Editorial: IP machinations

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Editorial: IP machinations

It is no secret that artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform many aspects of IP. The role and impact of the technology has been discussed many times and in many forums, but what we've done in this issue's cover story is bring together several views in one place. Most notably, we have spoken to Francis Gurry, the director general of WIPO, as well as Christian Archambeau, executive director of the EUIPO. We have also included comments from CIPO in Canada, to provide a wider view of how IP offices are using AI and their assessment of its influence.

One of the key – and most positive – findings is that there will still be a human role in IP administration in spite of AI's potential dominance. This of course comes against the backdrop of societal fears about AI robbing us of our jobs, and even our existence, depending who you believe. Gurry makes the good point that just 20 or 30 years ago, people worried that computers "would soon be running the world," but that industry is now a huge employer. It's an important reminder that while we often focus on the future in the AI debate, history can provide some useful pointers too.

The data we have sourced also paints an interesting picture. IBM is the clear leader in AI patent filings, followed by the State Grid Corporation of China, which is just ahead of Microsoft. Baidu and Google are in fourth and fifth places. Amid tensions between the US and China, the two countries vying for global supremacy, it's notable that organisations from those nations are seeking to dominate innovation in what could be the 21st century's most important technology. The filings graph shows a sharp spike in applications in the past four years, and that trend is likely to continue, prompting more AI work for IP offices – and, potentially, machines.

Away from AI, this issue covers topics as diverse as trademark legislation in Argentina to empowering young lawyers to become leaders, and EU patent injunctions to recycling rare earth metals. We hope there is something for everyone.

Speaking of diversity, our latest in-house counsel survey focuses on diversity and inclusion in IP; the full findings will be published on managingip.com over July and August. Soon after it will be conference season, and we hope to see you then.

Ed Conlon

Managing editor

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
Gift this article