For much of the past two years, AI litigation has centered on how AI systems are built: the training data, content, and intellectual property that go into them. Those disputes continue, but the Q3 additions to the J.S. Held AI Disputes Monitor show litigation expanding to examine what AI systems do once deployed, including how […]
Ocean Tomo Insights
The Business Case for AI as Intellectual Property: Eight Questions on Recognition, Protection, Valuation, and Monetization
Executive Summary In this post, Joel Lutzker, Managing Director of Ocean Tomo, a part of J.S. Held, and James E. Malackowski, Chief Intellectual Property Officer of J.S. Held, examine artificial intelligence through the lens of intellectual property and intangible asset management. They argue that AI is more than a technology capability. AI systems comprise valuable […]
Intangible Asset Market Value in the Australian Equity Market: Australia’s Integration into the Intangible Economy
Senior IP decision-makers, specifically Chief Intellectual Property Officers (CIPOs), and partners at law firms and in-house counsel advising the ASX 200 companies, should read this article to understand: Australia’s intangible share and its 25-year trajectory. Intangible assets rose from about 65.5% of ASX 200 market capitalization in 2000 to a record 74% in 2025, a […]
AI as IP™ Framework: Reasonable Measures in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Corporate Chief Intellectual Property Officers, General Counsel, and Chief IP Counsel should read this article to: Understand how “reasonable measures” in trade secret, patent, and copyright contexts are evolving as AI systems create, store, modify, and expose valuable intellectual property across technical and organizational layers Advise clients to build AI Asset Registers that document asset […]
Ocean Tomo Insights Series: Strategies for Standard Essential Patents (Part 3 of 4)
This article is the third in a four-part Ocean Tomo Insights series focused on strategies for managing standard essential patent (SEP) portfolios, litigation, and licensing. Each installment addresses a specific stakeholder group including implementers, innovators, outside counsel, and suppliers. The articles explore how understanding SEP related technical analysis and FRAND royalty rates can support proactive risk assessment, strategy, and positioning in SEP disputes In this third article, we examine […]
Biotech Blues & The Not-So-Hidden Costs of Prior Art: Lessons in Pharma and Psychedelics
| This article was first published on les Nouvelles, March 2026 edition. In the high-stakes biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, and in their emerging offshoots like the fast-growing psychedelics space, patents are both a cornerstone of innovation and a potential latent source of risk. At the heart of this dynamic lie prior art and freedom-to-operate […]
Software Reverse Engineering and Dynamic Testing for Evidence of Use
In a previous article, I introduced the three primary approaches for establishing Evidence of Use (EoU) in patent matters involving software and firmware: analysis of publicly available information, device and application testing, and reverse engineering. That piece outlined what each approach involves and when each is most appropriate. This article goes deeper into the software […]
Ocean Tomo Insights Series: Strategies for Standard Essential Patents (Part 2 of 4)
This article is the second in a four-part Ocean Tomo Insights series focused on strategies for managing standard essential patent (SEP) portfolios. Each installment will address a specific stakeholder group — implementers, innovators, outside counsel, and suppliers — and explore how understanding technical standards, SEPs, and technical analysis can support proactive risk assessment, litigation defense, […]