Request for Comments on Intellectual Property Protection for Artificial Intelligence Innovation, 58141-58142 [2019-23638]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 210 / Wednesday, October 30, 2019 / Notices Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a webinar-based meeting with the public to provide information on options available to commercial fishing operators for electronically submitting required Vessel Trip Reports (VTRs) in the Greater Atlantic Region. This is in support of the Council’s joint action with the New England Fishery Management Council that could require electronic reporting of VTRs by operators holding commercial fishing permits for species managed by either council that require the submission of VTRs. SUMMARY: The meeting will be held Wednesday, November 20, 2019, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., EST. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via webinar (http:// mafmc.adobeconnect.com/evtr_ publicmtg/) with a telephone audio connection (provided when connecting). Audio only access via conference phone number: 1–800–832–0736; Room Number: 5765379. Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N State St., Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674–2331. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council; telephone: (302) 526–5255. The Council’s website, www.mafmc.org also has details on the proposed agenda, webinar access, and briefing materials. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council is considering requiring electronic reporting of commercial fishery VTRs in a joint action with the New England Fishery Management Council. This action would change the method of transmitting VTRs—the required data elements would not change. Existing regulations requiring that VTRs be completed before arriving at the dock would not change, but the timeline for submitting electronic reports may change. This meeting will provide a review of approved electronic VTR applications, initial steps that would be necessary for commercial operators to begin reporting electronically, and a demonstration of two of the most popular electronic reporting applications (with limited time for questions) to convey information on the process involved for commercial operators to report VTRs electronically. DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:18 Oct 29, 2019 Jkt 250001 Special Accommodations The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526–5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Dated: October 24, 2019. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2019–23609 Filed 10–29–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No. PTO–C–2019–0038] Request for Comments on Intellectual Property Protection for Artificial Intelligence Innovation United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Request for comments. AGENCY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (‘‘USPTO’’) is gathering information about the impact of artificial intelligence (‘‘AI’’) technologies on intellectual property law and policy. To assist in gathering this information, on August 27, 2019, the USPTO published questions related to the impact of artificial intelligence inventions on patent law and policy and asked the public for written comments. Those questions cover a variety of topics, including whether revisions to intellectual property protection are needed. The present notice extends this inquiry to copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property rights impacted by AI. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 16, 2019. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent by email to AIPartnership@ uspto.gov. Comments may also be submitted by postal mail addressed to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450. Although comments may be submitted by postal mail, the USPTO prefers to receive comments via email. Because written comments and testimony will be made available for public inspection, information that a respondent does not desire to be made public, such as a phone number, should not be included in the testimony or written comments. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 58141 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coke Stewart, Office of the Under Secretary and Director of the USPTO, (571) 272–8600. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies are increasingly becoming important across a diverse spectrum of technologies and businesses. AI poses unique challenges in the sphere of intellectual property law. At a January 31, 2019 conference on ‘‘Artificial Intelligence: Intellectual Property Policy Considerations,’’ USPTO explored a number of those challenges.1 On August 27, 2019, the USPTO published a request for comment regarding AI’s impacts on patent law and policy. As a continuation of this work, the USPTO is also considering the impact of AI on other intellectual property rights. Issues for Comment: The USPTO seeks comments on the copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property rights issues that may be impacted by AI. The questions enumerated below are a preliminary guide to aid the USPTO in collecting relevant information to evaluate whether further guidance is needed and to assist in the development of any such guidance with respect to intellectual property policy and its relationship with AI. The questions should not be taken as an indication that the USPTO has taken a position, or is predisposed to any particular views. The USPTO welcomes comments from the public on any issues that they believe are relevant to this topic, and is particularly interested in answers to the following questions: 1. Should a work produced by an AI algorithm or process, without the involvement of a natural person contributing expression to the resulting work, qualify as a work of authorship protectable under U.S. copyright law? Why or why not? 2. Assuming involvement by a natural person is or should be required, what kind of involvement would or should be sufficient so that the work qualifies for copyright protection? For example, should it be sufficient if a person (i) designed the AI algorithm or process that created the work; (ii) contributed to the design of the algorithm or process; (iii) chose data used by the algorithm for training or otherwise; (iv) caused the AI algorithm or process to be used to yield the work; or (v) engaged in some specific combination of the foregoing 1 A videotape of the entire conference, along with the agenda and an overview of the conference, are available at https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/ artificial-intelligence-intellectual-property-policyconsiderations. E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM 30OCN1 58142 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 210 / Wednesday, October 30, 2019 / Notices activities? Are there other contributions a person could make in a potentially copyrightable AI-generated work in order to be considered an ‘‘author’’? 3. To the extent an AI algorithm or process learns its function(s) by ingesting large volumes of copyrighted material, does the existing statutory language (e.g., the fair use doctrine) and related case law adequately address the legality of making such use? Should authors be recognized for this type of use of their works? If so, how? 4. Are current laws for assigning liability for copyright infringement adequate to address a situation in which an AI process creates a work that infringes a copyrighted work? 5. Should an entity or entities other than a natural person, or company to which a natural person assigns a copyrighted work, be able to own the copyright on the AI work? For example: Should a company who trains the artificial intelligence process that creates the work be able to be an owner? 6. Are there other copyright issues that need to be addressed to promote the goals of copyright law in connection with the use of AI? 7. Would the use of AI in trademark searching impact the registrablity of trademarks? If so, how? 8. How, if at all, does AI impact trademark law? Is the existing statutory language in the Lanham Act adequate to address the use of AI in the marketplace? 9. How, if at all, does AI impact the need to protect databases and data sets? Are existing laws adequate to protect such data? 10. How, if at all, does AI impact trade secret law? Is the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), 18 U.S.C. 1836 et seq., adequate to address the use of AI in the marketplace? 11. Do any laws, policies, or practices need to change in order to ensure an appropriate balance between maintaining trade secrets on the one hand and obtaining patents, copyrights, or other forms of intellectual property protection related to AI on the other? 12. Are there any other AI-related issues pertinent to intellectual property rights (other than those related to patent rights) that the USPTO should examine? 13. Are there any relevant policies or practices from intellectual property agencies or legal systems in other countries that may help inform USPTO’s policies and practices regarding intellectual property rights (other than those related to patent rights)? VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:18 Oct 29, 2019 Jkt 250001 Dated: October 23, 2019. Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [Docket No.: ED–2019–ICCD–0093] BILLING CODE 3510–16–P Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program Annual Performance Report COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION AGENCY: [FR Doc. 2019–23638 Filed 10–29–19; 8:45 am] Sunshine Act Meetings 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, November 5, 2019. TIME AND DATE: CFTC Headquarters, LobbyLevel Hearing Room, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC. PLACE: STATUS: Open. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘CFTC’’) will hold this meeting to consider the following matters: • Proposed Rule—Correcting Amendment to Commission Regulation 160.30 (Privacy of Consumer Financial Information); • Foreign Board of Trade (FBOT) Applications of Euronext Amsterdam, Euronext Paris, and European Energy Exchange; and • Other Commission business. The agenda for this meeting will be available to the public and posted on the Commission’s website at https:// www.cftc.gov. In the event that the time, date, or place of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, or place of the meeting, will be posted on the Commission’s website. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission, 202–418–5964. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b. Dated: October 28, 2019. Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 2019–23810 Filed 10–28–19; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6351–01–P PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), Department of Education (ED). ACTION: Notice. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of an existing information collection. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 29, 2019. ADDRESSES: To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use http://www.regulations.gov by searching the Docket ID number ED– 2019–ICCD–0093. Comments submitted in response to this notice should be submitted electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http:// www.regulations.gov by selecting the Docket ID number or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. If the regulations.gov site is not available to the public for any reason, ED will temporarily accept comments at ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Please include the docket ID number and the title of the information collection request when requesting documents or submitting comments. Please note that comments submitted by fax or email and those submitted after the comment period will not be accepted. Written requests for information or comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to the Director of the Information Collection Clearance Division, U.S. Department of Education, 550 12th Street SW, PCP, Room 9086, Washington, DC 20202–0023. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact Carmen Gordon, 202–453–7311. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM 30OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58141-58142]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23638]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Patent and Trademark Office

[Docket No. PTO-C-2019-0038]


Request for Comments on Intellectual Property Protection for 
Artificial Intelligence Innovation

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of 
Commerce.

ACTION: Request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') is 
gathering information about the impact of artificial intelligence 
(``AI'') technologies on intellectual property law and policy. To 
assist in gathering this information, on August 27, 2019, the USPTO 
published questions related to the impact of artificial intelligence 
inventions on patent law and policy and asked the public for written 
comments. Those questions cover a variety of topics, including whether 
revisions to intellectual property protection are needed. The present 
notice extends this inquiry to copyright, trademark, and other 
intellectual property rights impacted by AI.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 16, 
2019.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent by email to 
[email protected]. Comments may also be submitted by postal mail 
addressed to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. 
Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. Although comments may be submitted 
by postal mail, the USPTO prefers to receive comments via email.
    Because written comments and testimony will be made available for 
public inspection, information that a respondent does not desire to be 
made public, such as a phone number, should not be included in the 
testimony or written comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coke Stewart, Office of the Under 
Secretary and Director of the USPTO, (571) 272-8600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies 
are increasingly becoming important across a diverse spectrum of 
technologies and businesses. AI poses unique challenges in the sphere 
of intellectual property law. At a January 31, 2019 conference on 
``Artificial Intelligence: Intellectual Property Policy 
Considerations,'' USPTO explored a number of those challenges.\1\ On 
August 27, 2019, the USPTO published a request for comment regarding 
AI's impacts on patent law and policy. As a continuation of this work, 
the USPTO is also considering the impact of AI on other intellectual 
property rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A videotape of the entire conference, along with the agenda 
and an overview of the conference, are available at https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/artificial-intelligence-intellectual-property-policy-considerations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issues for Comment: The USPTO seeks comments on the copyright, 
trademark, and other intellectual property rights issues that may be 
impacted by AI. The questions enumerated below are a preliminary guide 
to aid the USPTO in collecting relevant information to evaluate whether 
further guidance is needed and to assist in the development of any such 
guidance with respect to intellectual property policy and its 
relationship with AI. The questions should not be taken as an 
indication that the USPTO has taken a position, or is predisposed to 
any particular views. The USPTO welcomes comments from the public on 
any issues that they believe are relevant to this topic, and is 
particularly interested in answers to the following questions:
    1. Should a work produced by an AI algorithm or process, without 
the involvement of a natural person contributing expression to the 
resulting work, qualify as a work of authorship protectable under U.S. 
copyright law? Why or why not?
    2. Assuming involvement by a natural person is or should be 
required, what kind of involvement would or should be sufficient so 
that the work qualifies for copyright protection? For example, should 
it be sufficient if a person (i) designed the AI algorithm or process 
that created the work; (ii) contributed to the design of the algorithm 
or process; (iii) chose data used by the algorithm for training or 
otherwise; (iv) caused the AI algorithm or process to be used to yield 
the work; or (v) engaged in some specific combination of the foregoing

[[Page 58142]]

activities? Are there other contributions a person could make in a 
potentially copyrightable AI-generated work in order to be considered 
an ``author''?
    3. To the extent an AI algorithm or process learns its function(s) 
by ingesting large volumes of copyrighted material, does the existing 
statutory language (e.g., the fair use doctrine) and related case law 
adequately address the legality of making such use? Should authors be 
recognized for this type of use of their works? If so, how?
    4. Are current laws for assigning liability for copyright 
infringement adequate to address a situation in which an AI process 
creates a work that infringes a copyrighted work?
    5. Should an entity or entities other than a natural person, or 
company to which a natural person assigns a copyrighted work, be able 
to own the copyright on the AI work? For example: Should a company who 
trains the artificial intelligence process that creates the work be 
able to be an owner?
    6. Are there other copyright issues that need to be addressed to 
promote the goals of copyright law in connection with the use of AI?
    7. Would the use of AI in trademark searching impact the 
registrablity of trademarks? If so, how?
    8. How, if at all, does AI impact trademark law? Is the existing 
statutory language in the Lanham Act adequate to address the use of AI 
in the marketplace?
    9. How, if at all, does AI impact the need to protect databases and 
data sets? Are existing laws adequate to protect such data?
    10. How, if at all, does AI impact trade secret law? Is the Defend 
Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), 18 U.S.C. 1836 et seq., adequate to address 
the use of AI in the marketplace?
    11. Do any laws, policies, or practices need to change in order to 
ensure an appropriate balance between maintaining trade secrets on the 
one hand and obtaining patents, copyrights, or other forms of 
intellectual property protection related to AI on the other?
    12. Are there any other AI-related issues pertinent to intellectual 
property rights (other than those related to patent rights) that the 
USPTO should examine?
    13. Are there any relevant policies or practices from intellectual 
property agencies or legal systems in other countries that may help 
inform USPTO's policies and practices regarding intellectual property 
rights (other than those related to patent rights)?

    Dated: October 23, 2019.
Andrei Iancu,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of 
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2019-23638 Filed 10-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-16-P