Advertisers from the big pharma sector are increasingly using deepfake technology to create promotional materials for dietary supplements with the participation of well-known doctors. The term ‘deepfake’ is defined in Article 3 (60) of the AI Act[1] and means’ AI-generated or manipulated images, audio content or video content that resembles existing persons, objects, places, entities or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful.

Deepfake in the world of new technologies

The technology makes it possible to create hyper-realistic audio-visual materials using images of people recognizable in a given industry as promoters of products, including dietary supplements. Manipulation of this kind is particularly harmful when it concerns doctors, i.e. people performing the profession of public trust. False recommendations of products intended for consumption can not only mislead patients and influence their purchasing decisions, but also damage the reputation of specialists, undermine trust in the medical profession and, above all, expose these people to legal consequences.

According to Article 71 (4) of the Code of Medical Ethics, ‘The doctor shall be responsible for information on the services offered published on their behalf or for their benefit by third parties’. In turn, according to Article 14 of the Code, ‘A doctor must not use their influence on a patient for any purpose other than therapeutic’. The doctor may be professionally responsible for a violation of the Code of Medical Ethics. At the end of 2019, a Code of Good Practice for Dietary Supplements was introduced. Pursuant to Article 6 of that Code, the advertising of a dietary supplement may not use the image or recommendations of a real or fictitious doctor. Therefore, there are a number of internal regulations that prohibit such advertising, the violation of which may entail certain legal consequences. Persons participating in prohibited advertising may be considered to be in violation of the law (and the Code of Medical Ethics) and may be subject to certain proceedings, e.g. disciplinary proceedings.

The use of the image of doctors in advertisements

Numerous incidents and media analyses show that deepfakes are used systematically in marketing activities to give credibility to products through alleged recommendations of experts. Despite the available legal instruments, effective enforcement of safeguards against such practices requires determination and knowledge of the possibilities of action.

The use of the image and voice of a doctor in advertising without his consent is included in the catalogue of violations of personal rights (including dignity, good name, image) and may constitute a crime (e.g. advertising fraud, defamation, using someone else’s image for profit) in accordance with the Polish legal order. The injured party has the right to claim the protection of personal rights pursuant to Articles 23 and 24 of the Civil Code, demanding, among others, the cessation of violations, removal of their effects, apology, compensation and compensation.

Depending on the specific circumstances of the use of the deepfake, it may constitute an offence provided for in the Criminal Code, such as misappropriation of identity (Article 190a (2)), force (Article 191), defamation or insult (Articles 212 and 216) and fraud (Article 286). However, analyses of supervisory authorities indicate that deepfakes often escape traditional legal categories. In the Polish legal order, there are still no provisions directly related to this technology, which makes it difficult to unequivocally qualify the law and effectively respond to new forms of violations.

Proposals for legal changes

The President of the Personal Data Protection Office (UODO) sent a letter to the Prime Minister with a request to consider the introduction of statutory solutions that will provide effective protection against the negative impact of deepfakes, especially for natural persons.

The Personal Data Protection Office and other institutions point to regulatory gaps and call for the introduction of new protective regulations. The letter indicates that effective counteracting the negative effects of the above-mentioned technology requires the involvement and cooperation of all participants in the information ecosystem. Therefore, the commitment of technology, internet and social platforms to install systems for automatic and effective detection and marking of deepfakes should also be considered.

The above solution could contribute to limiting the phenomenon of deepfakes in public space. However, given the fact that not all platforms will comply with these regulations, and the creators of deepfakes will look for alternative solutions, the greatest challenge seems to be the effective enforcement of rights by the victims and the determination of the perpetrator.

What actions can the victim of deepfake take?

The entities creating the deepfake and deriving profits from it often come from outside Poland, which requires additional activities to determine and identify the perpetrators. The data of domain registrants is also often secret, and the manufacturer of the advertised product itself is not always the perpetrator of the infringement. It happens that advertisements for products using deepfakes are used to extort consumer data or money. In these types of situations, the responsibility lies with another entity.

In the case of using the image through deepfake technology, it is important to immediately document the misleading material, for example through screenshots, notarization of prints, requesting immediate cessation of dissemination (if the perpetrator is identifiable) and requesting publishing platforms to remove the content. It is worth pursuing civil claims and considering reporting the crime to the police or the prosecutor’s office. It is also very important to correct false information through the media, e.g. by publishing a statement in front of the camera or posting in social media.

Legal conclusions and recommendations

In the era of rapidly developing technology and its almost unlimited possibilities, it is necessary to introduce a legal framework adapted to deepfake (obligation to mark the generated materials, mechanisms for rapid removal of content, liability of entities commercially using other people’s images without consent). We are faced with an urgent need to update the applicable provisions on the protection of personal rights and personal data, which are most often violated.

The use of deepfake technology to create advertisements for dietary supplements with the participation of well-known doctors poses a serious threat to both public health and trust in the medical community. It also causes serious professional consequences for the doctor, who de facto had no influence on the unauthorized use of his image. Current legal tools theoretically allow for the enforcement of rights, but there are no coherent and rapid mechanisms adequate to the scale of this phenomenon. Parallel actions are needed: raising awareness and procedures on the part of the medical community, technical and regulatory solutions on the part of platforms and urgent legislative changes to effectively counteract abuse and protect doctors and patients from the harmful consequences of deepfake.

[1] Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on the establishment of harmonised provisions for artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act), (OJEU.L.2024.1689).

Authors:

Małgorzata Furmańska

Aleksandra Tabaka

Artykuł Deepfake in advertisements for dietary supplements. Risks and legal mechanisms for protecting doctors pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

The Winter Games are the largest testing ground for sports technologies. And it is there that it is most clearly visible which solutions really improve safety, aerodynamics, control over equipment or the comfort of the athlete. Every meter of advantage, every fraction of a second and every reduction in the risk of injury matters. For this reason, manufacturers of sports equipment and infrastructure increasingly treat patents as a key element of technological and business strategy.

Many innovations visible on our screens cannot be noticed at first glance. In most cases, patent protection does not focus on the product’s eye-catching design or the mere inclusion of electronic components. More often, it covers the sequence of operations, the way components interact, the control logic, or the geometry that dictates specific user behaviour. The simple assumption that we will add a sensor or change a material is very often not enough to not enter into an already existing patent monopoly.

Below, I describe some of the most interesting patents related to skiing, ski jumping and winter sports infrastructure. Explore the technical challenges each of these innovations is meant to overcome.

The Olympic Games are only a starting point, the real game takes place much earlier, at the stage of technology design and building an advantage based on intellectual property.

Remote control of ski bindings – PL 227120 B1 (application: 16.01.2015)

https://api-ewyszukiwarka.pue.uprp.gov.pl/api/collection/b062f02fd82b1653f567038c3a128421

Polish Patent PL 227120 B1 relates to a remote control system for ski bindings. The starting point for the invention is a well-known problem, i.e. classic ski bindings have a release force set before the ride, statically, based on the weight, height and riding style of the skier. This solution does not consider the changing conditions on the slope or emergency situations while driving.

The solution covered by the patent introduces a system that allows wireless influence on the state of bonds while driving. The key element is that it is not only about disconnecting the bond, but about changing the force of disconnection, and thus adjusting the “sensitivity” of the bond. The system includes a control and transmission unit located in the handle of the ski pole and receiver and control units integrated with the bindings themselves. On the transmitter side, a specific functional sequence is important: a carrier signal generator, a code generator and a modulator, as well as the method of power supply consciously activated by the user. On the bonding side, the signal processing path is protected from the decoder, through the digital adder, to the digital-to-analog converter controlling the actuator affecting the tension of the bonding spring.

The solution variants also provide for the use of a ski speed sensor, which allows you to automatically reduce the release force at low speed. Therefore, patent protection does not cover the “ski remote” itself, but rather the system architecture and the logic behind adjusting the binding parameters in real time.

Heated chairlift – PL 236938 B1 (application: 12.07.2019)

https://api-ewyszukiwarka.pue.uprp.gov.pl/api/collection/4e8ab912a1619f2e08a36b5e74dfc026

Polish Patent PL 236938 B1 relates to ski infrastructure, specifically a chairlift equipped with a heating system. The real technical challenge went beyond simply keeping the passenger warm. Earlier solutions faced the lack of stable power supply, the risk of overheating and the dependence of heating and control on a single source of energy.

Proprietary innovation consists in combining several elements into a coherent system. Heating is not conducted by direct contact of the heater with the user, but by air flow in a channel led in the handrail of the chair. The heater is placed in a chamber containing a medium of high heat capacity, which acts as an energy storage. Safety is ensured by bimetallic thermal valves and two temperature sensors, one monitoring the temperature of the medium, the other the tracking the temperature in the hand area.

The separation of power supply is also key from the point of view of the intellectual property (IP) protection potential. The system uses supercapacitors as an energy support element, and the heater and control are connected by controlled keys, which avoids losing control of the system in the event of a discharge. The patent therefore protects the energy and thermal configuration and not the mere fact that “the chair is heated”.

Ski simulator – PL 239553 B1 (application: 21.11.2018)

https://api-ewyszukiwarka.pue.uprp.gov.pl/api/collection/abec3e3bdadde4b0835581186c078438

Polish Patent PL 239553 B1 relates to a ski simulator designed for individual training. A technical problem that is indicated by the description is that the known simulators do not reproduce the conditions of a real ski turn at high speeds. In particular, they do not allow adequate swinging of the torso and realistic distribution of forces acting on the body.

The claimed solution includes a specific frame structure with an arched track, a trolley and a rotating platform. The essence of innovation is not the mere presence of moving elements, but the way they are interconnected. The foot cradles are connected by rods mounted on a common axis, wherein the rods are slidably mounted in openings of the support frames of a specific shape. In addition, a harness system with elastic fasteners placed at a certain height relative to the user’s feet was used.

The patent therefore protects the geometry and mechanics of the system, which allows to generate loads similar to real driving, and not the fact that the device “simulates skiing”.

The system of preparation of the inrun track – EP 2876210 B1 (application: 22.10.2014)

https://api-ewyszukiwarka.pue.uprp.gov.pl/api/collection/811f944aedb3901bab003b0d2428531e#search=%222876210%22 

European patent EP 2876210 B1 relates to the preparation of an inrun track for ski jumping. Traditionally, these tracks were machined mechanically, using heavy milling cutters. These solutions were expensive to maintain and structurally complicated.

The patented system is based on a sleigh moving along the inrun track, equipped with a left and right track preparation device. A key innovation is the use of electric heating skids that remove ice and snow in a thermal way, while making mechanical contact with the track surface. The whole is coupled with an adjustment device that controls the speed of the sleigh movement and the intensity of the thermal impact.

Patent protection thus covers the transition from mechanical “milling” to controlled thermal impact, along with the entire control architecture.

Textile ski slope – EP 3063333 B1 (application: 30.10.2014)

https://api-ewyszukiwarka.pue.uprp.gov.pl/api/collection/62b5acdaf7d3f5532806929dc437175d#search=%223063333%20%22 

European patent EP 3063333 B1 relates to an artificial textile ski slope. The technical problem was to create a surface that allows you to ski in a way similar to driving on snow, and at the same time it is durable and modular.

The claimed solution uses a fabric with a loop structure, in which the height of the loops and their density fall within strictly defined ranges. However, the key is that the slope has a specific direction of travel, and the orientation of the carcass threads is consistent with it. That is, the sliding behaviour and skiing results from the directional structure of the material, and not only from its composition.

The patent thus protects textile parameters and their functional connection with the movement of the skier.

Ski jumper glove – EP 3932236 B1 (application: 06.01.2021)

https://api-ewyszukiwarka.pue.uprp.gov.pl/api/collection/56f2d796f07fae033a1412c802cdcfcf#search=%223932236%22

European patent EP 3932236 B1 relates to a ski jumping glove and solves an aerodynamic problem. In flight, the jumper strives to obtain as much of the supporting surface of the hand as possible, while traditional anatomically cut gloves are limiting in this respect.

The protected solution consists in the use of a two-dimensional cut of the glove, in which the thumb is shaped in an anatomically unnatural way – laterally extended and lying in the same plane as the other fingers before putting on the glove. In addition, the back of the glove is at least equal in length to the inside. As a result, the glove “folds” under the aerodynamics at the moment of flight.

The patent therefore protects not the glove material, but the concept of the typeface as a tool to improve aerodynamic parameters.

Ski binding with magnetic coupling – EP 4 452 429 B1 (application: 02.12.2022)

The latest of the discussed patents concerns a ski binding equipped with a lever cooperating with the skier’s calf. The technical problem was to ensure a stable but comfortable contact of the lever with the user’s leg, without having to use complicated mechanical clamps.

The proprietary innovation consists in the use of magnetic means of connection between the binding lever and the element worn on the skier’s leg, such as a boot, leggings or belt. Both the binding itself and the wearing element are protected, which significantly strengthens the legal position of the entitled person. The essence of protection here is the method of initiating and maintaining the contact of the lever with the leg, and not the mere fact of using a magnet.

Summary

The analysis of these patents clearly shows that in winter sports technologies, patent protection rarely applies to gadgets. These sports innovations are based on sequences of operation, system architectures, geometric and functional relationships and the way the user is affected. It is these elements that make it so that bypassing the patent by simply changing a component, e.g. adding a sensor, another magnet or an application, very often ends in failure.

Artykuł Snow Patents: What’s Really Protected in Winter Sports Technology pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

Recently, on social media, especially on Instagram and Tik Tok, but also on well-known sales platforms, the trend of promoting the so-called dupes – or cheaper replacements for luxury products – has been gaining popularity. We can already talk of dupe culture.[i] This is especially common in the beauty industry, where high-end products may be expensive and less available to some consumers. Large-scale influencers publish posts in which they share their discoveries of “replacements” of cosmetics, perfumes or clothes that “are, or look, or act like the original”, but “can be purchased for a fraction of the price”. Although it may be alluring from the viewpoint of the consumer, it is worth considering whether such activities may violate the law.

What are dupes?

The term “dupe” comes from the word “duplicate” and refers to a product that is a cheaper equivalent, usually of a popular and often luxury item. However, it is not a counterfeit of a given product (e.g. it does not contain a well-known brand logo), but intentionally resembles it and has a similar or allegedly identical smell, formula or appearance, while its price is much lower.

Unlike counterfeits, dupes do not always constitute a clear violation of the law.  However, this does not mean that they remain outside the scope of regulations on industrial property protection, copyright or combating unfair competition.

One product – many rights, many risks of violation

The same product may be protected by different intellectual property rights in parallel, thus the infringement may concern several of those at the same time. In practice, this means that different intellectual property rights can coexist and complement each other in one product, creating a strong and comprehensive market protection. Launching or promoting an identical or similar product may lead to cumulative liability, e.g. infringement of a trademark (e.g. a logo), an industrial design (e.g. packaging), copyright (e.g. graphics) and/or a patent (e.g. a cosmetic formula).

When does the dupe or the way it is promoted violate the law?

According to the Polish Industrial Property Law, it is a violation of the law to use a sign similar or identical to the protected trademark if it can mislead the consumer. In the case of reputable marks (i.e. very recognizable and prestigious ones which enjoy wider protection), it is a similarity that brings an undue advantage or is detrimental to the distinctive character or reputation of this type of mark (use or undermining of attractiveness and prestige).

Interestingly, even promoting products using hashtags with an exclusive brand name can also be a violation of the law. The assessment of this issue depends on various factors, while both the dupes’ producers and the influencers who promote them should be careful when publishing posts with reference to other, especially reputable, brands.

In the context of industrial property law, it is also necessary to keep in mind the protected industrial design. Copying the unique design of the product or its packaging may be considered a violation of the law, and the manufacturer of the original, who has the right to register the design, may pursue claims.

Unfair competition and false advertising

Imitation of a product may constitute an act of unfair competition, i.e. an act contrary to the law or good conduct that threatens or violates the interest of another entrepreneur or customer. False advertising, which may affect the customer’s decision to purchase the goods or services, is also prohibited.

Advertising is considered misleading when the customer obtains false ideas about the goods on its basis. A discrepancy in the idea of the product may result from objectively false information in a given advertising message or other factors that make even true information in this message lead to a false picture of reality.[ii] Any commercial communication aimed at promoting the sale or paid use of goods that is misleading constitutes a violation of the law.

Information that may mislead the consumer includes especially the following: quantity, quality, composition, method of production, suitability, applicability, repair or maintenance of the advertised goods. If the manufacturer or influencer promotes the product using false information about its properties, e.g. using the phrase “as effective as”, they violate the law and may be held liable.

However, Polish law allows the so-called fair reference use. It comes down to the fact that someone else’s trademark may be used for informational purposes, provided that this is done in a fair manner, in accordance with good commercial practices and without suggesting an economic relationship with the trademark owner.

It is also worth remembering that many exclusive products and their packaging are works within the meaning of the Act on Copyright and Related Rights, which are subject to protection. The authorized person whose proprietary copyrights have been violated may demand, among others, the cessation of violations, repairing the damage or issuing the benefits obtained.

How to act in accordance with the law?

Before launching the product, the manufacturer should carry out legal analyses to reduce the risk of claims from other entities.

When it comes to influencers, even if they don’t produce or sell dupes, their promotional activity may be considered a violation of the law. First, before promoting a product, one ought to make sure it does not violate someone else’s rights. And during the promotion, one should, as a rule, avoid comparisons that suggest that the promoted article is “the same” as another, reputable one.

Producers of goods at risk of exposure to dupes, in order to avoid losses – both image-based and related to the decline in sales of their luxury product – should monitor the market and react if there are products that can be labeled as dupes of a given brand. It is crucial to register trademarks and designs, and to patent solutions, which greatly facilitates the effective pursuit of claims.

Communication of brand values and uniqueness; consumer education

Dupes win in terms of price, but not authenticity. Luxury brands in marketing communication should emphasize that their value lies in something more. It is worth building the message around the quality, history, craftsmanship, heritage and intellectual value behind the brand

What should be of great importance to consumers is the products’ safety. Therefore, it is crucial to emphasize the significance of dermatological tests carried out, and to show the differences between the original and the “inspiration” (e.g. durability, ingredients, certificates).

Many consumers are unaware that the promotion of dupes may be illegal, or that cheaper cosmetic substitutes may be harmful to human health due to the use of unsuitable ingredients or the lack of testing. It is a good idea to run information campaigns about the differences between the originals and “replacements”.

Consumers should be made aware that reputation does not only mean luxury, but also a responsibility towards customers, employees and society, transparency, i.e. transparent actions without hiding relevant information, and high quality.

Consult a patent attorney!

In the era of influencer marketing and the growing legal awareness of consumers, the border between inspiration and violation of the law is becoming thinner. More and more well-known companies are choosing the legal route to protect their design and reputation. Therefore, being careful is advisable – both as a producer, and creator of advertising content. The producers of the so-called dupes, as well as the people promoting them on social media, should first acquire a legal analysis, lest they become key figures not of a media trend, but a court dispute.

If you want to check whether your brand or influencer activity is at legal risk, please contact our law firm. If, as an entrepreneur, you encounter dupes of your brands, contact us, and we will help you assess the situation and secure your interests.

[i] https://trademarklawyermagazine.com/the-rise-of-dupe-culture-designers-struggle-to-protect-their-designs/

[ii] J. Kępiński, J. Szwaja (ed.), Ustawa o zwalczaniu nieuczciwej konkurencji. Commentary, ed. 1, 2024

Artykuł #smellslike #dupe – Dupes under scrutiny of the law, or when inspiration becomes violation pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

History and origins

Although the concept of biomimetics as a scientific discipline appeared only in the twentieth century, the very idea of imitating nature has accompanied humanity for centuries. Even the ancients drew inspiration from animals and plants. The mythical wings of Icarus, for example, were inspired by the way birds fly.

One of the earliest documented examples of biomimetic design is Leonardo da Vinci’s flying machine from the late 15th century. The flight mechanism of this machine was based on an analysis of the movement of bird and bat wings. Although its construction never got off the ground, it was an important step towards future attempts to engineer the reconstruction of natural phenomena.

Fig. Ornithopter designed by Leonardo da Vinci

However, the real breakthrough in biomimetic development occurred in the 20th century, alongside progress in molecular biology, materials science, and microscopic technologies. These advances enabled scientists to carefully analyse biological structures, from spider threads to the construction of butterfly wings, and apply their properties to new technological solutions.

Biomimetics in patents

Biomimetics not only drives the development of new technologies, but also increases the potential for commercialising inventions. Nature inspirations lead to more effective, durable and often environmentally friendly solutions, which makes them attractive to both scientists and entrepreneurs. As a result, the number of patents based on biomimetics is growing, and databases containing so-called “biological patents” are becoming a valuable source of inspiration for further innovators.

The process of patenting biomimetic solutions follows the same general rules as other forms of protecting industrial property. The invention must be new, have an inventive step (it cannot be obvious from the state of the art) and be suitable for industrial application. Biomimetic inventions can be reported as either new products or new modes of operation or construction. For example, nature itself (such as the shape of a fish’s fin) cannot be patented, but the method of its technical reproduction and application to a specific device can.

Examples of areas where biomimetic solutions have been used

What was once only an observation of nature is now becoming a full-fledged engineering tool. Both individual inventors and large research companies use biomimetics as a source of breakthrough solutions. This means that patents essentially serve as a form of protection for what has been “read” from nature and then transferred to the world of technology.

Artykuł Nature as a source of innovation – biomimetics in inventions and patents pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

The basis of music protection in Poland – copyright in the music industry

In Poland, musical works are protected primarily by the provisions of the Act of 4 February 1994 on copyright and related rights.

In the music industry, works can include, for example, lyrics, sound compositions (music), songs (music with lyrics), sound recordings, videos, as well as artistic performances (e.g. covers).

Copyrights can be divided into author’s moral and economic rights. Moral rights are the creator’s eternal rights and arise upon the creation of the work. This means that no additional formalities need to be completed for moral rights to be established.

Moral rights include, among others, the right of the author to include their name, surname and/or pseudonym in the designation of the work, the right to preserve the integrity of the content and form of the work and the right to make the work available to the public for the first time. Since in copyright disputes it is possible to question the authorship, so it is worth accumulating the evidence confirming that you are the creator. Such conflicts can occur even years after the creation of the work (e.g. in the case of musical groups and bands).

A well-known copyright dispute in the music industry is the case of the British artist FKA twigs, who once shared a choreography plan on social media. This was later used by a large brand without her consent. The video she had shared became a proof that her choreography was the original.

Author’s economic rights, in turn, are transferable (they can be transferred to other persons or entities, e.g. by reselling). Also, they are limited in time (they last up to 70 years after the creator’s death, then the work enters the public domain). Economic rights include, among others: the right to use the work, the creator’s right to dispose of the work and the right to remuneration for the use of the work. Author’s economic rights may be held not only by the creator, but also, for example, a record company, streaming media service, producer, organization for collective copyright management or performer. Despite his worldwide fame, Prince fought for the rights to his musical work for a long time. In the 1990s, he started to appear with the word “SLAVE” written on his face and changed his name to a symbol to protest against the record company that had the rights to his recordings. Years later, he regained control over his work, but it had cost him a lot. Today, his example serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of well-written contracts.

Below, you will learn how to manage your copyrights.

Branding in music – trademarks for artists and music bands

On the music market, it is not only artistic works that have a specific value. A band name, first and last name or nickname, logo or a characteristic slogan may also have a real market value. Protecting them by registering trademarks gives the owner the exclusive right to their use for commercial and promotional purposes. Strong brands can generate huge profits, e.g. by selling posters, accessories or clothes with the singer’s or band’s logo.

Beyonce registered her daughter’s Blue Ivy Carter name as a trademark for fear that someone else would want to use it commercially. By registering the mark, she protected not only the name, but also a potential brand in the future.

Registering a trademark with the Polish Patent Office allows the owner to exclusively use the trademark in the territory of Poland for the entire 10-year protection period, with the possibility of its extension for subsequent decades. Artists building their careers also abroad need to protect their marks in other countries or as part of the international registration procedure. With such protection, they can have an impact on the development of the brand and prevent infringements, e.g. the sale of counterfeits or use without the owner’s consent or against their intentions.

One artist who has decided to take advantage of this opportunity is the Polish rapper Young Leosia, who registered her pseudonym as a trademark. As a result, she can not only control its commercial use but also take action against counterfeits or unauthorized events.

What about sound trademarks? These also occur. If the sound or melody is related to the brand and identified with it by the audience, it can be registered as a trademark. Examples include the characteristic “ta-dum” sound effect of Netflix, MGM lion roar, or the deer’s roar for Jägermeister.

Is music good? So should be cooperation.

At the core of fruitful and good cooperation between the artist, record label, producer and other entities is a clear desire for business cooperation. And such desire is mostly expressed in license and distribution agreements. And to draft them, it is worth seeking legal assistance to ensure that the creator can impact their work and the way it is used. The principles of remuneration and distribution of profits, as well as the manner of use or the possibility to modify the work should be properly defined.

Billie Eilish and her brother Finneas have always made music in their home recording studio. Although they signed a contract with a large label, they made sure to keep control over key decisions regarding the use of their works in commercials or films.

License agreements specify who, where, to what extent and how can use the work, e.g. by publishing it in digital services and using it in commercials or on physical media devices. Such documents should also specify a settlement method or a type of (exclusive or non-exclusive) license to be granted.

In turn, distribution agreements specify the principles of dissemination of the work, including, among others: distribution of profits, duration of cooperation and options to control the use of recordings. They should also precisely determine where the work will be made available to the audience (e.g. physical or digital distribution).

A Polish indie rock band signed a contract with a digital distributor to stream their album in Europe and Asia. After a year, the members of the band discovered that their work was used in a commercial without their knowledge. Due to the lack of precise provisions in the agreement they suffered financial losses, and their reputation was negatively impacted.

When drafting such legal documents, it is worth using assistance of an experienced attorney. He or she will make sure that obligations specified in a contract are clear and comprehensible to all the parties, which will eliminate misunderstandings during cooperation.

The future of music? Only with IP!

The development of technology has changed completely the way we create, listen to, experience, and share music. With new opportunities, new threats have emerged, such as copying, generative AI, voice deepfakes and online piracy.

In 2023, a song featuring AI-generated voices of Drake and The Weeknd reached millions of views on TikTok. But the problem is that neither of the artists contributed to the recording. Following protests, the services removed the song, and the case sparked a global debate about the rights to one’s image and voice.

Due to the above threats, artists and companies from the music industry should strengthen their relations with intellectual property experts. With the experts’ help, they can not only effectively protect their works, but also knowingly manage their music and build lasting, valuable artistic and business brands.

With well-written contracts and trademark registration, creators gain tools to influence the way their music is presented online. Its use in streaming services, social networks or computer games can be the source of huge profits, but without a portfolio of structured rights, the income can be earned by someone else.

Investment in IP protection provides creators with independence, income, and security. As part of a long-term strategy, it allows for informed licensing, establishing partnerships with brands, or controlling remixes and covers. Protect your rights as they work for your success around the clock!

Artykuł From Prince and Beyonce to FKA twigs and Young Leosia: How Intellectual Property Changes the Fortunes of Artists. True Stories from the World of Music pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

What challenges did we have to overcome?

Our client Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjno-Handlowo-Usługowe “Wojtex” is a valued and recognizable supplier of assortment for the gas industry.  

In 2018, the bailiff seized the goods manufactured and introduced by Wojtex in the form of steel gas connections. The bailiff’s seizure of the goods was the implementation of the Court’s decision on security for claims made against our client by his competitor. 

In addition to the seizure of the goods, the court also decided against our client, for the duration of the proceedings, to prohibit the manufacture and offering of these products and to withdraw them from the market. 

After receiving the decision to secure claims, the competitor sued our client to prohibit manufacturing, offering and marketing of these products. The claims of the competing company were based on a patent for the invention of a steel gas connection.  

For our client, a market-leading producer of product assortment for the gas industry, the impact was twofold: financial and reputational. His will was not only to dismiss the action, but to recover any costs he had incurred in order to defend his rights.  

Effectively Taken Actions

In order to effectively defend the rights of our client, we analyzed not only the validity of claims for patent infringement (i.e. whether our Client’s products fall within the scope of patent claims), but also looked at the “patent itself”. 

We have taken the following steps in the case:   

• in cooperation with patent attorneys specializing in our law firm in mechanical inventions, we have collected evidence and developed arguments on the basis of which we have effectively undermined the validity of the patent, pointing to the lack of the so-called inventive level, i.e. the “innovativeness” of the contested invention1,  

• by invalidating the patent, we have consequently led to dismissal of the action in the case of its alleged infringement, and finally 

• we have obtained for our client a reimbursement of the costs of the process in the amount of almost 10 times the minimum rate. 

Thus, the decision became final and the dispute was resolved at the level of the court of first instance.  

Reimbursement of the real costs of the proceedings in the real amount

As a rule, reimbursements of the costs of the proceedings in intellectual property cases ordered by the Courts in the amount of the minimum statutory rate (PLN 1,680) do not correspond to the real costs of conducting the case. This means that the winner is forced to incur costs that are only symbolically compensated.  

In order to ensure that the client’s interests are fully protected, we have decided to ask the Court to award the costs of the trial in the actual amount, based on the list of costs.  In order to do this: 

• we have prepared a detailed list of all costs related to handling the case, including court fees and our law firm’s remuneration 

•  we presented the Court with arguments in favour of the need to award higher costs, emphasising that the statutory rate does not reflect real expenditure. 

The court endorsed our request and awarded our Client the costs of the trial in the amount of about 10 times the minimum rate.  

It is good to know!  

• In disputes over infringement of intellectual property rights, it is important to make a comprehensive, multi-faceted assessment of the legitimacy of claims. As attorneys-at-law, we not only carefully verify the extent to which the infringement itself occurred (whether a given product falls within the scope of patent claims) and on this basis we develop a strategy in the dispute, but also carefully look at the patent itself by verifying whether the grounds for its cancellation have not come true.

• It is possible to obtain the costs of the process for the benefit of the client in an amount higher than the statutory one. With the appropriate arguments and evidence, the court may award reimbursement of costs that will lead to full compensation for the expenditure incurred in the dispute.

• In the event of a final dismissal of the action for infringement of the patent, the defendant has the right to claim compensation for the damage resulting from the issuance of the decision on security, during its validity, as well as after, if the cause of the subsequent damage is related to the issuance of security. The effectiveness of the claim depends on proving three things: firstly, that the action was finally dismissed; secondly, that there was damage; and thirdly, that there is a causal link between the damage and the release of the security. The assessment of the chances of success in a damage compensation case depends on the type and quantity of evidence confirming its occurrence in principle and the amount.

Conclusions of the case

This is another success of our law firm, which shows that the adoption of a multi-level process strategy brings very good results.   

Our many years of experience combined with a strategic way of operating based on reliable, in-depth data analysis and an unconventional approach to client matters gives us a high chance of finding a solution that is beneficial for the Client, regardless of their status or the significant amount of the opponent’s claims. 

Artykuł From Loss to Victory: Achieving Success in a Patent Infringement Dispute pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

Nokia, acting simultaneously in several jurisdictions, pursued a strategy of “litigation as leverage” – applying pressure not only in the courtroom, but above all at the negotiating table. This is a calculated game, with legal positioning as a form of economic pressure. For large and medium-sized companies, innovation is a global commodity, and local protection alone is no longer enough – competitive advantage is built on the ability to play in multiple arenas at once and to adapt swiftly to the changes in the regulatory environment. 

This case highlights the importance of a strategic approach to patent portfolio management and the need to conduct licensing negotiations in good faith. It also demonstrates the value of considering cross-border legal differences early on – during the development and protection strategy phase – to lay the groundwork for potential international IP litigation. 

Nokia’s licensing agreement with Amazon is more than just a testament to the strength of its IP portfolio – it is a reminder that licensing has become a modern way of “monetizing competitive advantage”. A well-structured patent portfolio acts as a diversified revenue stream – regardless of seasonality or logistics. In the hands of a forward-thinking management team, IP is no longer a cost center – it becomes a working asset that contributes directly to the bottom line. A well-managed portfolio can generate income even when the products described in the patents are not manufactured directly. 

By consistently protecting its technologies, Nokia is not just fending off competition – it is setting the rules of the game, not just legally, but also technologically and commercially. Companies that proactively build their market position through IP are better prepared for mergers, investments, expansion, and regulatory risks. The takeaway? Investing in IP means investing in security, bargaining power, and long-term competitive advantage – especially in the world where any technology can become a flashpoint in the global value chain. 

Nokia’s engagement of top-tier law firms in the US, Europe, India, and Brazil reflects strategic maturity and the ability to think globally before acting locally. In today’s world, the winners are those who plan ahead, invest in high quality  legal advice, and know how to translate IP protection into tangible business gains. Intellectual property is now one of the most forward-looking tools for managing enterprise value – especially for those who see it as an opportunity, not just an obligation. 

 What technology companies should be doing:

• Review and update their intellectual property management strategies regularly – at least once a year. 

• Invest in thorough due diligence procedures before launching new products on the market. 

• Be prepared for licensing negotiations, as they are often a productive way to resolve disputes. 

• Recognize that offering products in multiple countries requires active defense of IP rights in multiple jurisdictions. 

Authors:

Oliwia Czarnocka

Małgorzata Furmańska

Artykuł Strategic Importance of IP Protection in Global Technological Competition: Nokia vs. Amazon pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

Although the Polish Presidency of the European Council leaves hope for a return to work on the project, the vast majority of conference participants treated the project as a piece of history and moved on to find new solutions, at most considering which elements of the regulation proposal are worth preserving.

Day one focused on new regulatory frameworks and policies for SEPs

Withdrawal of EU regulation on SEPs leaves the uncertainty among the market participants. While it is agreed that regulation was getting short of the set out goal of transparency, for the majority it still is necessary to have some regulations to improve the process of SEP licensing.

From the perspective of implementers, particularly SMEs, lack of regulation is a bad news. SME’s have no access to the information on global FRAND rates, which makes process of licensing unpredictable. SME’s have to take for granted what SEP holder tells them and fear cherry picking of highest licensed rates. SMEs see SEP Holder approach as “trust me, I’m a doctor”, as they don’t know to what rates other licensees agreed to.

President Mattia Fogliacco of Sisvel has clearly indicated that patent pools have every incentive to set license rate FRAND so that the market penetration is swift and implementation of SEPs unimpacted.

SEP holders see the problem elsewhere. From their point of view, regulation proposal treated all patents as equal, while in practice they are not. Seemingly they emphasize that no regulation should lead to delaying or restricting access to the court, as this erodes the IP protection.

All parties agree that transparency and predictibility of the process are a key to any future regulation, but ultimately all the discussions on willigness of licensees (and licensors), SEP essentiality check and mediation or arbitration, are only a secondary topics to the one thing that actually matters – FRAND-rate setting.

Day two focused on dispute resolution

President of the UPC Court of Appeal, dr Klaus Grabinski, started the day with a remark that a decision to withdraw the EU SEP regulation proposal was justified due to the number of problems with it. The UPC is already dealing with the SEP cases and any regulation that would likely enter into force only years from now could be inadequate to the new challenges in licensing that occurred in the meantime.

Judge Fabian Hoffmann of Bundesgerichtshof discussed Oberlandesgericht München approach to global FRAND-rate setting, noting that Huawei v. ZTE framework ends, where actual problem begins – FRAND rate determination, particularly when parties do not agree to arbitrate.

Rt Hon Lord Justice Richard Arnold of Court of Appeal of England and Wales presented the UK approach to FRAND-rate where discussion on willingness prior to deciding what is FRAND is irrelevant, as the real question on willingness is whether the parties are willing to licence at a royalty which is in fact FRAND. Therefore to decide willingness one first has to decide what is FRAND, and only then one will find out who is willing or unwilling to license at that rate.

Justice Prathiba M. Singh of High Court of Delhi pointed out, that India is emerging as a key SEP jurisdiction and last five years have seen a spike in SEP litigaton. India does not shy away from ruling on FRAND-rate determination, while allowing in the same proceedings to rule on validity of the patents and their essentiality.

This presents a clear difference in approach to the topic of FRAND-rate setting in EU, UK, India and China. In the UK, SEP case is perceived as contractual dispute since SEP holder’s declaration gives rise to a contract between SEP holder and implementer, whereas in the EU FRAND defence is rooted in the competition law. Uncertainty of the competence prevents UPC from determining a global FRAND-rate, while German courts tend to focus on implementer’s duties. As Prof. dr Matthias Leistner summarized, the English are setting licenses, while Germans are granting injunctions.

It appears therefore that in the end some regulation is needed to give European courts the same ability to determine the FRAND-rate during the SEP infringement proceedings.

Artykuł The Future of SEP Regulation in Europe: Uncertainty, Challenges, and the Path Forward pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

Can AI be considered a creator? 

In the light of the applicable law, it should be stated that the creator, in the strict sense of the word, i.e. the entity for which, in principle, copyrights are created, can only be a human being[1].

The above is confirmed by the jurisprudence – the Supreme Court decided that the original source of copyright is the creative activity of a natural person. It follows from the very nature of the creative process that the creator can only be a human being[2], and the features determining the protection of the work can only be given by one. Only the human being in question is equipped with the ability to create or generate a work[3].

The current legal status in Poland does not allow for the recognition of AI as the creator of works, and moreover, among the subjects of civil law, only a human being can perform a creative act[4]. However, this topic is dynamic and requires further research and regulation to adapt the law to the rapidly developing technology.

To whom the authorship of the works generated by the cooperation of AI and man should be attributed?

One of the problems with products created in whole or in part with the participation of AI in copyright law is the answer to the question whether they are protected at all. On the basis of the solutions existing today, it is not possible to attribute them directly to AI, but the authorship can be granted to a person who designs or employs an artificial intelligence system[5] and takes an active part in the process of creating a work using AI.

For example, Image-to-image translation is a method in which a person provides an image that the AI transforms into another one, while maintaining the essential features and structure of the original. However, the use of this tool in the creative process will not be sufficient to assign authorship to the supplier. Here, we can compare the situation where a client employs an artist and provides them with comments on the desired work, what it is supposed to represent, its style, mood, etc. The fact that the client gives the creator tips based on which the client then recognizes the final effect, the image, as corresponding to a certain imaginary concept, does not make them the author of the work[6].

The situation in the USA is also worth a closer look. The local Copyright Office (USCO) has indicated what is decisive for assessing whether the work was created by a human.
Namely, it is important to determine whether the AI served only as an auxiliary tool, or whether the traditional elements of authorship in the work – literary, artistic or musical expression or elements of selection, arrangement, etc. – were in fact invented and made not by man, but by machine.

If the work was created by a machine or a process that works randomly or automatically – without any creative contribution or intervention of a human author – then we cannot talk about human authorship. However, if, during the creation of a work in the program, a person makes certain decisions regarding the features of the work and the creative process, they actively shape their choices in real time during the operation of the program (segregation, selection of elements), and the effect of these choices is created only with the help of the program, such a contribution can be considered creative.

How to distinguish whether the work was created by AI or a human? – overview of methods

The distinction between works created by AI and those created based on human creativity is becoming more and more complicated. There are several key aspects that can help identify the source of the work:

• labelling – aims to ensure transparency and authenticity of materials published in various media. The labels inform the recipients that the material was created or modified using AI tools. An example is the Meta platform, which labels the content generated by AI to promote transparency and understanding among users[7];
• detection using AI – refers to the processes of identification and analysis of content that was generated by AI systems using programs created for this purpose;
• hashing – a technique that involves transforming input data (e.g. text, image) into a unique string of fixed-length characters, called a hash. Each file or piece of content generated by AI can be assigned a unique hash, which allows its identification and verification;
• fingerprinting – it can take into account various data features, such as structure and content, and is used for pattern recognition;
• metadata – they provide information about the origin, author and technical details of the created materials.

The problem of identifying the origin of AI content in light of the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council – Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA)

Article 50 (2) of the AIA imposes an obligation to label artificial content in a machine-readable format. This order applies to AI system providers, i.e. systems generating synthetic content, sounds, images, video, text.

An exception to the obligation to label is the operation of auxiliary AI systems, e.g. in the scope of standard editing.

Entities using an AI system that generates synthetic content that can give the impression of being real (deepfakes) must, in principle, disclose that the disseminated content was artificially generated, or possibly subjected to other types of manipulation[8].

[1] M. Markiewicz [in:] Komentarz do ustawy o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych [w:] Ustawy autorskie. Komentarze. Volume I, ed. R. Markiewicz, Warsaw 2021, art. 8.

[2] Judgment of the Supreme Court of 14 Feb 2014, II CSK 281/13, LEX No. 1459159.

[3] Judgment of the Supreme Court of  6 Oct.2017, II FSK 2462/15, LEX No. 2393123.

[4] A. Niewęgłowski [in:] Prawo autorskie. Komentarz, Warsaw 2021, art. 8.

[5] https://zaiks.org.pl/artykuly/2023/grudzien/czego-tworcy-oczekuja-od-ai-act

[6] https://www.traple.pl/tworczosc-ai-a-prawo-autorskie-w-usa-rozstrzygniecia-us-copyright-office-i-wnioski-dla-polskiego-prawnika/

[7] https://www.meta.com/pl-pl/help/artificial-intelligence/how-ai-generated-content-is-identified-and-labeled-on-meta/

[8] D. Flisak, Akt w sprawie sztucznej inteligencji, LEX/el. 2024.

Artykuł On the trail of the creator – the trouble with copyright protection of the effects of AI activity pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

Here are some of Poland’s most interesting 21st-century inventions.

Asymmetric number systems – a Polish invention that has become the language of world electronics

Jarosław Duda is a professor at the Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. In 2006-2014, while still a student, he developed a scientific method called ANS coding. It allows you to compress data on computers and other electronic devices, so that especially large files such as photos or videos will take up less space without losing quality. While working on the method, he presented his achievements in specialized forums, which resulted in an attempt to patent the code by Google. Thanks to the pressure of the environment, the procedure was interrupted. The code, according to the intention of the inventor, began to be used by all interested parties. It found its way to solutions of Linux, Google, Facebook, Apple and countless other entities. In March 2021, the inventor realized that Microsoft had filed a patent application for his developed rANS method in the United States. And what’s more, in January 2022, he received it. Due to the high cost of litigation in the US, Microsoft’s patent could not be revoked.

Multi-segment vertical wind turbines – ecology and economy from Podlasie

Since 2008, Waldemar Piskorz from Podlasie has been working on a new approach to obtaining wind energy. The vertical segmented wind turbine invented by him and his team can generate energy in wind at a speed of 1m/s (this is about 70% less than current windmills), and they are much lower, thanks to which they do not constitute an obstacle to air transport or generate such a lot of noise.

The invention is protected by European patents: EP4248087, EP3129647

EP4248087A1

EP3129647A1

Graphene – the material of the future

Graphene made a media sensation a few years ago. Its structure makes it a hundred times stronger than steel, and at the same time extremely light. The Polish contribution to the development of graphene is due to Prof. Włodzimierz Strupiński and his team at the Warsaw University of Technology. They created and patented their own method of producing graphene of the highest quality.

P.391416 right in force

Blue laser – Top-Gan Sp. z o.o. and the High Pressure Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences

The first solid-state laser, based on gallium arsenide (GaAs), was developed more than 40 years ago and converts electrical energy into coherent light. Its colour depends on the material used. The blue laser is based on single crystals of gallium nitride (GaN), but this material does not occur in nature and its production requires more difficult conditions than the production of artificial diamonds..

This is where scientists from the Institute of High Pressure of the Polish Academy of Sciences, who have been working on the technology of obtaining single crystals of gallium nitride since 2001, entered. The specific facilities of the Institute made it possible to develop a revolutionary method thanks to which single crystals of a quality exceeding those created in other laboratories were produced. This method was filed with the Patent Office in 2021 as a “Method of manufacturing a two-dimensional array of semiconductor laser diodes and an array of semiconductor laser diodes” and has been patented since September 4, 2023.

P.437357 – law in force

Otoimplant – middle ear prosthesis

Dr. Magdalena Ziąbka, from the Faculty of Materials Engineering and Ceramics of the AGH University of Science and Technology, together with her research team, developed an innovative middle ear prosthesis. The implant not only allows the reconstruction of the ossicular chain, but also has a bactericidal effect, which promotes convalescence and reduces the risk of infection. The result is improved hearing in a wide range of patients with hearing impairments.

The prosthesis is protected by an international patent in the procedure PCT/PL2013/000069

“Formation method of a middle ear prosthesis” PCT/PL2013/000069

These are just some of the numerous innovations created by Poles. It is also worth reading about the co-founder of OpenAI, who introduced artificial intelligence to wide waters – Wojciech Zaremba, about Lucie Łągiewka, the inventor of the so-called “Łągiewka bumper” using the Accumulation and Dispersion Energy Converter, or about BioCam capsules, which can revolutionize medical research such as colonoscopy and gastroscopy

The Polish contribution to the development of technology can be seen in many industries. Today, it is still often the case that the development of innovative solutions and their commercialization takes place outside our country. We hope that Poland in the 21st century will be equally attractive to inventors, so that they can and want to create a better future for everyone.

Discover the most important Polish inventions of the 20th century >>

Artykuł Inventions of the 21st century pochodzi z serwisu JWP.

However, our nation’s creativity has developed independently of statehood, and interesting inventions that have changed the world have often been created and registered abroad. Ingenuity and innovation are the driving forces behind new solutions and improvements in the quality of life in many areas. The following people have left their mark on science and the arts: Nicolaus Copernicus, Maria Skłodowska-Curie, Fryderyk Chopin and many others. This time, however, we would like to introduce you to lesser-known but equally important Polish inventors of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Inventions of the 20^th century:

Józef Kosacki – a Pole who stopped death thanks to a handheld mine detector.

The first handheld electromagnetic detector, or actually a metal detector allowing for the detection of landmines, was created in 1941 as an invention of Józef Kosacki. Due to the Second World War, the creator decided to give up the patent, saving the lives of many thousands of people. The technical drawings were handed over to the British government and then sent to all Allied troops. After the end of the war, the invention proved irreplaceable in the restoration of areas where recent warfare had taken place. With some modifications, it was used until the 1990s.

Hilary Koprowski – polio vaccine that saves millions!

Hilary Koprowski was born in 1916 in Warsaw, but shortly before the outbreak of World War II, he went to Italy and Brazil, to finally reach the USA and settle there. As a virologist and immunologist, he studied the poliovirus which causes poliomyelitis. In 1948, together with two American colleagues, he created a working vaccine, and to test its effectiveness, he tried the first dose on himself and the technique that accompanied him in the research process. Thanks to Koprowski’s actions, 9 million doses of vaccines reached Poland, which allowed to control the epidemic of diseases.

Like the invention of Józef Kosacki, the vaccine was not patented and went into mass production in the name of saving human health.

Henryk Magnuski – a precursor of handheld communication

As long as you’re not reading this article on your phone, you’ve got it in your pocket or somewhere within easy reach, right? Can you imagine life without the possibility of convenient distance communication? If not, you should be familiar with Henryk Magnuski. Born in Warsaw in 1909, the Polish inventor went to the USA for training shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War and stayed there permanently. Working at Galvin Manufacturing Corporation (which later changed its name to Motorola), he was part of a radio communications project and developed the first portable radios. When he retired, he had around 30 patents that improved communication and significantly influenced our everyday life today.

Józef Hofmann – the inventor of perfecting everyday things, including car wipers and stools with adjustable height

He gained fame mainly as a top-class pianist, but fascinated by everyday life, he also created about 70 inventions. His best-known technical solutions are car wipers and a height-adjustable stool. All his ideas were firmly rooted in everyday life inspired by his two passions: music and motoring. Car wipers were inspired by the movements of the metronome. They were appreciated by Ford and put into production in their factories. Hofmann gave music concerts already at the age of eleven, and from the need to reach for the piano pedals, a stool with adjustable height was born. Among the patents of Józef Hofmann we can also find many interesting inventions that improve the comfort of driving a car: car telescopes, spring bumpers, pneumatic shock absorbers, a GPS prototype or to improve piano playing and music recording: a piano with narrower keys, a way to reduce the resistance of the keys during the game or pedal extensions. Józef Hofmann patented most of his inventions in the United States, which brought him considerable income.

Jan Czochralski – the inventor who invented modern electronics and invented the railway!

Jan Czochralski was born in 1885 in Kcynia, near Bydgoszcz, which was then partitioned and occupied by Prussia. With a passion for chemical experimentation, he soon left home to study at the Technical University of Berlin and work in AEG laboratories. In 1916, he discovered a method of manufacturing single crystals, especially semiconductors, which are used to build transistors necessary for the operation of most electronic devices: phones, computers, cameras, tablets, etc. The scientific world called this method the Czochralski method, but it was not patented. Another invention was an alloy for plain bearing shells, called metal B or bahnmetall. This alloy was soft enough to lubricate the axles of the wagons, but hard enough to last. The patent, granted in 1926, was almost immediately bought by the German railways, which made it possible to speed up transport.

These are not the only inventions of the 20th century constructed by Poles. This list should include many more solutions such as: fluorescent lamp, semaphore, pulsar clock, cryptological bomb, radiomicroscope, “Nagra” reporter tape recorder, teletroscope, hydrogen bomb, parabens in cosmetics or toothpaste with activated carbon. From entertainment to medicine, from mathematics, logic and the beginnings of programming to cosmetology and hygiene – there are interesting Polish inventions in every field.

Check out polish inventions of the 21st century >>

Artykuł The most important Polish inventions of the 20th century pochodzi z serwisu JWP.