Flat Preloader Icon
Jaguar Meat

Jaguar Meat has been applicated by the BPTO for recognition of Geographical Indication

Leia em português aqui.

“Carne de Onça” (Jaguar Meat), one of the symbols of Curitiba (one of the Brazilian cities), is expanding its borders.

The recipe is simple, but the flavor is unmatched. Cornbread with lean ground beef, white onion, and finely chopped green onion, seasoned with extra virgin olive oil, salt, and black pepper. From bar patrons to the most refined restaurants, people from all over the world want to taste the famous Carne de Onça when they come to Curitiba.

But now, in addition to being famous in the capital of Paraná, the delicacy already has international relevance, as it recently entered the ranking of the ten best raw meat dishes in the world.

Because it is famous and is part of the culture and history of Curitiba, Carne de Onça – which is already considered the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Curitiba – had a application for recognition of Geographical Indication (GI) filed with the Brazilian Patent Office (BPTO), in the Indication of Origin modality.

The search for recognition became notorious due to the location’s importance in producing this specific product, valuing its traditions, history, and culture.

More than 200 restaurants in Curitiba offer “Carne de Onça” on the menu.

History of Jaguar Meat

According to history, in the 1940s, Ronaldo Abrão – “Ligeirinho”, owner of Ligeirinho’s Bar in the center of Curitiba – was part of the Britânia football team (ten-time champion at the time), whose director, Cristiano Schmidt, was also the owner of a bar in Marechal Deodoro, called “Buraco do Tatu.” During Britânia’s heyday as a winning team, to celebrate their achievements, Schmidt prepared a peculiar mixture as a prize (football was practically amateur): raw meat on slices of cornbread, served to the players.

On a particular day, the goalkeeper of the Britânia team, known as “Duaia”, expressed his discontent: “Wow, Schmidt, you only serve this meat, which even jaguars don’t eat!” This is how the name “Carne de Onça” came about.

But some say that the name is due to bad breath (in Portuguese we have the expression “bafo de onça”, literally translated it would be jaguar’s breath) the onion left on people.

Another trend directed the creation of the snack to Leonardo Werzbitzki, “Onha”, who served the specialty in his restaurant in the 1950s. But his was more elaborate, containing egg yolks and other ingredients.

Source: CBN


YouTube will remove content generated by AI imitating musical artists

Leia em português aqui

It was recently reported that YouTube will warn you when a video contains AI-generated content. Still, the platform wants to go further and announced that it will ban deepfakes that improperly impersonate real people and musicians.

The new turn against content produced by artificial intelligence is due to unprecedented sets of guidelines related to copyright and extra rules applied to other categories.

Labels on videos

One of the new requirements made by YouTube requires content creators to signal the use of AI or similar tools in their materials so that viewers are not misled into believing that the content is authentic.

According to the platform, anyone who does not comply with the new guideline will be subject to having their video removed, demonetized, or even banned from the Partnership Program, in addition to other forms of punishment.

To make it clear to the viewer, the video will present a label signaling that the content is produced by artificial intelligence. Depending on the degree of sensitivity of the content, this same label will be even more prominent in the interface — reinforcing the use of AI tools. Despite the warnings, there is no guarantee that the video will be free from removal if it violates the platform’s rules.

Siege against deepfakes

YouTube also reinforced the fight against deepfakes that improperly simulate a person’s face, voice, and other identifiable characteristics. Punishment may be applied through deletion requests made by users.

However, the social network guarantees that not all material will be subject to removal, as, in some instances, it may be that certain content is a parody, for example, and does not present any violation of the video service’s rules.

In the music segment, YouTube announced that it wants to implement a feature that allows music partners to request the removal of videos generated by artificial intelligence that imitate an artist’s voice or song without authorization.

This new reporting category will be exclusive to record labels and distributors of artists enrolled in YouTube’s AI music testing program. Still, it will be enabled for other companies in the segment in the future.

Source: CanalTech

Starbucks: franchise in Brazil lost brand license on October 13

Starbucks: franchise in Brazil lost brand license on October 13

Clique aqui e leia em português.

On October 13, 2023, the headquarters of Starbucks Corp. in Seattle, in the United States, sent a document to the trademark’s operator in Brazil that was decisive for the Brazilian company’s request for judicial recovery submitted to the Court on Tuesday (31).

The most famous coffee shop in the world delivered, on that date, the “Notice of Termination of Licensing Agreements.”

Without receiving royalties for using the trademark in Brazil, the multinational announced the termination of the contract that allowed SouthRock Capital to explore the Starbucks brand in Brazil. The end of the agreement took effect immediately.

Two contracts were suspended. One licensing the trademark in Brazil, and another granted SouthRock Capital the right to be the master Starbucks licensee in the country – that is, the operator of the stores. The information is contained in the documentation submitted by SouthRock in the request for judicial recovery.

This decision by headquarters accelerated the urgency of the request for judicial recovery.

SouthRock’s lawyers argue that these contracts “are essential to maintaining the applicants’ activities and, consequently, enabling the restructuring of their liabilities.”

“The exploration and operation of Starbucks stores/cafeterias on the national scene – not only is it essential to the activities of the applicants as already mentioned, but it also consists of one of their greatest assets,” they mention in the document delivered to the São Paulo Court.

The company also argues that SouthRock had adopted, before the end of the contract, “operational and financial measures aimed at restructuring its operations to equalize its economic situation.” And that the Brazilian company was negotiating with the multinational to try to renegotiate the contracts, including some additions already signed.

The objective was that “payment conditions reflect your current financial capacity.”

Currently, the gross revenue of the Starbucks trademark in Brazil exceeds U$10 million per month.

To CNN, SouthRock said it “continues to operate the Starbucks trademark in Brazil” and is “committed to working closely with its commercial partners to develop the trademarks in its portfolio in Brazil.” In a note to CNN, the company says that “alignments on licenses are part of the judicial recovery process and are carried out directly with these partners.”

In the request for judicial recovery, however, the company says that “the notification of termination (of licensing) was received by the applicants with absolute surprise since the relationship and negotiations maintained between the parties until then had never indicated that there would be the possibility of immediate termination of the Starbucks License Agreements.”

Source: CNN


Spotify may change the way royalties are paid in 2024

Clique aqui para ler em Português.

Spotify may change the way it pays artists from 2024 onwards. It appears that the company plans to change its royalty model for next year, disqualifying certain audio tracks — such as low-range streaming and non-musical noise — and increasing penalties against studios that commit fraud.

The platform did not confirm these possible changes, but sources consulted by Billboard point to imminent changes in the remuneration of singers and other accounts. Spotify may discuss this idea with major US record labels, including Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, and Warner Music Group.

For 2024, three significant changes are expected in the way creators are paid:

  • Limit of minimum annual flows that a track must meet before starting to generate royalties.
  • Fines for distributors and record labels when fraudulent activities are identified.
  • Minimum playback time for white noise tracks, sounds of rain, birds, and other similar audio to start earning royalties.

To achieve these objectives, Spotify must sign new agreements with record labels and distributors so that the change in the way music royalties are paid is approved by everyone. In response to Billboard, a company spokesperson commented on these speculations, noting that:

“We are always evaluating how we can better serve artists and regularly discuss ways to promote the integrity of the platform with partners. We have no news to share at this time.” The statement does not provide details about the company’s plans but points to an open discussion with affiliates.

Source: Tudocelular

Artificial Intelligence
Articles, Tavares IP

Artificial Intelligence: Challenges and Opportunities Presented in the Intellectual Property

Let’s delve into the fascinating world of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its implications for intellectual property rights. As an integral part of the modern business landscape, AI is reshaping how we process and analyze data across various industries. However, its rapid evolution brings challenges and opportunities, especially concerning data protection, trade secrets, and intellectual property rights.

Understanding the Risks and Potential of Artificial Intelligence

Recent developments in AI technology, particularly generative tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Bard, have caught the attention of enterprise risk executives worldwide. Their inclusion in the top 10 risks of a recent Gartner survey highlights the mounting concerns around these technologies.

The Intellectual Property Quandary

One significant issue is the inadvertent inclusion of data into AI training sets. When businesses input data into generative AI tools, there’s a risk this information could be exposed or even unintentionally infringe upon intellectual property rights. This scenario necessitates a deep understanding and transparency in using AI tools to safeguard sensitive data.

Data Privacy in the Artificial Intelligence Era

Data privacy has also come into sharp focus with generative AI. These tools can unintentionally disseminate data that may reveal trade secrets or confidential information. This concern has prompted stricter data protection regulations in various jurisdictions, including Brazil, China, the EU, the US, Canada, India, and the UK.

Cybersecurity: A Double-Edged Sword

The susceptibility of generative AI to cyber threats such as malware and sophisticated phishing attacks cannot be overlooked. Yet, paradoxically, AI also enhances cybersecurity measures. By detecting and responding to threats more efficiently than traditional systems, AI proves to be a formidable ally in data protection.

Ethical Considerations in Artificial Intelligence Deployment

The deployment of AI in data analysis and information discovery raises ethical concerns, mainly when used for purposes like industrial espionage or in ways that could violate privacy and stifle innovation. Companies must weigh the risks against the benefits, adopting comprehensive cybersecurity practices and staying abreast of relevant regulations and ethical considerations.

Real-World Applications and Legal Complexities

The transformative potential of AI in business operations is undeniable. For instance, Tavares IP employs AI to automate tasks and prevent its clients’ intellectual property from being infringed. Similarly, Microsoft’s implementation of content filters in Copilot reflects the industry’s proactive stance in addressing these challenges. However, legal disputes, such as the copyright lawsuit against GitHub Copilot, highlight companies’ intricate legal responsibilities in ensuring their AI technologies respect intellectual property rights and do not violate existing content.


Artificial Intelligence undoubtedly offers tremendous advantages in data processing and business automation. Yet, it simultaneously introduces significant intellectual property, data privacy, and cybersecurity challenges. As we navigate this evolving landscape, companies must address these challenges responsibly. Compliance with regulations, ethical standards, and a balanced approach to leveraging AI’s potential is essential to protect and enhance business operations in this digital age.

Stay tuned to our blog or our Instagram and LinkedIn for more insights and legal expertise in the ever-evolving world of AI and intellectual property. Your thoughts and comments are always welcome!


Nokia seeks compensation for Amazon’s use of their patented multimedia inventions

Clique aqui para ler esta notícia em português.

The Finnish Nokia is suing Amazon and HP over the unauthorized use of a mix of video streaming-related essential patents. Nokia filed a lawsuit in a Delaware federal court and similar lawsuits across Germany, India, the UK, and the European Unified Patent Court.

The lawsuits, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, allege that Amazon’s Prime Video and Twitch streaming services, as well as its Fire TV devices, infringe Nokia’s patents related to video streaming technology. Nokia is seeking injunctions to stop the alleged infringement, as well as damages.

Nokia claims that Amazon has refused to license its patents despite being offered fair terms. The company says that it has invested heavily in video streaming technology and that the alleged infringement is harming its business.

In a statement, Nokia said: “We are taking this action to protect our intellectual property and to ensure that our investments in research and development are rewarded. We believe that Amazon’s use of our patented inventions is unlawful, and we are committed to defending our rights.”

Amazon has not yet commented on the lawsuits.

Source: Nokia