MallMAX Scope Now, with MallMAX Scope, a service that visualizes product specific challenges, transcosmos helps businesses expand their sales channels...
Years ago our industry adopted the ‘Know Your Customer’ (KYC) guidelines to verify identity, assess risk and prevent fraud. This straightforward concept has...
Skim the latest supply chain news and you’ll find headlines spanning disruptions, backlogs, shipping delays, soaring prices, and changing consumer habits. “Supply chain complexity” is a popular search term as businesses explore technologies that will enable them to better manage risk and uncertainty. We’ve discussed how supply chain visibility is the foundation to building a successful technology strategy – but what is the ultimate aim?
Certainly, the “perfect order” – on time and in full (OTIF) delivery at the lowest possible cost – is the gold standard from a business perspective. From a technological perspective, the systems that will best help us reach those aims are intelligent cloud platforms with artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL) capabilities.
Charlton Hill, Co-founder and Head of Innovation at Uncanny Valley, a Sydney-based progressive music technology company discusses the company’s ambitions to speed-up, democratize and re-shape music production through the use of artificial intelligence.
Regular readers will know my position on this issue – I do not consider it appropriate at this time (or, potentially, ever) to grant patents for inventions devised entirely by automated means, such that there is no human inventor. I have written an article targeted to a more general audience, which has been published by InnovationAus, providing an overview of the Australian case, and broadly discussing my concerns. Here I will be going into more detail of the arguments presented at the recent hearing, and why I think it would be very unfortunate if Justice Beach were to decide that this is a suitable case for judicial development of the law to embrace machine inventors, as he is being encouraged to do by Thaler.
I was able to attend the hearing virtually, since it was being held via web conference. Thaler’s team, led by experienced and highly-regarded barrister David Shavin QC, appeared in person in the Melbourne courtroom with Justice Beach, while the Commissioner of Patents was represented by Hamish Bevan, appearing via video from Sydney (subject to restrictions, due to an ongoing COVID outbreak). Although I disagree with the proposition, I thought that Mr Shavin presented a persuasive argument that the relevant provisions of the Australian Patents Act 1990 can, and should, be interpreted to encompass non-human inventors, and that Mr Bevan perhaps did not do enough to counter this argument. I formed the impression that Justice Beach just might be minded to ‘develop’ the Australian law to permit patent applications having no human inventor, in part because he was not presented with any particularly good reasons not to do so.
Vigilant Aerospace Systems’ CEO Kraettli Epperson participated in an AUVSI presentation on “Enhancing Operations with Sensors and Other Instruments.” We are happy to share...
In recent years AI and machine learning have had a major impact on how we run our businesses. They have also influenced the way we make decisions in supply chain planning. As a result we are now in a position to have a supply chain planning system that may have enough intelligence to grow and change with the organization on its own!
According to the 2024 Agility Index research study from Epicor and Nucleus Research, nearly half of surveyed companies across the make, move and sell...