The Supreme Court of the United States decides that 'AI is not recognized as an inventor at the time of patent application'
On April 24, 2023, local time, the United States Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against
US Supreme Court rejects computer scientist's lawsuit over AI-generated inventions | Reuters
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-rejects-computer-scientists-lawsuit-over-ai-generated-2023-04-24/
US Supreme Court rejects patents for AI-generated inventions – Tech Startups | Tech Companies | Startups News
AI Inventor and the Ethics Trap for US Patent Attorneys | Patently-O
https://patentino.com/patent/2023/04/cert-denied-inventorship.html
Computer scientist Steven Thaler used a proprietary AI system called DABUS to generate prototypes of a shape-shifting food container and an emergency flashlight. Thaler then filed a patent application for these inventions in 2019 with DABUS as the inventor.
However, in April 2020, both the United States Patent and Trademark Office and a federal court in Virginia rejected Thaler's patent application for his invention, ruling that ``under American patent law, an inventor must be a human being.'' bottom.
``AI cannot be registered as an inventor when applying for a patent,'' the US Patent and Trademark Office announces an official opinion-GIGAZINE
Mr. Thaler, who was dissatisfied with this announcement, developed a lawsuit in the United States and Australia on whether to accept AI as an inventor. However, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , which specializes in patents and other matters, has issued a first-instance decision that upheld the Patent and Trademark Office and federal courts.
A ruling that ``AI is not recognized as an inventor'' comes down in the United States, while Australia ``recognises''-GIGAZINE
Dissatisfied with these lower court decisions, Thaler appealed to the Supreme Court. Thaler's supporters include academics such as Lawrence Lessig of the Harvard Law School, who responded to the Federal Circuit's ruling that 'this ruling costs billions of dollars in current and future investments.' Not only does it put more than $1.3 billion at risk, but it also threatens America's competitiveness and results in conflict with the clear text of patent law.'
Thaler also said that AI is being used in a variety of innovations, from medicine to energy, and that rejecting patents on AI-generated inventions would undermine the patent system's ability to foster innovation and technological progress. I argue that it will lead to
However, on April 24, 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed Thaler's appeal of the lower court's ruling. The Supreme Court ruled that ``patents can only be issued to human inventors, and Thaler's AI system ``DABUS'' is not considered the legal inventor of these two inventions.''
Mr. Thaler has applied for patents in countries such as the United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia and Saudi Arabia as well, but only one example has been granted in South Africa. In the UK, from March 2023, the Supreme Court will hold a trial to determine that even an invention generated by AI has the right to obtain a patent.
In addition, Mr. Thaler has applied for copyright to the painting generated by the algorithm named ``Creativity Machine'', and in December 2022, ``There is no element of human copyright,'' the copyright authority and Mr. Thaler's appeal has been dismissed by the court.
``There is no copyright in the work of art created by AI,'' the US Copyright Office rejects AI's copyright-GIGAZINE
Related Posts:
in Science, Posted by log1r_ut