UK Supreme Court: AI Cannot Be Considered Patent Inventor - Technology Org | By The Digital Insider

In a groundbreaking case in Britain regarding whether artificial intelligence (AI) can possess patent rights, a U.S. computer scientist faced a setback on Wednesday, when the UK Supreme Court ruled that artificial intelligence cannot be considered a patent inventor.

Scientific discovery, artificial intelligence – conceptual artistic interpretation. Image generated with DALL·E 3

The story goes back some time ago, when Stephen Thaler sought to register two patents in the UK for inventions attributed to his AI system, the “creativity machine” named DABUS. However, the UK’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO) rejected the patent registration, asserting that the inventor must be a human or a company, not a machine.

In response to the refusal, Thaler appealed to the UK’s Supreme Court. Despite his efforts, the court unanimously dismissed his appeal, citing that, according to UK patent law, “an inventor must be a natural person.”

The court’s written ruling clarified that the case did not address the broader question of whether advancements generated autonomously by AI-powered machines should be eligible for patents.

A spokesperson for the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) expressed approval of the decision, highlighting the clarity it provides regarding the existing legal framework concerning the patenting of AI-generated creations.

The spokesperson also acknowledged the existence of “legitimate questions” about how the patent system and intellectual property, in general, should handle such AI-driven creations. The government, they noted, will continue to scrutinize and review this area of law.

Experts note that, for now, the ruling does not significantly impact the patent system since AI is currently viewed as a tool, not an entity.

This ruling aligns with similar decisions by courts in Europe, Australia, and the U.S., providing clarity that inventors must be natural persons. However, the judgment does not prohibit a person from utilizing AI to devise an invention. In such cases, applying for a patent is possible, provided the person using the AI is identified as the inventor.

Written by Alius Noreika

#AINeuralNetworksNews, #Ai, #AIPowered, #Artificial, #ArtificialIntelligence, #ArtificialIntelligenceAI, #Australia, #AuthoredPost, #Britain, #Computer, #Creativity, #Europe, #FeaturedInformationProcessing, #FeaturedTechnologyNews, #Framework, #Government, #How, #Human, #ImageOfTheWeek, #IntellectualProperty, #Intelligence, #Invention, #Inventions, #It, #Law, #Legal, #Natural, #Patents, #Review, #Scientific, #SoftwareNews, #SpecialPost, #SpotlightNews, #Technology, #Time, #Tool, #UK

---

Published on The Digital Insider at https://thedigitalinsider.com/uk-supreme-court-ai-cannot-be-considered-patent-inventor-technology-org/.