The invisible legal architecture behind AI systems, either talking to each other or failing spectacularly, takes center stage in this deep dive into interoperability. Far more than technical specifications, the ability of AI models to connect and share data represents a battlefield where intellectual property rights, competition law, and global governance clash to determine who controls the digital ecosystem.

Starting with IBM’s mainframe antitrust case, we trace how European regulators forced a tech giant to provide third parties with technical documentation needed for maintenance. This early precedent established that when your system becomes essential infrastructure, monopolizing access raises legal red flags. The SAS v. World Programming Limited ruling further clarified that functionality, programming languages, and data formats cannot be protected by copyright, giving developers freedom to create compatible systems without infringement concerns.

Patent battles reveal another dimension of interoperability politics. Cases like Huawei v. ZTE established detailed protocols for negotiating Standard Essential Patents, preventing companies from weaponizing their intellectual property to block competitors. The Microsoft v. Motorola judgment defined what “reasonable” licensing fees actually look like, protecting the principle that interoperability shouldn’t bankrupt smaller players.

Google’s decade-long fight with Oracle over Java API copyright culminated in a Supreme Court victory validating that reimplementing interfaces for compatibility constitutes fair use, a landmark decision protecting the ability to build systems that communicate with existing platforms without permission. Meanwhile, the Oracle v. Rimini ruling reinforced that third-party software support isn’t derivative copyright infringement, even when designed exclusively for another company’s ecosystem.

Beyond courtrooms, international frameworks increasingly shape AI interoperability standards. From UNESCO’s ethics recommendation to ISO/IEC 42001 certification, from the G7 Hiroshima AI Process to regional initiatives like the African Union’s Data Policy Framework, these governance mechanisms are establishing a global language for compatible, trustworthy AI development.

Whether you’re building AI systems, crafting policy, or simply trying to understand why your tools won’t work together, these legal precedents reveal that interoperability isn’t just about good coding. It’s about who controls the playground, the rulebook, and ultimately, the future of AI innovation.

Case Study: Lego’s Playbook For Intellectual Property – Intangiblia™

Think a lost patent ends the story? We unpack how Lego turned a single technical invention into a platform for decades of innovation, brand power, and adult creativity. Starting with the 1958 stud-and-tube coupling, we explain what the original brick patent really covered, why its expiry didn’t sink the company, and how modern patents protect motion, mechanisms, and programmable systems rather than basic interlocking. From there, we map the rest of the toolkit: trademarks for source identity, design rights for appearance, and copyrights for expressive elements.We also dive into the courtroom rulers that drew bright lines on functionality. Attempts to trademark the brick shape faltered in Canada and the EU because function can’t double as a brand signifier, while the minifigure shape prevailed as a 3D trademark. A later EU design-rights win showed that even bricks have protectable visual features when not purely functional. Enforcement cases against Best-Lock and Lepin underline how copyrights and trade dress defend minifigures, packaging, and character designs across markets.Then we switch from courts to culture. Lego’s adult strategy blends nostalgia with display-worthy design: Star Wars Ultimate Collector Series, sleek Architecture skylines, and the Botanical collection that doubles as decor. Black-box, 18+ packaging telegraphs “made for you,” and the brand leans into mindful building as a calming, creative ritual. Finally, we explore Lego Serious Play, an open-source methodology that spreads fast through facilitators while the company retains the brand and sells specialized kits. It’s a masterclass in sharing the method but owning the name.If you enjoy smart takes on how IP, marketing, and design shape the products you love, hit follow, share this with a friend who builds, and leave a review to tell us which Lego insight surprised you most.Send us a textCheck out "Protection for the Inventive Mind" – available now on Amazon in print and Kindle formats. The views and opinions expressed (by the host and guest(s)) in this podcast are strictly their own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the entities with which they may be affiliated. This podcast should in no way be construed as promoting or criticizing any particular government policy, institutional position, private interest or commercial entity. Any content provided is for informational and educational purposes only.

1. Case Study: Lego’s Playbook For Intellectual Property 21:52
2. Zodiac Season, Litigation Rising 32:08
3. From Spark to Impact, the Conscious Path of an Idea 31:16
4. Mireille Gomes – Can Algorithms Heal? Reimagining Health Equity with AI and Data Justice 35:34
5. Jean Marc Seigneur – In Trust We Build: Designing the Future of Digital Reputation 01:07:27