Chambers Global, in a second independent review from clients, had this to say about Brian: “Brian ‘can perform miracles’ according to his clients. As well as being ‘a pleasure to work with,’ he can deal with situations where ‘there are no real precedents’. As one client remarked, ‘ we cannot afford to take risks- we need a lawyer who can provide an analysis of which way the law is going and who can foresee how the courts might respond-and that’s precisely what Gray does.”

In an independent review from clients, Chambers Global had this to say about Brian: “Brian Gray is considered the best …for pure IP work, whether contentious or non-contentious. Clients say he is ‘diligent, knowledgeable, responsible and reasonable in terms of what needs to be done and portioning out the work so the rates remain viable.”


Fordham Law School Fair Use Panel

Friday, April 22, 2022

On April 22, 2022, I participated as a panelist at the Fordham Law School's Hansen annual intellectual property conference. The subject was Fair Use and in particular the recent US Second Circuit Warhol decision and the Supreme Court decision in Google v. Oracle.  Speakers on the panel included Prof Jane Ginsburg, Joseph Gratz and Daan Erikson.


AIPPI Annual Meeting

Friday, October 22, 2021

At the AIPPI annual meeting I participated as chairman of the international leadership team for Study Question 278 "Industrial designs and the role of prior art".  Previous to this, I had also been chairman of the Canadian group studying this question.

I also participated in the Canadian Group studying Q276 "Inventiveness and sufficiency of disclosure in AI inventions"

In addition I participated as discussion leader in the AIPPI cafe 34 session "Parody, satire and pastiche"  lead by Dale Nelson.

Rights in Data

Tuesday, October 5, 2021

I am pleased to report that I have authored the Canadian chapter of a new book entitled "Law of Raw Data" published by Wolters Kluwer. This book was edited by Christian Czychowski and Jan Bernd Nordemann.  It followed from a study on IP rights in data that was undertaken  by the AIPPI in 2020. 

Related Articles

Why Choueifaty is wrong

  • Posted on: 25 April 2022
  • By: BWG

In 2020, the Federal Court of Canada decided an important case on subject matter eligibility of computer implemented inventions: Choueifaty v. Attorney General of Canada 2020FC 837. Briefly I explain why the decision in Choueifaty is at least analytically wrong, although I take no position, at this time, as to whether the case was correctly decided as to subject matter eligibility, only that it was decided for the wrong reasons.


Post sale rights post Lexmark. Implications for U.S. and foreign patent owners and licensees

  • Posted on: 14 February 2018
  • By: BWG

Post sale rights post Lexmark. Implications for U.S. and foreign patent owners and licensees.

The Supreme Court disallows post sale restrictions

The Supreme Court of the United States in Lexmark v. Impression Products 581 U.S. 1523 (2017) May 30, 2017 has disallowed any patent post sale restrictions following the sale of a patented article from the patent owner or any licensee from the patent owner.