Artificiële Intelligentie & Recht
Innovation, Quantum-AI Technology & Law
0

Blog over Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum, Deep Learning, Blockchain en Big Data Law

Blog over juridische, sociale, ethische en policy aspecten van Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum Computing, Sensing & Communication, Augmented Reality en Robotica, Big Data Wetgeving en Machine Learning Regelgeving. Kennisartikelen inzake de EU AI Act, de Data Governance Act, cloud computing, algoritmes, privacy, virtual reality, blockchain, robotlaw, smart contracts, informatierecht, ICT contracten, online platforms, apps en tools. Europese regels, auteursrecht, chipsrecht, databankrechten en juridische diensten AI recht.

Berichten met de tag Patents
Quantum Nexus LSI Test Published by Vanderbilt JET Law
Quantum Nexus LSI Test Published by Vanderbilt JET Law

Most technology law arrives too late: the architecture ships, the market consolidates, and legislators are left regulating what already exists. A new essay in Vanderbilt's Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law argues that quantum technology presents the opposite—and far rarer—situation, and explains what the law should do with it. Quantum law is being written before quantum technology has fully arrived, and that timing is not a defect to apologize for but an opportunity to seize.

A test with three prongs

At the center of the essay stands the LSI test, a doctrinal instrument for dual-use governance that asks of every state intervention whether it is the least trade-restrictive, security-sufficient, and innovation-preserving measure available. The shift in emphasis is subtle but consequential: the question is no longer whether a government possesses a restrictive tool—export control, outbound investment screening, patent secrecy—but whether it is deploying the narrowest one that actually works. Between the romantics of total openness and the reflexes of total restriction, the test stakes out a defensible middle ground the essay calls security-sufficient openness.

Patents and export controls, one system

The essay's second contribution is diagnostic. Intellectual property and national security are conventionally treated as separate fields with separate experts and separate statutes. In quantum practice they behave as one entangled legal control plane: a single patent disclosure can simultaneously raise eligibility questions under Alice, research-security questions under the export-control regime, and commercialization questions under Bayh-Dole and the federal acquisition rules. Reading them together is not an academic nicety—it is the only way to see where over-securitization would quietly strangle the startups, standards participation, and allied interoperability on which democratic quantum leadership depends, a dynamic explored across the MINDS quantum strategy research at CIGI.

From a six-paragraph essay to a coalition playbook

Behind the essay stands the full Quantum Nexus Article—a book-length treatment on arXiv that develops the LSI test into an implementable coalition playbook: empirically anchored criteria, differentiated guardrails with red-zone domains where denial is the default, and secure closed-loop enclaves for high-sensitivity collaborative research. The stakes are framed without euphemism: U.S. assessments now call for a Quantum First posture by 2030, China's program advances under military-civil fusion, and the choice before democratic legislators is whether the coming wall of quantum regulation will be disciplined by doctrine or improvised under pressure. For lawyers, the essay is a preview of their next decade; for policymakers, it is a usable standard; and for the quantum community, it is an argument that the rules now being written deserve the same precision as the systems they will govern.

Meer lezen
Intellectual Property, Quantum Technology, GovernanceHenry QuentirIntellectual Property, National Security, Dual-Use, Export Controls, Patents, Quantum Governance, Stanford RQT, CIGI, Mauritz Kop, LSI Test, Vanderbilt JETLaw, Quantum Nexus
Mauritz Kop Awarded Senior Fellowship at Leading G7 Think Tank CIGI Waterloo
Mauritz Kop Awarded Senior Fellowship at Leading G7 Think Tank CIGI Waterloo

Mauritz Kop, founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology (RQT) and a guest professor at the US Air Force Academy (USAFA), has been appointed a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), a leading Canadian G7 think tank with a global reputation for impactful research and policy advice. This fellowship marks a significant new chapter in Professor Kop's work, allowing for a deeper dive into the intricate and rapidly evolving nexus of quantum technology, artificial intelligence (AI), intellectual property (IP) law, competition policy, and national security. The initial project will focus on developing a comprehensive roadmap for navigating this complex landscape, building on previous engagement with CIGI and long-standing academic and professional connections with Canada.

Mauritz Kop Appointed Senior Fellow at CIGI: A New Chapter in Quantum Governance and Global Security

This CIGI senior fellow appointment is not just a personal honour, but a testament to the growing global recognition of the urgent need for innovative governance models to steer the development of powerful dual-use technologies towards beneficial outcomes for humanity. The challenges are immense, but so are the opportunities. In a world grappling with geopolitical instability and the disruptive potential of emerging technologies, CIGI’s mission to build bridges from knowledge to power has never been more critical. Kop is thrilled to contribute to this mission and to collaborate with CIGI’s distinguished team of experts.

Building on a Foundation: The Dual-Use Project and Previous Engagements

Professor Kop's journey with CIGI began prior to this fellowship, with a seminar delivered on the governance of dual-use quantum technologies. That lecture, titled “Responsible Quantum AI Governance: From Ethical Principles to Global Frameworks,” set the stage for the work he is about to undertake. In that presentation, he argued that we are approaching a “Quantum Event Horizon”—a critical juncture beyond which our ability to shape the trajectory of advanced quantum and AI systems may be irrevocably lost. The core of Kop's argument was that traditional governance models and diplomatic efforts are insufficient to address the systemic challenges posed by a global, high-stakes race for quantum supremacy.

The seminar explored the necessity of a multi-layered governance strategy. This includes not only the development of robust international legal frameworks and oversight bodies, drawing inspiration from nuclear non-proliferation treaties, but also the integration of “Quantum-Resistant Constitutional AI” to hardwire universal values into the technology itself. This dual approach, grounded in the principles of responsible innovation, is essential to mitigate the risks of misuse by state and non-state actors, and to ensure that these technologies serve to enhance, rather than undermine, democratic societies.

The positive reception to these ideas and the stimulating discussions that followed with the CIGI community laid the groundwork for this senior fellowship. It became clear that there was a shared understanding of the stakes involved and a common commitment to forging a path towards a safe and equitable quantum future. This fellowship provides the ideal platform to transition from articulating these principles to developing concrete, actionable policy recommendations.

A New Frontier: IP, Competition Law, Quantum, Dual-Use, and National Security

Professor Kop's first project as a CIGI Senior Fellow will be an in-depth analysis of the critical nexus between quantum technology, AI, IP policy, and national security strategy. The convergence of quantum and AI capabilities presents unprecedented challenges for global innovation and strategic stability, most notably the looming threat of “Q-Day,” when a sufficiently powerful quantum computer could break most of the public-key cryptography that underpins our digital world.

This project will draw lessons from historical precedents, particularly the governance of nuclear technology, to inform the development of novel frameworks for quantum governance. A key component of the research will be a comparative analysis of quantum IP strategies across the dominant tech blocs, examining how different approaches to patents, trade secrets, and state secrets are shaping the global quantum race.

Meer lezen
CIGI, Stanford RQT, Quantum ELSPI, Quantum Technology, Quantum-AI, Governance, GeopoliticsMauritz KopCIGI, Quantum Governance, Senior Fellowship, Intellectual Property Law, Antitrust Law, Ethics, Geopolitics, Dual-Use, national security, Export Controls, WIPO, Patents, Trade Secrets, Grand Strategy, Mauritz Kop, Standards, Democratic Values, Human Rights
Public Property from the Machine published in Harmonizing Intellectual Property Law for a Trans-Atlantic Knowledge Economy
Public Property from the Machine published in Harmonizing Intellectual Property Law for a Trans-Atlantic Knowledge Economy

Brill | Nijhoff's edited volume Harmonizing Intellectual Property Law for a Trans-Atlantic Knowledge Economy—edited by Péter Mezei, Hannibal Travis, and Anett Pogácsás, with a foreword by Maciej Szpunar—includes a chapter by Mauritz Kop, founder of the Stanford Center for Responsible Quantum Technology, titled Public Property from the Machine. The chapter confronts the question generative artificial intelligence forces on intellectual property law: who should own what a machine makes when no human authored it.

A new category, not a new right

Kop's answer breaks with the reflex to meet new output with new ownership. He argues that human authorship and inventorship remain the normative basis of copyright and patent law, and that—on the chapter's account—extending those rights to fully AI-generated works would chill innovation, narrow cultural diversity, and crowd the commons. In their place he proposes Res Publicae ex Machina—public property from the machine—a deliberately designed, permission-free public-domain regime for creations and inventions that have crossed the autonomy threshold, the point at which output is produced without meaningful human creative contribution. He frames the move as a Pareto improvement: many gain access, and no legal person loses a right that was ever warranted.

Rooted in the articulated public domain

The proposal develops Kop's earlier AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain, published in the Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal in 2020, which argued for designing the public domain deliberately rather than treating it as the leftover of whatever rights fail to attach. The 2024 chapter applies that foundation to machine-generated subject matter under a named regime—so the two are best read as a sequence: the foundational article first, the autonomous-output application second. The same design-first instinct that animates Kop's responsible-innovation work, including the Ten Principles for Responsible Quantum Innovation, runs through the chapter: shape the rules before the defaults harden.

Why it matters for trans-Atlantic IP

Placing the argument inside a volume on trans-Atlantic harmonization is deliberate. The familiar questions—can an AI be an author, can an AI be an inventor—assume ownership is the only available category. Public Property from the Machine insists that public property is a category too—one the chapter argues is more defensible for output no human authored. For the United States and Europe, the practical question becomes not how to extend private rights to machines but what to agree to leave free. The fuller portrait of the scholar behind the proposal is set out in the Mauritz Kop profile. The chapter is a scholarly proposal rather than a statement of existing law—but it reframes a debate that has too often had only one answer on offer.

Meer lezen
Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, InnovationMauritz KopMauritz Kop, AI, Stanford RQT, Intellectual Property, Public Domain, Generative AI, Copyright, Patents, Brill, Res Publicae ex Machina, Trans-Atlantic
Mauritz Kop and Mateo Aboy Present QT and Law Research at Lund Quantum Conference
Mauritz Kop and Mateo Aboy Present QT and Law Research at Lund Quantum Conference

When Lund University convened The Quantum Law Conference in late April 2022, the legal scholarship on quantum computing was still in its infancy. Organized by Valentin Jeutner under the WASP-HS-funded Quantum Law Project, the gathering—formally titled The Legal Dimensions of Quantum Computing—gave an early home to a question that has only grown more urgent: whether intellectual property law is fit for the quantum age. Mauritz Kop, then a TTLF Fellow at Stanford Law School, and Mateo Aboy, Principal Research Scholar at the University of Cambridge, brought a distinctive answer—one built on data rather than intuition.

Theory meets the patent record

Kop's theoretical contribution warned of IP overprotection: a "rainbow" of overlapping rights that could entrench first movers and concentrate market power in a young field. Rather than rest on the argument, the team tested it. Aboy led a patent-landscape study of the quantum computing subfield, asking whether feared "thicket" and "anticommons" effects were actually appearing. The pairing of a normative framework with empirical patent analysis is what made the Lund presentation unusual—and useful to policymakers who need evidence, not assertion.

A counter-intuitive result

The data pointed the other way. The patent system in quantum computing was not, at that stage, generating innovation-choking overprotection; instead, a growing share of quantum patent information was entering the publicly available disclosure record through lapsed and non-granted filings, forming an expanding information commons. The important caveat was secrecy: trade secrets and state secrets ordinarily do not appear in patent datasets, so quantitative mapping must always be read alongside qualitative analysis. The conclusion was measured—IP law works best in concert with competition law, steering between under- and overprotection.

From a conference room toward the journals

The work is not staying in Lund. The theoretical and market-power strand is forthcoming as a peer-reviewed article in the Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice (Oxford University Press), and the companion patent-landscape study is forthcoming in IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (Springer), with a transatlantic author team spanning Stanford, Cambridge, and CeBIL at the University of Copenhagen. Together they promise one of the earliest evidence-based treatments of quantum-IP policy. It is a quieter companion to Kop's better-known warning that quantum computing carries risks that rival those of artificial intelligence: here the concern is not catastrophe but market structure—who gets to build on quantum technology, and on what terms. The answer the Lund research offers is calibration, not maximalism: predictability enough to attract investment, openness enough to keep the field competitive.

Meer lezen
Intellectual Property, Quantum Technology, AcademicsMauritz KopMauritz Kop, Quantum Governance, Quantum Technology, Intellectual Property, Patents, Mateo Aboy, Timo Minssen, Lund University, Conference, Competition Law, JIPLP, IIC
Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law
Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law

Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2021

New Stanford University Beyond IP Innovation Law research article: “Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law”.

By Mauritz Kop

Citation: Kop, Mauritz, Quantum Computing and Intellectual Property Law (April 8, 2021). Berkeley Technology Law Journal 2021, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp 101-115, February 8, 2022, https://btlj.org/2022/02/quantum-computing-and-intellectual-property-law/

Download the article here: Kop_QC and IP Law BTLJ

Please find a short abstract below:

Intellectual property (IP) rights & the Quantum Computer

What types of intellectual property (IP) rights can be vested in the components of a scalable quantum computer? Are there sufficient market-set innovation incentives for the development and dissemination of quantum software and hardware structures? Or is there a need for open source ecosystems, enrichment of the public domain and even democratization of quantum technology? The article explores possible answers to these tantalizing questions.

IP overprotection leads to exclusive exploitation rights for first movers

The article demonstrates that strategically using a mixture of IP rights to maximize the value of the IP portfolio of the quantum computer’s owner, potentially leads to IP protection in perpetuity. Overlapping IP protection regimes can result in unlimited duration of global exclusive exploitation rights for first movers, being a handful of universities and large corporations. The ensuing IP overprotection in the field of quantum computing leads to an unwanted concentration of market power. Overprotection of information causes market barriers and hinders both healthy competition and industry-specific innovation. In this particular case it slows down progress in an important application area of quantum technology, namely quantum computing.

Fair competition and antitrust laws for quantum technology

In general, our current IP framework is not written with quantum technology in mind. IP should be an exception -limited in time and scope- to the rule that information goods can be used for the common good without restraint. IP law cannot incentivize creation, prevent market failure, fix winner-takes-all effects, eliminate free riding and prohibit predatory market behavior at the same time. To encourage fair competition and correct market skewness, antitrust law is the instrument of choice.

Towards an innovation architecture that mixes freedom and control

The article proposes a solution tailored to the exponential pace of innovation in The Quantum Age, by introducing shorter IP protection durations of 3 to 10 years for Quantum and AI infused creations and inventions. These shorter terms could be made applicable to both the software and the hardware side of things. Clarity about the recommended limited durations of exclusive rights -in combination with compulsory licenses or fixed prized statutory licenses- encourages legal certainty, knowledge dissemination and follow on innovation within the quantum domain. In this light, policy makers should build an innovation architecture that mixes freedom (e.g. access, public domain) and control (e.g. incentive & reward mechanisms).

Creating a thriving global quantum ecosystem

The article concludes that anticipating spectacular advancements in quantum technology, the time is now ripe for governments, research institutions and the markets to prepare regulatory and IP strategies that strike the right balance between safeguarding our fundamental rights & freedoms, our democratic norms & standards, and pursued policy goals that include rapid technology transfer, the free flow of information and the creation of a thriving global quantum ecosystem, whilst encouraging healthy competition and incentivizing sustainable innovation.

Meer lezen
Intellectual Property, Innovation, Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Computing, Quantum Technology, StanfordMauritz KopStanford Law SchoolQuantum Computing, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Technology, Deep Learning, Software, Hardware, Patents, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Trade Dress, Public Domain, Regulation, Antitrust Law, Democracy, Human Rights, Innovation Policy, Security, State Secrets, technology transfer, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Stanford Law School, University of California Berkeley, Mauritz Kop
Een Juridisch-Ethisch Kader voor Quantum Technologie
Een Juridisch-Ethisch Kader voor Quantum Technologie

Een bewerkte versie van deze bijdrage is gepubliceerd op platform VerderDenken.nl van het Centrum voor Postacademisch Juridisch Onderwijs (CPO) van de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. https://www.ru.nl/cpo/verderdenken/columns/we-nederland-voorbereiden-kwantumtoekomst/

Nederland moet zich voorbereiden op de toepassing van kwantumtechnologie, zegt jurist en Stanford Law School Fellow Mauritz Kop. Op het gebied van regulering, intellectueel eigendom en ethiek is er nog veel werk aan de winkel.

De Quantum Age roept veel juridische vragen op

Het gedrag van de natuur op de kleinste schaal kan vreemd en contra-intuïtief zijn. Hoe kunnen beleidsmakers de toepassingsgebieden van kwantumtechnologie, zoals quantum computing, quantum sensing en het quantum internet op een maatschappelijk verantwoorde manier reguleren? Dienen ethische kwesties een rol te spelen in regulering? De Quantum Age roept veel juridische vragen op.

Hoe kunnen we kwantumtechnologie reguleren?

Regulering van transformatieve technologie is een dynamisch, cyclisch proces dat de levensduur van de technologie en de toepassing volgt. Het vraagt om een flexibel wetgevend systeem dat zich snel kan aanpassen aan veranderende omstandigheden en maatschappelijke behoeften.

De eerste regelgevende stap om te komen tot een bruikbaar juridisch-ethisch kader is het koppelen van de Trustworthy AI-principes aan kwantumtechnologie. Die vullen we vervolgens aan met horizontale, overkoepelende regels die recht doen aan de unieke natuurkundige eigenschappen van quantum. Aan deze horizontale kernregels voegt de wetgever tenslotte verticale, industrie- of sectorspecifieke voorschriften toe. Die verticale voorschriften en gedragscodes zijn risk-based en houden rekening met de uiteenlopende behoeftes van economische sectoren waar het duurzame innovatiestimuli betreft. Zo ontstaat een gedifferentieerde, sectorspecifieke benadering aangaande incentives en risks.

Bewustwording van ethische, juridische en sociale aspecten

Een belangrijk onderdeel van het synchroniseren van onze normen, waarden, standaarden en principes met kwantumtechnologie is het creëren van bewustwording van de ethische, juridische en sociale aspecten ervan. De architectuur van systemen die zijn uitgerust met kwantumtechnologie moet waarden vertegenwoordigen die wij als samenleving belangrijk vinden.

Vooruitlopend op spectaculaire doorbraken in de toepassing van kwantumtechnologie is de tijd nu rijp voor regeringen, onderzoeksinstellingen en de markt om regulatoire en intellectuele eigendomsstrategieën voor te bereiden die passen bij de power van de technologie.

Nederland moet zich voorbereiden op een kwantumtoekomst, want die komt eraan.

Meer lezen
Artificiële Intelligentie, Intellectueel Eigendom, Innovation, Machine Learning, Policy, Quantum Technology, Quantum Computing, Recht, Scholarship, Wetgeving, ReguleringMauritz KopAIRechtQuantum Technology, Machine Learning, AI & Quantum Computing Hybrids, Software, Intellectual Property, Patents, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Public Domain, Standardisation, Regulation, Technology, Certification, Ethics, ELSA, Competition Law, Democracy, Human Rights, Innovation Policy, Mauritz Kop, CPO, Radboud Universiteit, VerderDenken, Stanford Law School, NEN, ISO, IEC, TU Delft, Quantum Delta, Normcommissie Quantum Technologieën, Living Labs
Regulating Transformative Technology in The Quantum Age: Intellectual Property, Standardization & Sustainable Innovation
Regulating Transformative Technology in The Quantum Age: Intellectual Property, Standardization & Sustainable Innovation

Stanford - Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, Transatlantic Antitrust and IPR Developments, Stanford University, Issue No. 2/2020

New Stanford cutting edge tech law research: “Regulating Transformative Technology in The Quantum Age: Intellectual Property, Standardization & Sustainable Innovation”.

Download the article here: Kop_Regulation Standardization Innovation Quantum Age-Stanford Law

Quantum technology has many legal aspects

The behavior of nature at the smallest scale can be strange and counterintuitive. In addition to unique physical characteristics, quantum technology has many legal aspects. In this article, we first explain what quantum technology entails. Next, we discuss implementation and areas of application, including quantum computing, quantum sensing and the quantum internet. Through an interdisciplinary lens, we then focus on intellectual property (IP), standardization, ethical, legal & social aspects (ELSA) as well as horizontal & industry-specific regulation of this transformative technology.

The Quantum Age raises many legal questions

The Quantum Age raises many legal questions. For example, which existing legislation applies to quantum technology? What types of IP rights can be vested in the components of a scalable quantum computer? Are there sufficient market-set innovation incentives for the development and dissemination of quantum software and hardware structures? Or is there a need for open source ecosystems, enrichment of the public domain and even democratization of quantum technology? Should we create global quantum safety, security and interoperability standards and make them mandatory in each area of application? In what way can quantum technology enhance artificial intelligence (AI) that is legal, ethical and technically robust?

Regulating quantum computing, quantum sensing & the quantum internet

How can policy makers realize these objectives and regulate quantum computing, quantum sensing and the quantum internet in a socially responsible manner? Regulation that addresses risks in a proportional manner, whilst optimizing the benefits of this cutting edge technology? Without hindering sustainable innovation, including the apportionment of rights, responsibilities and duties of care? What are the effects of standardization and certification on innovation, intellectual property, competition and market-entrance of quantum-startups?

The article explores possible answers to these tantalizing questions.

Meer lezen
Quantum Technology, Policy, Innovation, Certification, Standardization, University, ScholarshipMauritz KopStanford Law SchoolQuantum Technology, Machine Learning, AI & Quantum Computing Hybrids, Software, Intellectual Property, Patents, Database Rights, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Public Domain, Standardisation, Regulation, Technology, Certification, Ethics, ELSA, Competition Law, Democracy, Human Rights, Innovation Policy, Mauritz Kop, Stanford-Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum, Stanford Law School
AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain
AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain

New peer reviewed research article: ‘AI & Intellectual Property: Towards an Articulated Public Domain’ (download)

By Mauritz Kop

Link & citation at Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal (TIPLJ): 28 Tex. Intell. Prop. L. J. 297 (2020)

Link SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3409715

The article has been published in the Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal (2020, 28). TIPLJ is published in cooperation with the State Bar of Texas three times per year at the University of Texas School of Law. The Journal is the official journal of the State Bar of Texas Intellectual Property Law Section.

Res Publicae ex Machina (Public Property from the Machine)

Building upon the doctrinal body of knowledge, the article introduces a new public domain model for AI Creations and Inventions that crossed the autonomy threshold (i.e. no sufficient amount of human intervention that can be linked to the output): Res Publicae ex Machina (Public Property from the Machine). It includes examples.

Intellectual property framework AI systems

Besides that, the article describes the current legal framework regarding authorship and ownership of AI Creations, legal personhood, patents on AI Inventions, types of IP rights on the various components of the AI system itself (including Digital Twin technology), clearance of training data and data ownership.

Compact Artificial Intelligence & IP overview analysis

Main goal of this research is to offer an accessible, relatively compact Artificial Intelligence (AI) & IP overview analysis and in doing so, to provide some food for thought to interdisciplinary thinkers and policy makers in the IP, tech, privacy and freedom of information field.

Meer lezen
Artificiële Intelligentie, Intellectueel Eigendom, Informatierecht, Internet of Things, Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Wetgeving, PolicyMauritz KopAIRecht.nlArtificial Intelligence, Robotics, Intellectual Property, Copyright, Authorship, AI Creations & Inventions, Public Domain, Autonomy Threshold, Human Intervention, Legal Personhood, Roman Property Paradigm, Res Publicae ex Machina, Human Rights, Patents, Data Ownership, Trade Secrets, Ethics, Policy, Public Property from the Machine, Mauritz Kop