The Law Offices of Melissa K. Dagodag

09/02/2026

The USPTO Is Moving From Watching AI to Actively Regulating Its Use

The USPTO is no longer treating artificial intelligence as a side issue and is instead building a more defined framework for how AI should be used by agency personnel, applicants, and practitioners appearing before the office. That shift is showing up through guidance on AI-assisted inventorship, practitioner use of AI tools, and subject-matter eligibility, all of which signal that AI-related filings and AI-assisted practice now require closer attention to compliance, accuracy, and human accountability.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2d0ab88b-ff70-47a5-a4ff-1055b21680f1&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-04-2

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become nearly ubiquitous in everyday life, and given AI’s widespread use across industries, it is no surprise that…

08/27/2026

Where IP Rights Meet Antitrust Rules in the U.S.

U.S. intellectual property law, covering patents, copyright, trademarks, and trade secrets, often intersects with antitrust rules that bar anticompetitive conduct such as price-fixing, tying, and mergers that lessen competition. The resulting case law and agency guidance shape how IP licensing, standard-essential patents, settlements, and litigation strategies are evaluated under the Sherman, Clayton, and FTC Acts.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c18f6684-f232-49a7-a710-18e17d656efb&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-08-18&utm_term=

08/25/2026

Parody Wins the Day: Ninth Circuit Tosses Jack Daniel’s Dilution Injunction Over Bad Spaniels Toy

The Ninth Circuit vacated the permanent injunction against VIP Products’ “Bad Spaniels” dog toy, holding that Jack Daniel’s failed to prove dilution by tarnishment because it did not establish fame for all asserted marks and its expert ignored the toy’s obvious parodic context when assessing reputational harm. The ruling underscores that even source-identifying parodies can defeat tarnishment claims where the humor makes clear the product is a joke, not a damaging knockoff.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5b66ce34-1626-4eba-aeb6-d3a6c59037de&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-08-18&utm_term=

08/25/2026

Parody Wins the Day: Ninth Circuit Tosses Jack Daniel’s Dilution Injunction Over Bad Spaniels Toy
The Ninth Circuit vacated the permanent injunction against VIP Products’ “Bad Spaniels” dog toy, holding that Jack Daniel’s failed to prove dilution by tarnishment because it did not establish fame for all asserted marks and its expert ignored the toy’s obvious parodic context when assessing reputational harm. The ruling underscores that even source-identifying parodies can defeat tarnishment claims where the humor makes clear the product is a joke, not a damaging knockoff.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5b66ce34-1626-4eba-aeb6-d3a6c59037de&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-08-18&utm_term=

08/18/2026

The Anthropic Leak Shows Why Software and AI IP Strategy Cannot Rely on Secrecy Alone

The Anthropic Claude Code leak is a vivid reminder that trade secret protection works only as long as secrecy holds, and even well-resourced AI companies can lose that protection quickly through ordinary human error rather than hacking or espionage. Once sensitive code or implementation details enter the public domain, trade secret claims can collapse, copyright may reach only literal expression, and patents may become the only IP right still capable of blocking independent reimplementation of the underlying methods.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=fd0e7df9-db04-4c8a-89be-f7d3a4be2d1f&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-04-2

08/14/2026

Keyword Bids Get a Green Light, but Visible Trademark Use Does Not

The Eleventh Circuit confirmed that buying a competitor’s trademark as an online search keyword, without more, is not infringement because consumers never see the keyword itself. However, NOCO’s visible use of “Battery Tender” in advertising, product descriptions, and customer communications supported infringement findings, while flawed pleading of a false-advertising claim sent the damages issue back for a new trial.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=94058ab1-a84e-4413-88d9-b42dc8440ce3&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-08-07&utmterm=

08/12/2026

AI Is Expanding in the Art Market More as an Operational Tool Than as an Accepted Creative Medium

Artificial intelligence is gaining ground in the art market mainly through administrative and business functions such as research, communications, planning, and data management, while skepticism remains much stronger when AI is presented as an artistic medium in its own right. That split is creating practical legal and commercial pressure around authorship, copyright, training data, privacy, disclosure, contracts, and the use of AI-generated works or likenesses, making clear governance and careful documentation increasingly important for galleries, artists, and related market participants.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c732010b-443a-4385-a26c-06a2a5ee1ea5&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-04-2

A recent Artsy survey of more than 300 gallery professionals underscores a widening gap between operational adoption of artificial intelligence (AI)…

08/06/2026

Human Creativity Remains the Cornerstone of Copyright Protection for AI-Assisted Works

Purely autonomous AI-generated works still face a major barrier to copyright protection in the United States, while AI-assisted works have a stronger path when a human can show meaningful creative control through prompting, selection, arrangement, and especially post-generation editing. The practical message for creators and companies is straightforward: preserve records of human input, keep drafts and prompts, and document revisions carefully if copyright registration or enforcement may matter later.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c75c9253-2b9d-48d2-bccc-b649c3d6613b&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-04-1

Last month in Thaler v. Perlmutter, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider the copyrightability of artwork generated purely autonomously by…

08/05/2026

Trademark Enforcement or PR Disaster? Patagonia’s Pattie Gonia Fight Raises Both

Patagonia’s dispute with Pattie Gonia shows that even a legally defensible trademark claim can create a major brand backlash when it collides with parody, activism, and a powerful public narrative. The case is a reminder that protecting a mark is not just a legal decision, it is a business and reputation decision too, and coexistence agreements may sometimes offer a smarter path than a public courtroom battle.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=619a3f48-f82d-445b-91c2-f74d88b29533&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-07-30&utm_term=

07/31/2026

A Celebrity Face Can Function as a Trade Mark, but Distinctiveness Does the Heavy Lifting

A face can be registered as a trade mark in the UK, but only when it is represented clearly and consumers would understand that image as identifying the commercial origin of specific goods or services rather than simply showing a person’s appearance. Luke Littler’s filing reflects a wider push by public figures to use trade mark law as a practical shield against unauthorized likeness use in the AI era, especially in jurisdictions like the UK where there is no standalone image right, though success still depends on proving the face is distinctive enough to function as a badge of origin.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8cb50bfb-efdf-4c2f-bcf6-ca1634f9f2fd&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2026-04-2