Practice area

Intellectual Property — Patents, Trade Marks, Copyright, Designs

Confirm the right, owner, territory and relevant dates before researching or drafting. Verify register information and technical material, and preserve specialist judgement on scope, validity and infringement.

Key facts

Tasks covered: 31
Tasks with a step-by-step checklist: 7
Local differences: 2 jurisdictions where this area changes

Jurisdiction

Tasks

GreenLawyer reviewYellowClose supervisionRedLawyer-led

Tasks in Intellectual Property — Patents, Trade Marks, Copyright, Designs
Task	How AI is used	Human involvement	What the lawyer must review
Build a prior-art hit table for novelty, inventive step or non-obviousnessStart this task See suggested levels	Search the patent collections and literature the lawyer names and table candidate hits with numbers, dates and a first-pass mapping to claim elements.	YellowClose supervision	Open every cited document Confirm the number, date and what it actually discloses Do not treat a mapping summary as a novelty opinion
Draft a patent specification from the inventor disclosureStart this task See suggested levels	The tool writes no part of the specification: no description, no background, no claims, no abstract, no scaffold and no suggested claim wording. It indexes the inventor disclosure, drawings and laboratory records feature by feature, lists every variant, parameter range and stated advantage against the page of the disclosure it comes from, checks that each reference numeral on the drawings appears in the lawyer's description, and flags any integer or embodiment in the lawyer's draft that no source document supports.	RedLawyer-led	The lawyer writes the description, claims and abstract, then checks their own text against the indexed disclosure: that every claim integer and every embodiment came from the inventor rather than from the index, that the claims are supported and the disclosure clear enough and complete enough to perform the invention, that the best method known to the applicant is disclosed, and that nothing has been added that would take the claims beyond what was disclosed at the priority date. The inventor confirms the technical content before the specification is filed.
Draft a response to a patent office action or examination reportStart this task See suggested levels	Produce a first-draft response with proposed claim amendments and arguments mapped to each objection in the examination report.	YellowClose supervision	Verify every citation and argument against the report and current examination practice Do not file until claim scope and admissions are settled
Draft a response to an IP Australia examination reportChecklist Start this task See suggested levels	Draft a response to an IP Australia examination report with claim amendments and arguments on novelty, inventive step, manner of manufacture, clarity and best method.	YellowClose supervision	Check every proposition against the current IP Australia Examination Guidelines Apply the October 2025 computer-implemented invention guidance after Aristocrat [2025] FCAFC 131 Do not apply pre-Aristocrat framing or US Alice/Mayo Check amendments do not add matter (Patents Act s 102) Verify every case, guideline and office decision exists and says what is claimed Consider what any argument or amendment concedes Do not narrow beyond commercial need
Respond to a USPTO office action with a human signature and a candor checkChecklist Start this task See suggested levels	Suggest claim amendments and argument headings from the office action and the specification the lawyer uploads into a closed environment.	YellowClose supervision	Sign the response yourself, as the USPTO notice (11 April 2024) requires Review every statement: filing certifies under 37 C.F.R. § 11.18 Do not delegate the duty of candor (37 C.F.R. §§ 1.56, 11.303)
Build a trade mark clearance conflict tableStart this task See suggested levels	Search the registers and common-law sources the lawyer names and list candidate conflicting marks by class, status and goods or services overlap.	YellowClose supervision	Confirm each cited mark on the live register Decide confusing similarity and whether the search coverage is enough to advise
Build a trade mark clearance conflict table from Australian Trade Mark SearchChecklist Start this task See suggested levels	Search Australian Trade Mark Search, Madrid Monitor, EUIPO, USPTO Trademark Search and the common-law sources the lawyer names; list candidate conflicting marks by class, status and goods or services overlap.	YellowClose supervision	Verify every registration number, class and status on Australian Trade Mark Search Search beyond the register: web, ASIC Business Name Register, ABN Lookup, domain names Apply deceptive similarity: Southern Cross Refrigerating Co v Toowoomba Foundry (1954) 91 CLR 592 Test imperfect recollection of the ordinary consumer, not similarity scores or TMPI rankings Check goods and services overlap under the Nice Classification as IP Australia applies it Flag marks with a pending opposition, adverse proceeding or removal action; check current Trade Marks Act 1995 grounds Do not treat TMPI (substantially identical text marks) as a full clearance search
Draft a trade mark goods and services specificationStart this task See suggested levels	Produce a Nice Classification goods and services specification from the client's product list, with a note of terms that look too broad or too narrow.	YellowClose supervision	Check the specification against what the client actually sells Check the office's current classification practice Avoid broad claims that create non-use risk
Draft a trade mark goods and services specification for IP AustraliaChecklist Start this task See suggested levels	Draft a Nice Classification specification and filing instructions from the client's product list against IP Australia's accepted headings, noting terms too broad or narrow.	YellowClose supervision	Check the specification is not so broad it risks non-use removal (Trade Marks Act 1995 s 92) Check it is not so narrow it misses actual use Check classification against IP Australia's current Goods and Services Acceptance Criteria Confirm the mark as filed matches the mark used or intended Confirm the applicant is the correct legal entity, not a trading name Check whether disclaimers are needed Confirm multi-class fees are allocated per class
Build a freedom-to-operate claim chartStart this task See suggested levels	Extract each integer of the claims in the patent families the lawyer has named, then compare them in a table against the features of the client's product or process, citing every row to the engineering specification, the drawings or the bill of materials, and list the integers on which the client's own material is silent. The tool writes no part of the freedom-to-operate advice — no draft, no suggested wording, no view on whether an integer is taken — and the lawyer construes the claims on the Australian purposive approach, makes the element-by-element call on each row, then settles the opinion.	RedLawyer-led	Construe each integer yourself against the specification and the prosecution history, and confirm the chart is built on the claims as granted and in force in the jurisdictions the client will make and sell in, including dependent claims and any pending divisionals the chart does not cover. Test every row against the product as it will actually be made, replace any taken-or-avoided note you do not accept, and decide what the unanswered integers require — further technical information or expert evidence — before the advice issues.
Compare two works for copyright subsistence, ownership and overlapStart this task See suggested levels	From the two works and the chain-of-title papers, list protectable elements, candidate owners and passages that appear to overlap, with file references.	YellowClose supervision	Apply the current copyright statute to verified facts Do not treat a similarity list as an infringement finding
Analyse copyright subsistence using the Copyright Office AI report hubChecklist Start this task See suggested levels	Extract claimed human authorship facts from the client papers into a list the lawyer maps to Part 2.	YellowClose supervision	Open Part 2 (copyrightability of generative-AI outputs, 29 January 2025) on copyright.gov/ai/ Do not rely on a generated summary of the report
Build an IP ownership and encumbrance table from the data roomStart this task See suggested levels	Extract registrations, assignments, licences and security interests from the permitted data room into a table with gaps in the chain of title flagged.	YellowClose supervision	Open every cited assignment and licence Check for schedules, side letters and unregistered interests that extraction misses
Draft infringement particulars from the claim chart and the productStart this task See suggested levels	Turn the lawyer's claim chart and product description into draft particulars of infringement, with a list of facts that still need an instruction.	RedLawyer-led	Read every particular against the asserted rights and the product Remove allegations the instructions do not support
Draft an IP licence or assignment from the term sheetStart this task See suggested levels	Produce a first-draft licence, assignment or NDA from the term sheet and the firm's precedent, listing grant, field, territory, improvements and payment clauses.	YellowClose supervision	Check grant language against the rights actually owned Settle governing law, residual knowledge and improvements before the draft leaves the firm
Prepare an issues list on AI-generated works and training dataStart this task See suggested levels	From the client's training-data description and outputs, list copyright, trade mark, confidential-information and publicity issues with supporting documents.	YellowClose supervision	Confirm the current position from primary sources for the governing law Do not rely on the tool's knowledge cutoff in client advice
Advise on AI-assisted inventorship and copyrightabilityChecklist Start this task See suggested levels	Collect the human contributions and the AI steps the client describes into a chronology for the lawyer.	YellowClose supervision	Apply the inventorship guidance (28 November 2025), which rescinds the 2024 notice Confirm only natural persons are named as inventors; never name an AI Open Copyright Office Part 2 (29 January 2025) for output copyrightability
Draft a plant-variety application descriptionStart this task See suggested levels	Turn the breeder's notes into a first-draft varietal description and a list of prior-variety hits from the databases the lawyer names.	YellowClose supervision	Check the description against the receiving office's examination requirements Do not file an unsourced variety comparison
Draft a plant-variety description under the Plant Breeder's Rights Act 1994 (Cth)Checklist Start this task See suggested levels	From the breeder's notes, draft a varietal description, list prior-variety hits from GRIN and UPOV PLUTO, and extract Plant Breeder's Rights Act 1994 (Cth) renewal dates.	YellowClose supervision	Check the description meets IP Australia PBR requirements (distinctness, uniformity, stability) Do not import patent criteria Confirm the agent, the breeder and the ownership chain Verify renewal dates on the IP Australia PBR register; missed annual fees cause lapse Take trial data and DUS test results from the technical reports
Build a design prior-art and infringement comparisonStart this task See suggested levels	Compare the client's design with the register hits and the accused product and produce a visual-feature table with document references.	YellowClose supervision	View the actual representations Do not treat a text summary of a design as a validity or infringement opinion
Build an infringement claim chart from the asserted rights and the productStart this task See suggested levels	Map each claim element or design feature against the accused product from the photos, manuals or samples the lawyer supplies, and mark gaps.	YellowClose supervision	Read the granted claims or registered representations, not a paraphrase Decide infringement yourself
Draft a cease-and-desist letter for IP infringementStart this task See suggested levels	Draft a letter from the registration or work, the accused use and the remedy and deadline the lawyer has named.	YellowClose supervision	Read the letter against the rights actually owned and the use actually seen Remove threats and admissions the instructions do not support
Build a trade mark opposition or cancellation evidence scheduleStart this task See suggested levels	Extract dates, publications, sales figures and witness statements from the file into a schedule matched to the grounds the lawyer has pleaded.	YellowClose supervision	Check every figure and exhibit against the source page Do not let the schedule invent use the documents do not show
Prepare a citation list of material prior art for disclosure to the officeStart this task See suggested levels	From the search hits and family file, list candidate citations with numbers and dates, marking duplicates and clearly irrelevant items.	YellowClose supervision	Read each listed document before it goes on a disclosure form Remove cumulative noise Keep the duty to disclose with the practitioner
Check named inventors on an AI-assisted patent applicationChecklist Start this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia only	List contributors and the AI tools used, and map each claimed feature to the human who conceived it.	YellowClose supervision	Confirm each inventor is a natural person who contributed to the inventive concept.
Screen a client's AI-generated content for copyright ownership riskStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific sources in links; vendor pages marked (vendor).	List which outputs may lack a human author and where licence terms apply.	YellowClose supervision	Lawyer applies Australian authorship law to the facts.
Review a generative-AI tool's terms for IP ownership and indemnitiesStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific sources in links; vendor pages marked (vendor).	Extract ownership, licence, training-use and indemnity terms into a table.	GreenLawyer review	Lawyer confirms against the current terms and advises.
Run a preliminary trade mark clearance summary from search resultsStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific sources in links; vendor pages marked (vendor).	Summarise search reports into a conflicts table by class and mark similarity.	YellowClose supervision	Attorney reviews all conflicts; AI does not replace IP Australia searching.
Draft an IP clause set for an AI development or data-licensing agreementStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific sources in links; vendor pages marked (vendor).	Draft ownership, improvements, training-data and output clauses from instructions.	YellowClose supervision	Lawyer settles clauses to the deal.
Prepare a client briefing on AI and IP risk for staff use of GenAIStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific sources in links; vendor pages marked (vendor).	Draft an internal policy note on confidentiality, ownership and infringement risk.	GreenLawyer review	Lawyer approves final policy text.
Advise on whether AI training on client content infringes copyrightStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific AU source in links	Apply the no-TDM-exception position.	YellowClose supervision	Lawyer advises.
Draft AI IP clauses for a services agreementStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific AU source in links	Draft clauses.	YellowClose supervision	Lawyer settles.
Assess trade mark registrability of AI-generated brand namesStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaAustralia onlySource basis: Area-specific AU source in links	Run a preliminary analysis.	YellowClose supervision	Attorney decides.
Draft a trade mark specification of goods and services and check it against the IP Australia trade marks pageStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaCommonwealth only	Draft the goods and services from the client's product list.	YellowClose supervision	Check every item against the client's goods and the IP Australia trade marks page. Delete a class the client does not use.
Prepare a patent search brief from the inventor's disclosure without stating that the invention is patentableStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaCommonwealth only	Organise the inventor's disclosure into a search brief. Do not say the invention is patentable.	RedLawyer-led	The lawyer decides patentability. Check the brief against the disclosure and the IP Australia patents page.
Draft a short-form copyright assignment and check the Copyright Act 1968 compilation for the writing requirementStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaCommonwealth only	Draft the assignment from the parties and the works the client named.	YellowClose supervision	Open the Copyright Act 1968 compilation and check what an assignment must contain. Do not rely on a generated section number.
Compare a design application with the Designs Act 2003 compilation before it is lodgedStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaCommonwealth only	List the application's product name and the representations for the lawyer to compare with the Act.	YellowClose supervision	Read the Designs Act 2003 compilation and the IP Australia design-rights page. Do not rely on a generated section number.
Draft a trade mark cease-and-desist letter and verify each registration number against an IP Australia extractStart this task See suggested levelsWritten for AustraliaCommonwealth only	Draft the letter from the registration extract the lawyer has already obtained.	YellowClose supervision	Read each registration number off the IP Australia extract. Delete any number that is not on that extract.

Firm-wide obligations

Firm-wide obligations
Obligation	What it covers
Trust accounting & handling client money	Checks that apply across files.
Costs, billing & litigation funding	Checks that apply across files.
Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools	Checks that apply across files.
Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents	Checks that apply across files.
AI decision systems	Checks that apply across files.
Confidentiality & client information	Checks that apply across files.
AML/CTF — the practice as a reporting entity	Checks that apply across files.

What changes in New Zealand

What changes in New Zealand
Topic	What changes
Registry	IPONZ administers patents, trade marks and designs. Do not file at IP Australia.
Statutes	Copyright Act 1994 and Copyright Regulations 1995; Patents Act 2013; Trade Marks Act 2002; Designs Act 1953; a separate 1994 Act for layout designs.
Tribunal	The Copyright Tribunal hears licensing-scheme and file-sharing disputes and is listed in the Courts of New Zealand GenAI guidelines.

What changes in United States

Known here as: Intellectual property — patents, trademarks, copyright, designs

What changes in United States
Topic	What changes
USPTO filings	The 11 April 2024 notice: a person must insert their own signature, and presenting a paper certifies under 37 C.F.R. § 11.18 that statements are true.
Inventorship	Guidance of 28 November 2025 rescinds the February 2024 notice. Only natural persons are inventors; naming an AI draws a 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 115 rejection.
Copyright	Copyright Office AI report: Part 2 (29 January 2025) on copyrightability of generative-AI outputs; Part 1 (31 July 2024) on digital replicas.
Designs	Design patents are USPTO. No Designs Act 2003 (Cth) analogue.
Limits on AI assistance	Do not name an AI system as inventor or joint inventor on a US application. Do not file an AI-drafted office-action response you have not read and signed yourself.

Precedents for this area

All precedents for Intellectual Property — Patents, Trade Marks, Copyright, Designs. Signed-in accounts can read the full text.

Related jurisdictions

New Zealand United States