Shepard’s Validation of Antitrust Relief Framework on Patent Infringement of Novartis’ Cancer Drug Using Genomic Architectures of Legal Literature Based on UK Intellectual Property Law
{"title":"Shepard’s Validation of Antitrust Relief Framework on Patent Infringement of Novartis’ Cancer Drug Using Genomic Architectures of Legal Literature Based on UK Intellectual Property Law","authors":"Z. Llarena","doi":"10.47672/ajl.1566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Comparative law is designed for alignment of constitutional law with other countries advocating public welfare and safety. The United States has an Intellectual Property provision under U.S. Fair Clause using their constitution as pre-emptive doctrine. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the applicability of UK Intellectual Property Law based on their complexed policies on Artificial Intelligence. Hence, it leads to problem statements questioning: (1) the eligibility of matters of facts did not meet UK IP Law; (2) the standard for evidence towards invention using Artificial Intelligence does not conform with UK IP Law; (3) Liability in AI patent infringement is not subsistent in UK IP Law; and (4) AI’s compliance is not subject for responsibility under creativity and non-obviousness criteria. \nMethodology: The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement promotes the public welfare and safety under constitutional laws. India, as a member, is obliged to comply with the standard of evidence in patentability under World Trade Organization (WTO). The study employs comparative contextual assessment using Novartis’ case as trial proceedings for disclosing theoretical framework vital to socio-legal integration of WTO principles. \nFindings: The World Trade Organization is a committee responsible to advocate business law. Invention for marketability of patent product has its own complexed policy to comply for acceptance of an Intellectual Property creation. Constitutional law is designed to be made comparable with other countries promoting monetary success of their nation exhibiting economic progress in industrial and technological advancements. Hence, authorless works marking artificial intelligence towards public health and safety must be done in lack of any dedication to human connections resulting to immersion of their “new” product as a work of an art making non-obviousness skills to people as part of common logic and interests, hence, a product of convenience. \nRecommendations: WTO is an intergovernmental task force important to implement constitutional laws comparable to other countries resulting to theory integration of socio-legal aspects based on trade-related principles. Hence, the advocacy of business ethics is a highly acknowledged means of making the lives of people to be technologically advanced with convenience, thus, inventions should be made affordable for public access.","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1566","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Comparative law is designed for alignment of constitutional law with other countries advocating public welfare and safety. The United States has an Intellectual Property provision under U.S. Fair Clause using their constitution as pre-emptive doctrine. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the applicability of UK Intellectual Property Law based on their complexed policies on Artificial Intelligence. Hence, it leads to problem statements questioning: (1) the eligibility of matters of facts did not meet UK IP Law; (2) the standard for evidence towards invention using Artificial Intelligence does not conform with UK IP Law; (3) Liability in AI patent infringement is not subsistent in UK IP Law; and (4) AI’s compliance is not subject for responsibility under creativity and non-obviousness criteria.
Methodology: The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement promotes the public welfare and safety under constitutional laws. India, as a member, is obliged to comply with the standard of evidence in patentability under World Trade Organization (WTO). The study employs comparative contextual assessment using Novartis’ case as trial proceedings for disclosing theoretical framework vital to socio-legal integration of WTO principles.
Findings: The World Trade Organization is a committee responsible to advocate business law. Invention for marketability of patent product has its own complexed policy to comply for acceptance of an Intellectual Property creation. Constitutional law is designed to be made comparable with other countries promoting monetary success of their nation exhibiting economic progress in industrial and technological advancements. Hence, authorless works marking artificial intelligence towards public health and safety must be done in lack of any dedication to human connections resulting to immersion of their “new” product as a work of an art making non-obviousness skills to people as part of common logic and interests, hence, a product of convenience.
Recommendations: WTO is an intergovernmental task force important to implement constitutional laws comparable to other countries resulting to theory integration of socio-legal aspects based on trade-related principles. Hence, the advocacy of business ethics is a highly acknowledged means of making the lives of people to be technologically advanced with convenience, thus, inventions should be made affordable for public access.
期刊介绍:
desde Enero 2004 Último Numero: Octubre 2008 AJLM will solicit blind comments from expert peer reviewers, including faculty members of our editorial board, as well as from other preeminent health law and public policy academics and professionals from across the country and around the world.