TCP Law's blog — listed in the site navigation under Resources as "Articles" — publishes content discussing relevant intellectual property issues across three primary categories: Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights. Articles address developments in IP law including USPTO policy updates, federal court decisions, PTAB proceedings, trademark registration standards, design patent guidance, and emerging issues at the intersection of IP and technology — including AI. The blog is designed for businesses, inventors, and creators who want to stay informed about changes in IP law that may affect their rights, their applications, or their enforcement strategies. A newsletter is also available for readers who want IP tips delivered directly to their inbox.

The blog's Trademark category includes articles on substantive trademark law developments. One article addresses the TTAB's treatment of genericness — specifically examining the "UX Academy" case and where the line falls between a descriptive or suggestive mark and one that has become so common it can no longer function as a trademark. Another article covers a Federal Circuit decision affirming a two-part test for determining the genericness of color marks — a nuanced area of trademark law that affects brands seeking to protect non-traditional marks like colors as source identifiers. These articles reflect the kind of TTAB and federal court developments that can directly affect pending trademark applications and the enforceability of existing registrations.

The blog's Patents category covers a range of USPTO policy developments, PTAB proceedings, and substantive patent law issues. Articles include coverage of the USPTO's supplemental guidance for design patents — relevant for inventors seeking to protect the ornamental appearance of products, including computer-generated interfaces and icons — and a piece on the USPTO's new guidance on Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations (SMEDs), which affects how applicants can support patent eligibility arguments for software and AI-related inventions. Additional articles address proposed major PTAB reforms, the two-part Advanced Bionics framework for PTAB proceedings, and discretionary institution considerations for AIA proceedings. Each of these topics directly affects how patent applications are prosecuted and how patents are challenged or defended.

Yes — the blog addresses AI and IP from multiple angles. One article is titled "New Life for AI and Software Based Patents?" — addressing the evolving USPTO and court landscape around patent eligibility for AI-implemented inventions, an area that has faced significant legal uncertainty under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Another article covers a federal court decision declaring AI training on books to constitute fair use — a copyright development with significant implications for AI companies, publishers, and creators whose works are used in training large language models. These articles reflect TCP Law's engagement with the intersection of emerging technology and IP law, an area directly relevant to John Laurence's background in technology law and electrical engineering.

The article title references a TTAB proceeding examining whether "UX Academy" — a term in the education and technology space — crosses the line from a protectable trademark into a generic term that cannot function as a source identifier. Genericness is one of the most consequential issues in trademark law: a mark that has become the generic name for a category of goods or services loses its trademark protection entirely and cannot be registered or enforced. The TTAB is the USPTO's internal adjudicative body that handles these kinds of disputes, and its decisions on genericness — particularly for terms in technology and digital services — set important precedents for brand owners seeking to protect names in competitive, fast-moving markets. For businesses naming products or services in the tech sector, understanding where the genericness line falls is critical brand strategy information.

The article title — "Federal Court Declares AI Training on Books Fair Use" — references a federal court decision addressing whether using copyrighted books to train artificial intelligence models without the authors' permission constitutes copyright infringement or falls within the fair use doctrine. This is one of the most actively litigated and consequential copyright questions of the current era, with significant implications for authors, publishers, photographers, musicians, and other creators whose works are used without license to train commercial AI systems. The fair use determination in this context involves the four statutory factors — including the purpose and character of the use and the effect on the market for the original work — applied to a novel technological context. TCP Law's coverage of this development reflects the firm's engagement with copyright issues at the frontier of technology law.

AIA proceedings refer to patent challenge proceedings created by the America Invents Act, which established the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and introduced inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR) as mechanisms for challenging the validity of issued patents. The blog article on the USPTO adding new discretionary institution considerations for AIA proceedings addresses the PTAB's authority to decline to institute a proceeding even when a petitioner meets the threshold for institution — a discretionary decision that has significant implications for both petitioners challenging patents and patent owners defending against such challenges. Understanding the current state of PTAB institution practice is important for any party involved in patent litigation strategy, licensing negotiations, or portfolio management.

The article titled "USPTO Issues Supplemental Guidance For Design Patents" addresses updated USPTO guidance on a specific and evolving area of design patent law — covering computer-generated interfaces and icons. Design patents have traditionally covered the ornamental appearance of physical manufactured articles, but their application to graphical user interfaces, icons, and other digital visual elements has been an area of active development and uncertainty. Supplemental guidance from the USPTO in this area affects how design patent applications for software interfaces and digital products are prepared, examined, and claimed. For technology companies, app developers, and software product designers, this kind of guidance update directly affects what can be protected and how applications should be drafted.

The article titled "Clarifying the Two-Part Advanced Bionics Framework" addresses a procedural framework used by the PTAB in inter partes review proceedings — specifically, the standard for when a PTAB proceeding should be remanded back to the examiner versus decided by the Board based on arguments raised by a patent owner after institution. The Advanced Bionics framework governs how new arguments and evidence submitted by patent owners during an IPR are handled, and clarifications to this framework affect litigation strategy for both patent owners defending their patents and petitioners challenging them. For anyone involved in PTAB proceedings — whether as an asserting patent owner or a defending accused infringer — staying current on these procedural developments is directly relevant to how proceedings are managed.

TCP Law provides two ongoing resources for staying current on IP law developments. The blog — accessible under Articles in the Resources section of the navigation — publishes articles discussing relevant IP issues across Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights, covering topics ranging from USPTO policy updates and federal court decisions to PTAB proceedings and emerging technology law questions. For readers who prefer not to check the site regularly, TCP Law also offers a newsletter subscription — accessible through the signup form on the blog page and throughout the site — that delivers IP tips directly to your inbox. For questions arising from any article or development covered in the blog, TCP Law offers a free introductory consultation to discuss how a specific legal development may affect your situation.