The metaverse, NFTs and IP rights: to regulate or not to regulate?

First of all, the metaverse is a network of 3D virtual worlds, where humans can interact with each other socially and economically, mainly through avatars. In the metaverse, companies will have the unprecedented ability to exploit the full potential of the data they collect.

 

In contrast, NFTs, based on blockchain technology, are cryptographic units of data, with unique metadata. As such, NFTs can be distinguished from one another and can hold other kinds of information, like the identities or artwork of different individuals. Their uniqueness makes them capable of being sold or traded, with a digital ledger registering all transactions.

 

It is important to highlight that new regulations are being demanded for the metaverse in order to protect users when they interact in this virtual world, and to close an apparent gap between reality and the law.

 

In this sense, IP laws govern the ownership regime of the intangible elements of such property. This principle has been applied for centuries and is also fully applicable to the metaverse and NFTs. Because IP laws deal with the intangible elements of an object, whether physical or virtual, the obvious conclusion is that the builders of the metaverse will have to respect the rights of inventors, designers, and owners of distinctive signs as in the real world. 

 

 

Regarding NFTs, the conclusion is similar. NFTs are digital files in which creative works or other subject matter, such as a video or an artwork, can be embedded. As long as copyright provides an exclusive right over original works of authorship and this is distinct from the ownership of any digital object in which the works are embedded, then anyone who uses them will need prior authorization from the copyright holder of such work.

 

This way, it is possible to conclude that we must analyze NFTs, the emergent metaverse and any other new digital phenomena against existing regulations, yet some adjustments will be necessary in the coming years.

 

Author: Nathália Regina Alves Dourado and Cesar Peduti, Peduti Advogados.

Source: The metaverse, NFTs and IP rights: to regulate or not to regulate? (https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2022/02/article_0002.html) 

 

—

 

Se quiser saber mais sobre este tema, contate o autor ou o Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.

If you want to learn more about this topic, contact the author or the managing partner, Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.

 

The future of artificial intelligence in Brazil

At the beginning of May, and in the midst of various news published about artificial intelligence, mainly with the emergence of ChatGPT – chatbox based on artificial intelligence -, a bill was presented that provides the use of Artificial Intelligence in Brazil – PL 2338/2023, by the Senate President, Rodrigo Pacheco, who heard the opinion of more than 60 specialists in the field.

 

In accordance with its article 1, the bill aims to establish general national rules for the development, implementation, and responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in Brazil, with the objective of protecting fundamental rights and guaranteeing the implementation of safe and reliable systems, for the benefit of the human person, the democratic regime and scientific and technological development.

 

 

The Brazilian bill, in turn, contains nine chapters, to provide: rights; risk categorization; governance of artificial intelligence systems; civil liability; codes of good practice and governance; communication of serious incidents; supervision and inspection. Regarding supervision and inspection, if violations of the established rules are committed, administrative sanctions may be applied by the competent authority, including a fine of up to 50 million reais.

 

It is important to highlight the concern of several countries regarding the processing of personal data through artificial intelligence. Proof of this was Italy’s temporary ban on ChatGPT, which was only reinstated after OpenAI, responsible for the technology, clarified the issues raised by the country’s data protection authority. It should also be noted that the European Union is also moving forward in this direction, in view of a bill in progress, which deals with artificial intelligence. It is, therefore, a matter of extreme importance to be regulated. In Brazil, the project will be analyzed by Senate’s thematic committees.

 

—

 

Author: Caroline Muniz and Cesar Peduti Filho, Peduti Advogados.

Source: Pacheco apresenta projeto de regulação da Inteligência Artificial sugerido por comissão de especialistas (https://www12.senado.leg.br/radio/1/noticia/2023/05/08/pacheco-apresenta-projeto-de-regulacao-da-inteligencia-artificial-sugerido-por-comissao-de-especialistas); União Europeia avança em lei que rege uso de inteligência artificial (https://veja.abril.com.br/mundo/uniao-europeia-avanca-em-lei-que-rege-uso-de-inteligencia-artificial).

—

 

“If you want to learn more about this topic, contact the author or the managing partner, Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.”

“Se quiser saber mais sobre este tema, contate o autor ou o Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.”

Important Considerations When Filing Trademarks in Brazil Using the Madrid System

Since 2019, Brazil has been a part of the Madrid Protocol. According to data published by the Brazilian Trademark Office on April 27, 2023, Brazil has received 35,424 designations through the system.

The number of applications from foreign applicants has undoubtedly increased due to the adoption of the Madrid system. Many of these applicants choose to file their trademarks without the advice of a Brazilian attorney in order to avoid costs. However, it is important to be aware of certain peculiarities of the Brazilian system to prevent any surprises during the application process.

Firstly, Article 217 of Brazilian IP Law states that a person residing abroad must appoint a qualified attorney permanently based in Brazil. Therefore, even in Madrid Protocol designations, it is recommended to engage a local attorney. Although this requirement is not explicitly highlighted during the application process before WIPO, the law itself has not been revoked since Brazil joined the Madrid system. Failure to appoint a local attorney could potentially be used by third parties to invalidate a Brazilian designation, as it would be argued that the law was not followed by the foreign applicant.

 

 

Another important consideration is the opposition system in Brazil, which differs from that of other countries. In Brazil, a trademark is published for opposition as soon as it is filed, and third parties have 60 days to file an opposition. The trademark owner then has 60 days to respond to any opposition. The publication of oppositions occurs in the BPTO gazette, and the owner does not receive a notification from WIPO if the trademark is opposed. Therefore, it is recommended to have a local attorney closely monitor the progress of the trademark application.

If you require further information about trademark applications in Brazil, please do not hesitate to contact Peduti Advogados.

 

Se você quiser saber mais sobre este tópico, sinta-se à vontade para entrar em contato com o autor ou o sócio-gerente, Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.

 

—

 

Advogados autores do comentário: Laila Reis Araujo e Cesar Peduti Filho, Peduti Advogados

 

—

 

Se quiser saber mais sobre este tema, contate o autor ou o Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.

If you want to learn more about this topic, contact the author or the managing partner, Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.

The collaboration between the BPTO and the USPTO for Intellectual Property

In May 2023, the Brazilian Trademark and Patent Office – BPTO and the United States Patent and Trademark Office – USPTO met to discuss technical cooperation between the institutes, among the actions planned for the agreement are the Hague Agreement, Madrid Protocol, PPH, North American experience with IP Marketplace tool, relationship with users and initiatives in the areas of diversity, inclusion, equity, accessibility and gender. 

 

 

This partnership has a practical basis and is justified, mainly, in the fact that the United States is the country with the largest number of Brazilians trademark applications through the Madrid Protocol. The discussion is based on a memorandum valid until 2025 and aims to meet mutual interest of both countries, market movement between them and ongoing measures.

 

Some collaborative practices have been observed over the years, such as, for example, the course taught in collaboration between BPTO and USPTO on how to accelerate the examination of patent applications and patent eligibility in the areas of software and biotechnology in the USA, for example.

 

This kind of work sharing arrangements with foreign intellectual property (IP) offices helps to improve intellectual property examination efficiency and facilitate cooperation within the global IP system. 

 

—

Author: Ana Luiza Pires, and Cesar Peduti Filho, Peduti Advogados.

Source: INPI and the USPTO discuss collaboration initiatives for 2023 

—

“If you want to learn more about this topic, contact the author or the managing partner, Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.”
“Se quiser saber mais sobre este tema, contate o autor ou o Dr. Cesar Peduti Filho.”