This always very dynamic and well-attended session enables you to select from a menu of hot topics in the Intellectual Property (IP), communications, media and technology sectors, and participate in roundtable discussions. The format is interactive networking. Topics are selected to be of current interest and likely to stimulate a lively debate. Moderators on each table introduce the table topic and the participants do the rest. Background knowledge or experience within areas for discussion is not required. You will have the opportunity to discuss four topics: at scheduled turnover times the participants move around the tables to the next topic of their choosing. Our menu will include hot and 'late breaking' topics in the areas of intellectual property law, internet law and mobile technologies, technology contracting and dispute resolution, arts law and space law. Discussion is usually around the interface of law, business and technology, with a global focus. Many topics for discussion are often the subject of considerable public and media interest, and this will be the case again. In participating in the table topics, you will gain a greater insight into these areas and be able to add your own comments. In addition, a 'degustation' breakfast buffet will be hosted in the room so that no time is wasted for those who want to boost their energy levels prior to or during the session. The session will provide you with a great opportunity to meet many other lawyers to discuss topics of mutual interest with them: don't forget your business cards. We welcome new participants in these discussions. We will also be soliciting your views about your areas of interest and other suggestions to enable the Section to programme future activities accordingly. The following topics will be discussed during the session, with the help of the respective moderators identified for each topic: Table 1 a) Disavowing authorship: in March 2017, artist Richard Prince returned the money paid by Ivanka Trump for her portrait as a political protest against the Trump administration. Can an artist legally repudiate his authorship of a work of art? Does the collector have any legal recourse against a decision that can potentially destroy the economic value of an artistic asset? b) Public art ownership and market value: a recent judgment in Italy held that the damage that has occurred to a sculpture owned by a municipal museum while it was being exhibited abroad could not be assessed with reference to market value standards (ie, international auction prices of similar works of the artist) because art owned by a public entity is unsaleable in Italy. How does the law work in countries where deaccessioning is permitted? How does (or should) private versus public ownership affect the liquidation of damages by courts? Should the private versus public nature of the owner of an artwork be taken into account by insurance companies in assessing the risk associated with insurance coverage? Table 2 a) Recently made and planned domestic space legislation b) Space 2.0: comparison of startup environments in jurisdictions worldwide Table 3 Time to take off the gloves: website blocking to stop the misuse of IP rights Table 4 Sights and sounds and shapes and smells, these are a few of my favourite things: the benefits and challenges associated with non traditional trade marks Table 5 The UPC: where are we now? Table 6 To 3D or not to 3D: what does 3D printing mean for intellectual property? Table 7 Biosimilars: how similar is similar enough? From cures to cancer to alleviating arthritic pain, biologics are at the frontier of new medicine. But as with all next generation technologies, biologics present a number of patent and other IP challenges for both the biologic developers and those wishing to bring similar products to the market. Table 8 a) Image rights/data privacy claims: data privacy and image rights claims are on the rise around the world (particularly in the EU/UK). We’ll discuss various facets of the topic. b) Libel suits and social media: with the recent Jack Monroe/Katie Hopkins libel judgment in the UK (finding Katie Hopkins liable for politically tinged tweets that, in the US at least, would surely have been deemed non-actionable hyperbole), it seems like a good time to discuss how social media is changing the rules of the road when it comes to the free speech/reputation balance. Table 9 Blockchain: the chain unravelled Table 10 Government access to information technology (IT) systems Table 11 Robotics and artificial intelligence (AI): outsmarted by machines Table 12 Ownership in data Table 13 Hacks, leaks and liabilities: from distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) to the internet of things (IoT) and plenty in between, who is liable when data leaks? Table 14 Smart cities Table 15 Digital platforms: rise and fall