IP.

But what may seem like a minefield of IP questions might actually be easier to navigate than it first appears. The trick will be ensuring appropriate legal protections through diligence and creativity in patent filing.

Over the last several years, as AI and large language models have become more widely accessible and available, there has been an increase in concern about the integrity of the patent process. If AI is capable of writing entire novels and screenplays, what's to stop it from parlaying such creativity to invention, coming up with the next miracle pill or revolutionary bit of tech?

It's a question that's been nagging at both patent offices globally and inventors themselves, who have a pretty good understanding of the potential of AI to transform their work.

AI has already shown itself to be a boon for inventors, doing things like offering them the ability to perform multiple complex experiments at once, or pulling together new molecules that humans had not yet thought of.

In the world of software development in particular, AI has the ability to do things like write code incredibly quickly, solving issues that may take inventors months to even discover. Tools like GitHub CoPilot, Anthropic's Claude and Cursor have been getting a lot of attention for their ability to write software — and because that skill is rapidly improving.

We know that legally, patents are only going to be granted to human inventors, but what about inventions that are assisted in their development by AI? What happens then?

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's February guidance maintains that if AI is used to assist in developing an invention, only humans who have made a significant contribution to the development of that invention can be named as inventors on a patent application for the invention. It's a decision that's largely in line with other nations — the German Federal Court of Justice ruled in an appeal brought by Stephen L. Thaler in June that AI-generated inventions can be patented in Germany, but a human inventor must be named in the patent application.[5]

That is, it should be noted, the same standard by which patent inventorship determinations are already determined for all inventions, whether or not AI played a role in its creation.

A lab assistant, for example, may not be named as an inventor on technology just because they did some of the legwork on it. Maybe they wrote code, ran experiments to test the inventor's theories or performed other work to help the inventor. But those activities alone do not meet the standard of a significant contribution.

There is a standard of creative and developmental input that's required to be considered a co-inventor. An inventor must be a driving force behind the invention — the one who requested that particular code be written or that certain experiments be performed.

It's the same reasoning with AI: While the AI may assist with the ultimate development of an invention, it must still be prompted to find a specific answer or run a specific simulation. The work being done by AI is generally a distillation of what would ordinarily be laboratory practices.

All of which to say, for businesses and individuals trying to patent something partially developed with assistance from AI — whether it's software that's been coded by AI or a drug that's been discovered as a result of the use of AI — recordkeeping and diligent documentation is of paramount importance when seeking patent protection.

A successful application will need to document human contributions to the invention. For example, if AI was used in the development of a new invention, the human inventor's role in creating, training and utilizing the AI model should be clearly documented; while this isn't a current requirement of the USPTO, in the early days of any new technology, it's best to document its use in case it's required later. This documentation should demonstrate how the human inventor's input was essential to the development of the invention.

For example, if any particular training data was used to train an AI model, then it is advisable to disclose any information about such training data that is necessary to enable the use of such training data. If the training data is publicly available, then it may be sufficient to refer to it by name.

If, however, the training data was created or customized for use in the invention, then it may be helpful or necessary to disclose additional information about the training data. If human skill or ingenuity was used to create or modify the training data, then it may be helpful to disclose the role that humans played in the preparation of the training data to justify listing certain people as inventors.

If the invention performs a useful function using a machine learning model, it may be useful to conduct experiments that demonstrate the ability of the model to perform that function reliably, and to document such experiments and their results in the patent application.

Otherwise, the patent application might be rejected for lack of enablement, or the scope of the claims might be limited to the scope of the specific uses of the model that are clearly proven in the patent application. In this way, patent applications for AI-related inventions may resemble traditional patent applications for chemical and biological applications in their inclusion of experimental methods and results. Describing such experiments may also provide further support for the assertion that specific people qualify as inventors.

A successful patent application will also need to clarify how AI is used to implement the invention, especially if AI is required for recreating the invention. Was it a tool for assisting in the coding process, or did it generate substantial parts of the code autonomously? The more autonomous AI's role, the more critical it becomes to highlight the human aspects of the invention.

The need to disclose the use of AI in the inventive process may depend on the relationship of AI to the claims in the patent application and the scope of protection being sought. For example, if AI was used to create a design for a product — e.g., a chemical or a circuit — but such a product can be sufficiently enabled using a traditional description, then it might not be necessary to disclose the use of AI in the inventive process to satisfy the enablement requirement.

However, the process by which the invention was made might still be useful to describe in order to demonstrate that there was a significant human contribution to establish human inventorship.

Even if it is not strictly necessary in a particular case to describe the use of AI in order to satisfy the enablement requirement, it still might be useful to disclose how AI was used to make the invention if doing so enables a broader claim scope. For example, if the patent's claims hold a class of chemical structure, and the use of AI enables a wide range of molecules having such a structure to be discovered, then disclosing the use of AI in the patent's specification might justify affording the claim with broader scope than if AI were not disclosed.

If the invention uses AI in its operation, such as antivirus software that uses a machine learning model to detect viruses and to continuously update that model based on new information, then the patent application will need to describe the use of AI in order to enable the claims.

There is a degree to which inventors need to be careful of overreliance on AI; given AI's current capabilities, it seems highly likely that elements of the process that are genuinely discovered by AI will be deemed to be obvious, and thus threaten the patentability of the invention.

The same standards of invention apply, whether AI has been used or not, so ensuring the patent office has no confusion over both human and AI contributions is key.

To be clear, anthropomorphizing AI as a contributor is the wrong tack — AI is a tool, just like any other computing system. Its power makes it an asset, but as in the early days of software development, as the landscape builds, inventors need to be more descriptive rather than less in order to ensure that patent officers understand, and also that appropriate patent protection is afforded.

This means that more than likely, filing a patent that involves AI right now will be more expensive, as the diligence and time needed is likely greater than a mechanical invention. Though, coincidentally, inventors looking for assistance in creating their patent application may be able to turn to AI to help.

As technology continues to advance, staying informed and adaptable will be key to securing IP rights in the age of AI.

This piece originally published in Law360.

The post Navigating The Minefield Of Patenting AI-Generated Inventions first appeared on Blueshift IP.

If you’re serious about making your patents a critical business asset, Building a Patent Portfolio with Maximum Monetization Value is for you. This webinar, presented by Blueshift IP co-founder and software patent expert Robert Plotkin, explores how to create a patent portfolio that not only protects your innovations but also maximizes their value for litigation, licensing, sales, fundraising, and acquisition.

Whether you’re a startup founder, business executive, or IP professional, this webinar will guide you through:

• Integrating Monetization Early: Understand why waiting until patent grants to develop a monetization strategy can be too late, and learn how to weave monetization considerations into your patent applications from the very beginning.
• Strategic Focus in Patent Filings: Discover how to focus your patent applications on features that drive company value, including those found in your own products, competitors’ products, and potential acquirers’ technologies.
• Creating “Blocking” Patents: Learn the concept of blocking patents, which can prevent competitors from entering your market and significantly enhance your patent portfolio’s value.
• Detecting Infringement: Gain insights into choosing inventions to patent based on the ease of infringement detection, making enforcement and monetization more feasible.
• Building with Continuation Applications: Explore how continuation applications can expand your patent protection cost-effectively, strengthening your portfolio’s monetization potential.
• Ensuring Solid Chain of Title: Understand the importance of obtaining clear patent rights from inventors and stakeholders to avoid issues during due diligence and maximize acquisition value.

The post Building a Patent Portfolio with Maximum Monetization Value first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder Robert Plotkin, author of the best-selling guide AI Armor: Securing the Future of Your AI Company with Strategic Intellectual Property, has created the AI Intellectual Property Checklist as a free download to help decision-makers at companies developing AI software determine the best route to take to protect their innovations to not only stave off competition but to add value to their growing businesses.

With the checklist, you will learn:

• Why picking the right form of IP protection is important
• How to evaluate your technology for patent protection
• How to evaluate your technology for trade secret protection
• How to evaluate your technology for dual protection
• How to evaluate whether your technology is suitable for IP protection

Download the free checklist here.

The post Download the AI Intellectual Property Checklist first appeared on Blueshift IP.

With SaaS becoming a dominant model in software delivery, the comprehensive guide offers invaluable guidance for obtaining enforceable patents in this complex and evolving field. Topics covered in the resource include:

• The challenges of patenting SaaS, including divided infringement and patent eligibility.
• Strategies for drafting claims that focus on single-entity infringement to simplify enforcement.
• Best practices for creating flexible and comprehensive claim sets to protect dynamic SaaS technologies.
• How to effectively use functional and structural language in patent drafting.

Download the PDF of Patent Drafting Software as a Service (SaaS).

The post Robert Plotkin Publishes Guide on SaaS Patent Drafting first appeared on Blueshift IP.

The post Blueshift IP Founders Named to 2024 Massachusetts Super Lawyers List first appeared on Blueshift IP.

In the webinar “Patenting Software in the U.S. and Europe,” leading software patenting experts Robert Plotkin, co-founder of Blueshift IP, and Dr. Jochen Reich, founder of Germany-based Reich-IP, provide essential guidance for business leaders, innovators, and legal professionals looking to expand their intellectual property footprint and secure the value of their innovations through software patents.

During the session, the two dive deep into the complexities of software patents, offering practical advice and expert insights on navigating the challenges of patenting software in both jurisdictions.

By watching this webinar, you will:

• Understand the differences in patent eligibility for software in the US and Europe
• Learn about the enablement requirement and how to meet it in software patent applications
• Explore the importance of novelty and how it impacts patentability
• Grasp the concept of nonobviousness (US) and inventive step (Europe) in patent examination
• Review the examination procedures in the USPTO and the EPO
• Gain practical drafting tips to strengthen your software patent applications

The post Patenting Software in the U.S. and Europe first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers has become regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer-review evaluation. More than 116,000 industry-leading lawyers are eligible to vote (from around the world), and Best Lawyers has received more than 17 million evaluations on the legal abilities of other lawyers based on their specific practice areas around the world. Lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed; therefore, inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America is considered a singular honor.

Lawyers included in the Best Lawyers lists are divided by geographic region and practice area. They are reviewed by their peers and undergo an authentication process to ensure they are in current practice and in good standing.

The full methodology for The Best Lawyers in America^® list and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch in America list is available here.

The post Blueshift IP Co-Founder Robert Plotkin Recognized in 2025 Best Lawyers List first appeared on Blueshift IP.

• Spending on IP that doesn’t protect your core business
• Overlooking obtaining IP that would provide critical protection against competitors
• Failing to secure IP that provides significant value for fundraising, revenue generation, and securing successful exits.

In “Business Goals + IP Strategy = Propelling Your AI Company Toward Success,” Blueshift IP co-founder and AI patent expert Robert Plotkin lays out a goal-based IP strategy for driving business success by securing AI assets through a strategic application of patent and trade secret protection.

By applying Robert’s purpose-built MIND process, business decision-makers can create AI assets and strategically deploy those assets to stave off competitors from encroaching on proprietary technologies while creating value for a company that it can leverage for strategic business purposes, including funding, licensing, and increasing valuation.

Key takeaways from this webinar include:

• What the MIND process is and how it can be applied to obtain and leverage IP protection that has maximum ROI for AI innovations.
• Using IP obtained using the MIND process to attract investment, generate revenue, and secure successful exits.
• Strategies for obtaining IP protection for your IP protection that is neither too broad nor too narrow.
• Insights into tailoring your IP strategy to your business goals, whether those be to protect against larger competitors, generate licensing revenue, or get acquired at maximum value.

The concepts in this webinar recording build off of our previous webinar “Mining for AI Gold: A Strategic Approach to Identifying AI Assets and Securing Value with IP.”

Both webinar cover information in Robert’s latest book, AI Armor: Securing the Future of Your AI Company with Strategic Intellectual Property, which is available to purchase on Amazon.

The post Business Goals + IP Strategy = Propelling Your AI Company Toward Success first appeared on Blueshift IP.

AI Armor: Securing the Future of Your AI Company with Strategic Intellectual Property

Authored by Blueshift IP co-founder and AI patent expert Robert Plotkin, AI Armor is a first-of-its-kind guide written specifically for founders, executives, investors, and advisors of growing AI companies. The book describes a systematic approach for using intellectual property (IP) – focusing on patents and trade secrets – to advance critical business goals, including:

• Raising funds
• Generating revenue
• Attracting top talent
• Securing successful exits

In our AI era where competition is fierce and Big AI seeks to assimilate innovations, IP is a powerful tool. Often mischaracterized as merely a passive insurance policy against potential infringement, patents are a dynamic profit and growth driver, key to proactive strategies that fuel revenue and business value.

Don your AI Armor today, and order your copy here.

The post “AI Armor” by Robert Plotkin Now Available on Amazon first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder and software patent expert Robert Plotkin recently wrote about the PERA bill, as well as the history of U.S. patent law that has created a need for such legislation. In his article “What a Patent Attorney Would Whisper in the Ears of Senators,” published by RealClear Markets, Robert discusses the America Invents Act, which created the often-criticized Patent and Trademark Review Board, as well as the SCOTUS decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, which made it harder for software developers—including those involved in AI-related innovations—to patent their creations.

The article is a great introduction for those who might not be familiar with the historical context needed to understand the current state of U.S. patent law as it applies to software inventions.

You can read the article for free on the RealClear Markets website.

The post What a Patent Attorney Would Whisper in the Ears of Senators first appeared on Blueshift IP.

In this webinar recording, you will learn about the following topics:

• Strategic Insight: Learn how to break down AI innovations into essential components, revealing hidden opportunities for IP protection.

• Expert Guidance: Benefit from the expertise of a patent attorney who has pioneered methods for obtaining robust, broad, and defensible patents tailored to AI technologies.

• Dual Protection Strategy: Understand how to navigate the choice between patent and trade secret protection for different elements of your AI innovation.

• Avoid Underprotection. Sidestep Overextension: Narrow patents leave loopholes, making it challenging to enforce your rights against competitors. Broad patents can be a double-edged sword – they promise extensive coverage but face higher risks of being unpatentable or invalidated.

The post Mining for AI Gold: A Strategic Approach to Identifying AI Assets and Securing Value with IP first appeared on Blueshift IP.

What is artificial intelligence IP mapping? As Robert Plotkin writes in his latest article for IP Watchdog, it’s a systematic method for mining your AI innovations for valuable intellectual property assets that can be protected through patents and trade secrets. Such a strategic approach to IP protection shouldn’t be done in a vacuum, however. Pioneering AI companies should also consider their overall business goals when developing their IP strategy.

You can read the full article on the IP Watchdog website.

The post Uncovering Valuable AI Assets: A Strategic Guide for AI Companies and Patent Attorneys first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP is offering a free advance download of select chapters from the book. Just follow this link, enter your contact information, and you will be provided a link to download your exclusive excerpts. You also will receive notices when the book is available for pre-order on Amazon.

You can learn more at AIArmorBook.com.

The post Robert Plotkin to Publish “AI Armor: Securing the Future of Your AI Company with Strategic Intellectual Property” first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder Robert Plotkin has had the privilege of working with Dr. Bates and Singular Computing for over 15 years to obtain an extensive international patent portfolio on the company’s groundbreaking technology, which speeds up modern AI processing.

We extend our congratulations to Dr. Bates and to Singular’s litigation team.

The post Blueshift IP Client Singular Computing LLC Settles Major Patent Infringement Suit Against Google first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder Robert Plotkin spoke with Authority Magazine about how artificial intelligence is disrupting the legal industry – and what lawyers should consider as we approach living in an increasingly AI-assisted world.

In addition to discussing his unique background as a MIT-trained computer scientist and patent software expert, Robert discussed how generative AI tools like ChatGPT have great potential to change the legal industry.

“Although such tools don’t come close to replacing expert lawyers, they can be extremely useful for performing tasks such as summarizing complex documents, rephrasing text in a different tone or a more understandable way, and coming up with examples of a concept,” Robert said.

Robert also discussed the skills that will be most valuable for what will likely be an AI-enhanced future.

“Even if I could tell you exactly what skills you need today to make yourself as valuable as possible in light of AI, no one can predict exactly how technology will evolve or what skills we will need a year from now, so the most important skill is the ability to observe, learn, and adapt continuously,” Robert said.

Fear of being replaced is a common reaction to an increasingly AI-enhanced world, and Robert discussed how this kind of mindset is a challenge to overcome for professionals.

“Many people have an instinctive self-protective reaction to AI and other new technologies, which is to cling fiercely to their current skills, responsibilities, and ways of doing things,” Robert said. “Although this is understandable, it’s counterproductive and actually is self-sabotaging.”

In the interview, Robert also discusses a number of other related topics, including ethical considerations and the top five things professionals need to do if AI is disrupting their industry.

Read the full interview on Authority Magazine’s website.

The post Robert Plotkin Interviewed by Authority Magazine on AI and the Legal Industry first appeared on Blueshift IP.

For smaller companies interested in innovating with AI but not wanting to take the capital-intensive route of developing their own AI models, Blueshift IP co-founder Robert Plotkin suggests compiling what are known as “spellbooks” – collections of reusable, specialized AI prompts designed for specific tasks. This approach allows for incremental and cost-effective automation that can create efficiencies and drive business success.

In his article “Casting an AI ‘Spellbook’: The Powerful, Low-Cost, Continuous Improvement AI Strategy for Small, Fast-Moving Companies”, Robert explains how small- and mid-size companies can leverage spellbooks for a competitive advantage. He then goes on to discuss how these spellbooks can be shielded from competitors by strategically maintaining them as trade secrets.

You can read the full article on Benzinga here.

The post Casting an AI “Spellbook”: The Powerful, Low-Cost, Continuous Improvement AI Strategy for Small, Fast-Moving Companies first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder and software patent expert Robert Plotkin authored an article for IPWatchdog about whether artificial intelligence prompts can be patented. The article is titled “Can AI Prompts Be Patented? Don’t Be Too Quick to Dismiss this Question” and can be read online here.

While much attention has been paid to the debate surrounding patenting the output of AI systems, little consideration has been given to the prospect of patenting the input to an AI system, such as a prompt to a large language model.

In his article, Robert reviews the criteria for patentability and draws parallels to AI system prompts and descriptions of classes of embodiments of an invention. To further demystify the intriguing idea of patenting prompts, Robert provides several examples, ranging from the straightforward to the more abstract. He then goes on to make the case for patenting prompts and explores potential unintended consequences should there be a prohibition on patenting prompts.

The post Can AI Prompts Be Patented? Don’t Be Too Quick to Dismiss this Question first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder and software patent expert Robert Plotkin recently published an article on IPWatchdog providing guidance to executives on when to consider patenting AI systems and their output versus when to consider keeping such innovations trade secrets.

Using the parable of the goose and the golden egg, Robert lays out the multiple options to protecting AI-related intellectual property and their respective pros and cons. Part of his analysis that is often a priority for executives and patent owners is the pathways to monetization.

“The savvy executive, guided by the patent attorney, has an important and strategic business decision to make, one rooted in an understanding of IP law and its impact on a business’ bottom line and its ability to stave off competition,” Robert writes.

The full article is available to read on IPWatchdog.com.

The post Robert Plotkin Authors Article for IPWatchdog Providing Guidance to Executives on When—and When Not—to Patent first appeared on Blueshift IP.

This dynamic discussion with Blueshift IP partner and software patent expert Robert Plotkin and Aaron Silverstein, partner at Saunders & Silverstein LLP, dives into the latest developments in IP law and how they apply to AI-generated works. (Spoiler: Recent patent and copyright-related court decisions don't necessarily mean you can't get protection.)

In this webinar recording, you will learn about how the latest AI tools are being used to write scripts, articles, books, and even generate designs for patentable inventions. We also will guide you through understanding the required threshold to obtain protection for your AI-generated works, as well as share insights on maximizing that protection and dodging potential pitfalls.

The post Harness the Power of AI While Protecting Your AI-Generated Works first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder and patent software expert Robert Plotkin recently authored an article for Law360  titled “Why I Use ChatGPT to Tell Me Things I Already Know.”

The article provides readers with tips on the practical application of ChatGPT within the legal profession while also addressing certain inherent risks of using ChatGPT, mainly the risk of inaccuracy.

In addressing the risk of inaccuracy, Robert acknowledges that in professions where accuracy is critical—including law and medicine—relying solely on ChatGPT would not be prudent. However, he goes on to point out certain tasks that are use cases for ChatGPT among lawyers, including rephrasing existing text for an existing audience and coming up with real-world examples of legal concepts.

Robert also highlights the fact that users of ChatGPT, especially lawyers, should be critical of the application’s output. He emphasizes the usefulness of ChatGPT but encourages lawyers to review ChatGPT-generated responses for errors.

Ultimately, Robert argues that an all-or-nothing approach to ChatGPT for lawyers is not the best way to view the technology. Rather, lawyers can use ChatGPT as a tool to facilitate certain tasks, but ultimately it is up to the user to verify AI-generated information.

You can download a PDF of the article here.

The post Robert Plotkin Authors Article for Law360 about How Lawyers Can Use ChatGPT first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder and patent software expert Robert Plotkin recently published an article in Inc., the magazine for entrepreneurs and innovators in business, titled “Patent Law Isn’t Ready for AI. Here’s How to Prepare Your Company.”

In the piece, Robert discusses how AI’s recent ascent in the public eye and adoption across industries have created significant opportunities for enterprising companies seeking to gain a leg up in the market through patenting AI-related innovations.

“Leveraging AI’s power in IP-protectable ways can create significant value and help software developers erect major competitive firewalls,” Robert writes. “But if a company misses the window that’s opening now or fails to incorporate major AI platform capabilities in its tech stack, it could find itself with a diminished trajectory, damaged prospects for raising capital, and significantly reduced enterprise value.”

Robert provides readers with three pathways companies should consider for the creation of protectable IP in the AI-driven tech verse. These include using AI functionality in products to cut development costs and shorten timelines, creating new and valuable products that use AI as a starting point, and seeking significant pioneer patents.

The full article is available here.

The post Robert Plotkin Authors Article for Inc. Magazine about How Software Companies Should Develop and Patent AI-Related Innovations first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder Robert Plotkin recently authored an article for Reuters that takes a unique approach to analyzing the trending question of whether an AI system should be eligible to be named as an inventor on a patent.

In the article, “Beyond recognition: why naming AI as inventor on patents doesn't compute,” Robert looks at why the patent system was developed in the first place: inventors are granted a certain period of exclusivity for their inventions in exchange for public disclosure of those inventions.

However, not being human, AI does not respond to the incentives inherent in our current patent system. As Robert writes:

An AI system does not have desires, aspirations, or needs. It won't choose to invent (rather than not to invent), work harder, or choose to disclose its inventions to the public (rather than keep them secret) if it knows it can be named on a patent, nor will it be demotivated if its name doesn't appear on a patent. Therefore, the primary public policy underlying the patent system, based on incentives, does not warrant naming AI systems as patent inventors.

Use this link to download the full article as a PDF.

To help illustrate the points made in the article, Robert collaborated with the popular large language model ChatGPT to author this fictional tale in which judges of an invention competition must select a winner among a slew of talented competitors, including a prolific AI system.

The Grand Innovation Fair

In the bustling city of Neotropolis, the annual Grand Innovation Fair was the highlight of the year. Inventors from all over the world flocked to showcase their brilliant creations, hoping to win the coveted title of “Master Inventor.” The title came not only with honor and pride but also with exclusive patent rights that ensured the winner's creation was protected.

This year, however, the fair was buzzing with an unexpected rumor. For the first time, an AI called Artemis-9, designed by the renowned tech conglomerate Cybertech Corp., was participating as an independent contestant.

When the day of the fair arrived, booths filled the massive hall, each displaying a marvel more astonishing than the last. But the largest crowd had gathered around Artemis-9. The AI, with its intricate web of gleaming wires and lights, was demonstrating an array of inventions at an astonishing speed. A self-tying shoe, a plant that could play music, even a mini-robot that could make breakfast!

The human inventors watched with a mix of amazement and anxiety. How could they compete with such rapid and flawless creation?

As the judges began their rounds, whispers filled the air. “Is this the end of human innovation?” “Will Artemis-9 be the new Master Inventor?”

Finally, at the grand podium, the chief judge stood up to announce the winner. The tension was palpable. “This year,” the judge began, “we've witnessed something unprecedented. Artemis-9's abilities are indeed remarkable. But we must ask ourselves – who is the true innovator? Is it the tool or the hand that wields it?”

The crowd listened intently.

“While Artemis-9 can create, it does not dream. It doesn't experience the spark of inspiration in the middle of the night or feel the frustration of failed attempts. It doesn't bask in the joy of discovery or the thrill of solving a problem that seemed insurmountable. These emotions, these journeys are the essence of invention.”

He continued, “A tool, no matter how advanced, is only as good as its user. It doesn’t embark on the journey of creation; it aids it.”

He paused for emphasis. “Therefore, this year's title of ‘Master Inventor' goes to… Mia Wang for her revolutionary clean energy generator!”

The hall erupted in applause, cheering for Mia's triumph. Artemis-9 continued to blink its lights, unaffected and unresponsive to the accolade it didn't win.

That evening, as the sun set over Neotropolis, the inventors celebrated not just Mia's invention, but the indomitable human spirit. The message was clear: Tools enhance the process, but the heart of innovation beats within a human chest.

The post Robert Plotkin Authors Article on AI as an Inventor for Reuters, Plus a Bonus Work of Fiction Written by ChatGPT first appeared on Blueshift IP.

An industrial generative AI software company, Zapata AI’s dedication to innovation, coupled with our strategic approach to patent portfolio development, has played a pivotal role in their journey to becoming a publicly traded company.

With a shared vision and resolute commitment to maximizing the value of intellectual property, Blueshift IP’s Robert Plotkin has diligently worked alongside Zapata AI to cultivate an extensive international patent portfolio of over 100 patents and patent applications. This portfolio, comprising cutting-edge patents in the realms of generative AI and other advanced algorithms that leverage quantum techniques, has not only protected their innovations but has also positioned them for this remarkable IPO.

Jonathan Olson, Zapata AI’s Associate Director of Quantum Science IP and a co-founder of the company, said about Zapata AI’s work with Blueshift IP, “I have worked closely with Robert Plotkin for the past five years, and Robert's unique ability to align patent strategy with our business goals has not only protected our innovations but has also laid the foundation for sustaining and growing the value of our technology. Robert's deep understanding of patent strategy and his dedication to our mission have made him an integral part of the Zapata AI team. His insights and strategic guidance have been instrumental in developing a robust global patent portfolio that rivals or exceeds those of the largest tech giants in our industry.”

Robert, who focuses on strategically developing patents to maximize value for acquisition and IPO, stated, “It has been an incredible privilege to collaborate with Zapata AI on their software patent, AI, and intellectual property journey. I’m immensely proud of their achievements and of the role that our patent strategies have played in ensuring the protection and commercialization of their revolutionary technologies. The success that Zapata AI has achieved with its IPO epitomizes what growing tech companies can accomplish with a combination of world class innovative technology and a strong, broad, and comprehensive patent portfolio behind it.”

The merger between Zapata AI and Andretti Acquisition Corp exemplifies the enormous potential of intellectual property as a valuable asset in the world of tech innovation. Andretti Acquisition Corp. is well-acquainted with Zapata AI and its unique capabilities through their commercial partnership with Andretti Autosport, where they utilize Orquestra® to gain a competitive edge in race strategy for NTT INDYCAR® SERIES competitions. This partnership illustrates how top-tier brands are embracing the company's industrial generative AI solutions to tackle intricate challenges and bolster their competitive standing. Joining forces with Andretti Acquisition Corp. will provide Zapata AI with access to capital markets and greater financial agility to support its technical roadmap, boost enterprise customer acquisition, advance its growth strategy, and to continue pioneering breakthroughs in generative AI.

We extend our heartfelt congratulations to Zapata AI on their remarkable achievement and look forward to being part of their expected success as a publicly traded company. Blueshift IP remains dedicated to supporting leading-edge clients like Zapata AI in obtaining comprehensive patent portfolios that protect them against competitors and lay the foundation for successful financing, acquisition, and IPO.

The post Blueshift IP Celebrates and Congratulates our Client, Zapata AI Announcing Its Intention to Go Public With Andretti Acquisition Corp. first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Cynthia and her fellow panelists, Terrell Morris, Director of the Office of Information Technology for Patents at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and Karl Doane, Senior Director of Brand IP at Clarivate, discussed current industry trends, potential challenges, and innovative strategies that professionals in the field can leverage to stay at the forefront of IP management. In particular, Cynthia shared insights into the rapidly evolving landscape of AI within an IP practice.

The AIPF's annual meeting served as a hub for thought leaders, legal practitioners, and professionals in the IP domain. Attendees had the opportunity to gain valuable insights and engage in networking opportunities.

For the full schedule and event details, please visit the official AIPF Annual Meeting program.

Blueshift IP was proud to contribute to the discussion on AI in an IP practice and enjoyed engaging with fellow professionals at this insightful event.

The post Blueshift IP Co-Founder Cynthia Gilbert – Panelist at Annual Meeting of Association of Intellectual Property Firms first appeared on Blueshift IP.

You may not realize it, but there is a solution to make your tech startup more attractive to potential investors while obtaining strong, broad, and defensible legal protection against competitors – software patents.

In this blog post, we discuss why your tech startup should be using strategically-focused patent applications to secure targeted software patents that will attract investors, secure additional funding, and even raise the valuation of your company.

Don’t Sit on Your Software Patent Assets

Many software startups fall prey to the myths surrounding patents and patentability, resulting in a deprioritization of applying for software patents. Common myths surrounding software patents among startups include:

• Upfront costs of obtaining software patents outweigh the benefits.
• The costs will eat into the startup’s limited resources.
• Software patents are only good for suing competitors.
• The startup needs to wait until after it secures funding to file software patent applications.

Savvy startups know the exact opposite to be true. Even startups with limited resources can use software patents and a robust patent portfolio to make their companies more attractive to investors. This means that your software patents aren’t a cost center – they’re an asset. Making targeted, strategic investments in software patents as early as possible can help startups attract investors and secure funding more quickly and easily by:

• Increasing the value of the startup — software patents are attractive balance sheet assets, which can be useful when securing loans or pursuing acquisition
• Delivering great value by deterring small and large competitors in your industry from infringing the startup’s technology and products with a relatively small investment – enabling you to charge more for your products and services
• Demonstrating to potential investors the startup’s belief in the value, uniqueness, and quality of its products as well as its commitment to future growth

Tech Startups: What’s Your Moat?

When courting investors, tech startups need to be prepared to answer the question, “What’s your moat?” In other words, what is it that stops your competitors, particularly larger ones with seemingly endless resources, from stealing your software innovations and copying them?

Being outdone by competitors, especially those with massive amounts of resources, is not an uncommon problem for startups. In fact, according to that same survey by CB Insights, 20% of startups surveyed failed because they were outcompeted.

Software patents provide a solution to this problem, particularly if the startup’s moat is developed using a business-driven approach to securing software patents, where the company’s business goals drive its patent strategy. With patents, startups can gain the legal right to block competitors from selling products and services that their patents cover. Patents also deliver great value by giving startups protection, even against industry giants, for a relatively small investment.

The following are business considerations startups should factor into their patent strategy to maximize the value of their patents:

• Identify key product features in software innovations that are unique and keep customers coming back
• Ask yourself what are the valuable elements of the company’s competitive advantage that are patentable
• Pinpoint elements that strengthen the startup’s competitive advantages if patented

The software patent experts at Blueshift IP have helped countless startups raise their competitive appeal by working collaboratively to understand our clients’ businesses, industries, and competitive landscapes to identify patentable innovations and winning patent strategies.

Attracting Investors by Viewing Software Patents Through a Business Lens

Not every patent firm is created equal, especially when it comes to software patents. Drafting successful patent applications for software innovations requires unique experience and knowledge. At Blueshift IP, we apply our backgrounds in computer science and our decades of experience obtaining patents for growing startups to draft software patent applications that meet the rigorous criteria of the USPTO.

Our work has helped startups attract investors and secure larger funding amounts quickly and easily by determining the most valuable and critical patents to secure and filing strong patent applications as early as possible. The patents we have obtained have also served as assets that have increased the value of our clients and enabled them to be acquired more quickly and at higher values than without software patents.

Want to learn more about the value of securing software patents early? We invite you to read our in-depth blog post on What Startups Need to Know About Patenting Software. You can also watch our free webinar Developing Strategic Patent Portfolios for Start-Ups: Tips and Strategies Explored.

If you are interested in learning more about patenting your startup’s software innovations to attract investors, secure funding, and increase the value of your company, please contact us directly.

The post Unlocking the Power of Patents to Secure Investment for Software Startup Companies first appeared on Blueshift IP.

This marks a significant milestone for Mr. Plotkin, as it is his first year of being acknowledged as a Best Lawyer. His dedication and expertise have earned him this well-deserved accolade within the legal community.

Inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® is a result of an exhaustive peer review process. Attorneys are meticulously evaluated based on their practice area and geographic location. Following this assessment, they undergo an authentication procedure to verify their active practice and good standing.

Mr. Plotkin's boutique practice is exclusively focused on software patents and AI patents. His proficiency in both technical knowledge and patent law empowers him to craft a unique and proprietary approach for securing robust, comprehensive, and defensible patents. This strategy not only maximizes the market value of these patents and benefits the clients who possess them, but also enhances the prospects of successful enforcement against competitors while bolstering the patents' resilience against adversarial challenges.

Since its inaugural publication in 1983, Best Lawyers® has evolved into the definitive guide for recognizing legal excellence. More than 13.7 million votes were analyzed for the 2024 edition of The Best Lawyers in America. For further insight into the comprehensive methodology, please refer to the details available here.

The post Blueshift Founding Partner Robert Plotkin Recognized in 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America first appeared on Blueshift IP.

• Deterring competitors from infringing on their technology and products
• Increasing the value of the company to obtain financing or pursue an exit strategy

Below, we discuss ways startups can obtain patents even with limited resources to set a foundation for long-term patent success. We also address common myths about the patenting process.

Maximizing Patent Benefits with Limited Resources

Typically, the process followed by tech startups is a reactive “invention-driven” one, whereby the company waits for inventors to approach management with inventions or ideas they hope will be patentable. The company’s patent attorneys then evaluate and file patent applications, usually in the order of innovativeness.

This approach can result in some good patents, but in addition to the significant resources required to secure the patents, this approach can lead to:

• Low-value patents: The company obtains patents on inventions that do not provide significant value (e.g., patenting an invention not used in any of its products).
• Gaps in protection: The company fails to obtain patents on inventions that are core to the company’s business. This can lead to a critical inability to block competitors from selling those inventions or affect the company’s future growth plans.

A better approach often is a proactive “business-driven” patent strategy, in which a company’s business goals drive its patent strategy. Startup executives can start by asking these questions and then prioritizing patent filings accordingly:

• What is our competitive advantage? Are there key product features we have that our competitors do not? What product features keep our customers coming back?
• Which elements of our competitive advantage are patentable? Which elements satisfy the legal requirements for patentability?
• Which elements would most secure or strengthen our competitive advantage if patented?

By using a business-driven patent strategy, a startup can focus its limited resources on obtaining patents that provide the most value to the company while minimizing the chances of both investing resources in low-value patents and failing to obtain patents for business-critical inventions.

Using Patents for Long-Term Success

Given the limited resources technology startups generally have, there are several things to consider to strategically use those resources when securing valuable patents.

• Provisional Patent Applications: Provisional patent applications are “scaled down” applications that buy the company a year to file the non-provisional (utility) patent application or an international patent application (PCT patent application). You can learn more about provisional patent applications in this episode of Blueshift IP’s The Software Patent Podcast. Benefits include:
  • Deferring costs: New companies can defer costs while seeking funding.
  • Secure an early filing date: If a company is expecting to make significant improvements in an invention in the next 12 months, a provisional application can secure an early filing date.
  • File multiple applications: Filing multiple provisional applications will give the company additional time to decide which inventions should be refiled as non-provisional applications.
  • Delay examination: A provisional patent application can slow the examination process down, if desired.

Provisional patent applications should not be used when an invention is fully developed, a company has secured its funding, or when an early examination is desired.

• Strategic Patent Searches: Performing a thorough and strategic patentability search can keep companies from wasting valuable resources pursuing patents with a low likelihood of broad success. While the searches can be conducted after filing a provisional patent application, Blueshift IP strongly recommends patent searches be conducted before the non-provisional patent application is filed.
• Foreign Filing Strategies: Many startups fail to consider filing foreign patent applications (PCT applications) due to the cost and what they perceive as currently irrelevant markets. Companies should consider filing PCT applications in markets where future businesses, customers, and acquirers could be located. A PCT application preserves a company’s foreign rights for 30 months from the priority date for a relatively low cost, and there are many combinations available to match a company’s preferences or needs based on budget, examination speed, and geographic coverage. You can learn more about foreign filing strategies in this episode of our The Software Patent Podcast.

Recognizing and Addressing Common Patent Myths

To build successful patent portfolios, startups need to be aware of the following myths surrounding patents and patentability:

• Myth #1: Patents are a “game of kings” and not suitable for startups: The reality is that obtaining even one strong patent on core technology can set a company apart from its competitors. Even a small portfolio of strong patents makes a company more attractive to acquirers.
• Myth #2: Companies should wait until they grow before filing patent applications: Legal deadlines and competitor activity can cause a company to forfeit its patent rights if applications are not filed early. (The U.S. has not been a “first-to-invent” system for many years.) A company can lose rights if a competitor launches a product, publishes a paper, or files a patent application on their inventions before the company does.
• Myth #3: “Quick and dirty” provisional patent applications provide enough protection: A provisional patent application protects only what it describes. Failing to include sufficient detail can lead to a loss of priority date, as if the company had not filed the provisional application at all.
• Myth #4: Provisional patent applications reduce costs: Provisional patent applications defer costs, but they also increase total costs and defer protection. The costs of filing both applications over the course of one year is more than filing a non-provisional application alone.
• Myth #5: Patents do not provide meaningful protection for software: Patents can provide strong, broad, and defensible software protection when designed and written properly. They protect new and useful functionality from infringement by anyone in the patent’s jurisdiction, even if the infringer had no knowledge of or access to a company’s patent or product. In contrast, copyright only protects against copyright of code by someone who had access to the code, while trademark only protects identification of goods and services, not functionality. Trade secret only protects against misappropriation of secrets by someone who had access to those secrets.

Startups can realize significant benefits from filing strategic, well-written patent applications, but they need to work with a knowledgeable patent attorney who understands how to view IP through a business lens. Furthermore, startups that are seeking to patent software innovations need to seek out counsel who has significant experience successfully filing software patent applications.

The attorneys at Blueshift IP combine their unique backgrounds in computer science and law to assist startups, and other companies, in making strategic decisions regarding their software patent portfolios that further the overall goals of their businesses. If you are interested in learning more about patenting your startup’s software innovations, please contact us directly.

If you’re interested in learning more about how to make strategic decisions regarding your startup's patent portfolio, listen to our special seven-part podcast series Demystifying Patent Decisions, which is part of The Software Patent Podcast.

The post What Startups Need to Know About Patenting Software first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Listen as Robert Plotkin, Software Patent Attorney and Co-Founder of Blueshift IP provides a comprehensive discussion of the current and emerging patent policies and procedures for AI-related inventions. Robert addresses practical tips and strategies for navigating this ever-changing regulatory landscape including:

• A Framework for Identifying Patentable Aspects of AI-Related Inventions
• Patenting Innovations Involving Large Language Models (LLMs)
• What Lies Ahead – Potential Implications of the USPTO’s Request for Comments on AI

The post Exploring the AI Patent Landscape: Emerging Top Trends and Shifts to Watch For first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP co-founder and software patent expert Robert Plotkin recently authored an article for Westlaw Today titled “How AI Is Affecting the Patent System.” The piece provides information on real-world applications of artificial intelligence and key challenges that AI raises for the patent system, particularly as AI has been used to automate the inventive process. You can download a PDF of the article here.

For example, the USPTO recently requested public comment on a variety of questions related to AI inventorship and patentability. These questions included whether an invention created using assistance from an AI system could be patentable, whether AI inventorship raises any significant ownership issues, whether the USPTO should expand its guidance on inventorship to address AI, and whether any statutory challenges should be made in light of issues raised by AI contributions to inventions.

The article comes on the heels of Blueshift IP’s in-depth white paper on the same topic, which can be accessed here: https://blueshiftip.com/how-ai-is-automating-the-inventive-process-and-its-impact-on-the-patent-system/

The post Robert Plotkin Authors “How AI Is Affecting the Patent System” for Westlaw Today first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP is pleased to announce the release of its white paper “How AI Is Automating the Inventive Process and Its Impact on the Patent System,” authored by firm co-founder and software patent attorney Robert Plotkin. You can download your complimentary copy here. Artificial intelligence technology is advancing at an incredibly rapid pace. Although recent developments have raised awareness about the ability of large language models to answer questions, search through vast amounts of information, and even write software code, few are prepared for the implications of AI technology that is automating the very process of inventing itself. Such AI-automated inventing is moving us in the direction of making it possible to create new products and services by describing the problems they should solve rather than by specifying how to solve those problems. Such automation of inventing by AI holds the promise of radically increasing the speed and decreasing the cost of innovation, and in turn democratizing innovation and freeing human inventors from tedious tasks so that they can spend their time instead on identifying new problems to solve and working cooperatively with AI to solve those problems.  AI’s automation of inventing also raises questions about the role of—and the need for— human ingenuity.  Every previous generation of automation technology has triggered fears that it would make humans obsolete, and the automation of tasks that previously required human creativity elicits this fear in connection with what we consider to be a uniquely human trait. Automated inventing also calls into question whether the patent system is still needed as an incentive to innovation and how to update and administer a patent system that originally was designed to handle industrial-age inventions.  In this white paper, we explore:  

• How AI is being used to automate the inventive process;
• The impact of AI-automated inventing on inventors, innovative organizations, and the inventive process; and
• The implications of AI-automated inventing on the patent system.

At every step of the way, we address both the problems and risks of AI as an invention-automating tool and provide practical recommendations for maximizing the benefits and minimizing the risks of AI-automated inventing.

Download the Whitepaper

The post Blueshift IP Releases White Paper “How AI Is Automating the Inventive Process and Its Impact on the Patent System” first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Industries are finding new ways to use generative AI to improve the way they conduct business, and the legal industry is no exception. Blueshift IP co-founder and software patent expert Robert Plotkin was recently interviewed by Managing IP to provide comment on how law firms could consider using generative AI tools in their practices.

Titled “Generative AI Prompts Associate Training Questions,” the article discusses the prospect of using generative AI tools to educate less experienced attorneys and draft documents, while also giving consideration to pitfalls of the technology, such as privacy concerns.

You can read the article here: https://www.managingip.com/article/2bl9wu49ky8f4pct4xkw0/generative-ai-prompts-associate-training-questions

Note: The article is behind a paywall and may require a subscription to access.

The post Robert Plotkin quoted in Managing IP, “Generative AI Prompts Associate Training Questions” first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Automation has created efficiencies across industries, but how will this technology impact the legal profession? Blueshift IP co-founder Robert Plotkin joined Steve Fretzin as a guest on the BE THAT LAWYER podcast to talk about the future of practicing law in an automated world. The BE THAT LAWYER podcast offers practical tips, fresh ideas, and new methodologies for growing and sustaining a legal practice.

“I still think it's true that performing legal analysis, in many ways, cannot be automated,” Robert said on the podcast. “If you were to observe, during the course of your day, all the tasks you perform as a lawyer and you break them down into smaller units, many of them don't really require the skill of a lawyer. Those can be automated.”

In the episode, Robert and Steve discuss:
• How AI can assist a law firm and the benefits of automating those things that can be automated.
• Best practices for selecting automation and law firm technologies.
• Common misconceptions about law firm automation.
• Creating a culture of innovation and continuous improvement.

You can listen to the full episode here: https://www.fretzin.com/podcast/episodes/robert-plotkin-law-firm-automation-to-find-your-success/

The post Robert Plotkin, Guest Appearance on “BE THAT LAWYER” Podcast Discusses the Future of Practicing the Law in an Automated World first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Blueshift IP’s Robert Plotkin joined host Mehmet Gonullu on the podcast The CTO Show with Mehmet to discuss the impact of AI on innovation and the patent system, the potential for AI to replace creative professionals, and the skills necessary for thriving in an AI-driven world.

The CTO Show with Mehmet covers the latest tech news and trends, explores the problem-solving abilities of new technologies, and profiles the founders and entrepreneurs behind these innovative products and services.

The podcast is available to listen to on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6xDuqqBGVbNMaRptLcguO3?si=wMV2G_QfTgOR05CL55HQcw

You can also watch a webcast of the discussion on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvF1xag_38c&feature=youtu.be

The post Robert Plotkin, Guest on The CTO Show with Mehmet Podcast Discusses the Impact of AI on Innovation and the Patent System and More first appeared on Blueshift IP.

The article goes on to anticipate that the influence of AI on the legal profession will be more a rising tide and less a tidal wave, one that actually enhances the practice by increasing lawyer and paralegal productivity.

To read the full article (which requires a subscription to access), please click here.

The post Robert Plotkin quoted in The New York Times article, “AI is Coming for Lawyers, Again” first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Listen as Robert Plotkin explains the unique patent issues and challenges associated with quantum computing. In this webinar, you will learn:

• How to draft quantum computing software patent applications to maximize patent eligibility
• Special considerations for non-obviousness of quantum computing software inventions
• Educating patent examiners about quantum computing

The post The Rise of Quantum Computing: Protecting Quantum Innovations with Patents first appeared on Blueshift IP.

After a patent is granted, you still need to take a few steps to keep it alive and enforceable.

In this episode, Robert Plotkin, a software patent attorney and co-founder of the law firm Blueshift IP explains the proactive and ongoing steps needed to keep a patent enforceable. He also explains the challenge of patent-marking software products.

Tune in to this seventh episode of the Software Patent Podcast to learn about keeping your patent alive and enforceable.

In This Episode, You Will Learn:

• The importance of patent marking (01:12)
• Risks related to patent marking (02:21)
• Why it's difficult to patent-mark software products (03:39)
• What the patent maintenance process entails (07:11)

The post Making Decisions Series: Marking and Maintenance first appeared on Blueshift IP.

Receiving a Notice of Allowance for your patent application is only the beginning of the end of examination of the application. Several additional decisions and actions need to be taken before your patent application will be granted as a patent.

In this episode, Cynthia Gilbert, a software patent attorney and co-founder of the law firm Blueshift IP explains the options available to you after receiving a notice of allowance. She also discusses the benefits of filing a continuing patent application.

Tune in to this sixth episode of the Software Patent Podcast to learn how to respond to a Notice of Allowance and maximize the protection you receive.

In This Episode, You Will Learn:

• Options available after receiving a notice of allowance (00:33)
• How to expand patent protection (01:21)
• The importance of having at least one continuing patent application (04:33)

The post Making Decisions Series: The Notice of Allowance first appeared on Blueshift IP.