Wednesday August 10, 2022
Edit
Ringomo Ringomo
  • most recent news
  • trending news
  • most read
  • All Video
  • Image gallery
  • more
Salesforce acquire slack
Business

Salesforce Acquire Slack: The

December 10, 2020
girl using phone while walking on footpath during pandemic
Technology

How Technology is Helping

December 10, 2020
AI Initiatives
Technology

5 Global AI Initiatives

December 15, 2020
Technology

Mom overturns wrongful in

March 17, 2021
Entertainment

Being elderly have per

March 17, 2021
Technology

Galaxy’s Edge the best

March 28, 2021
  • Accessibility
  • Help
  • Contact
  • About qoxag
  • Technology
  • Health
  • Marketing
  • Write For Us
Ringomo Ringomo

Breaking News

Why Outsource a White Label Marketing Agency?

Thermal vs Solar Energy: Which is Better?

How to test a web application: 6 simple steps

How Technology is Helping Humans to Survive a Pandemic?

Guide: Starting a Successful Marketing Company

Can I Spy on an iPhone

What Is the Photovoltaic Effect? Understanding the Basics of Solar

Sci-Fi Short Down To Earth Feels Like an Australian Stranger

Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra Review: Phone Specifications

Salesforce Acquire Slack: The Future of Both Companies

  1. Home
  2. Legal Tech
  3. Judge Says an AI Can’t Be an Inventor on a Patent Because It’s Not a Person
 Judge Says an AI Can’t Be an Inventor on a Patent Because It’s Not a Person
Legal Tech

Judge Says an AI Can’t Be an Inventor on a Patent Because It’s Not a Person

by Kainat Batool September 6, 2021

It all boils down to how the law defines an ‘individual.’

Don’t worry, humans—artificial intelligence systems aren’t taking over the world yet. They can’t even appear as inventors on U.S. patents.

U.S. federal judge Leonie Brikema ruled this week that an AI can’t be listed as an inventor on a U.S. patent under current law. The case was brought forward by Stephen Thaler, who is part of the Artificial Inventor Project, an international initiative that argues that an AI should be allowed to be listed as an inventor in a patent (the owner of the AI would legally own the patent).

Thaler sued the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office after it denied his patent applications because he had listed the AI named DABUS as the inventor of a new type of flashing light and a beverage container. In various responses spanning several months, the Patent Office explained to Thaler that the machine does not qualify as an inventor because it is not a person. In fact, the machine is a tool used by people to create inventions, the agency maintained.

Brinkema determined that the Patent Office correctly enforced the nation’s patent laws and pointed out that it basically all boils down to the everyday use of language. In the latest revision of the nation’s patent law in 2011, Congress explicitly defined an inventor as an “individual.” The Patent Act also references an inventor using words such as “himself” and herself.”

“By using personal pronouns such as ‘himself or herself and the verb ‘believes’ in adjacent terms modifying ‘individual,’ Congress was clearly referencing a natural person,” Brikema said in her ruling, which you can read in full at the Verge. “Because ‘there is a presumption that a given term is used to mean the same thing throughout a statute,’ the term ‘individual’ is presumed to have a persistent meaning throughout the Patent Act.”

The judge also rejected Thaler’s claim that the Patent Office had to provide evidence that Congress did not want to exclude AI systems from being inventors.

Furthermore, Brikema stated that the nature of an inventor has already been examined in federal courts, which have ruled that neither companies nor states can claim to be inventors on a patent.

For his part, Thaler also tried to argue that the court should respect Congress’ intent to create a system that would “encourage innovation.”

“Allowing patents for AI-Generated Inventions will result in more innovation. It will incentivize the development of AI capable of producing patentable output by making that output more valuable…” Thaler said. “By contrast, denying patent protection for AI-Generated Inventions threatens to undermine the patent system by failing to encourage the production of socially valuable inventions.”

Nonetheless, Thaler didn’t have luck with that argument, either. Brikema said that these were policy considerations and thus must be dealt with by Congress, not the courts.

And it’s not like the Patent Office is refusing to consider what role, if any, AI should have in patents. It has requested comments artificial intelligence in patent policy and reported that the majority of responses reflected the belief that current AI “could neither invent nor author without human intervention.”

Ryan Abbott, a law professor who oversees the Artificial Inventor Project, told Bloomberg the group would appeal. Although Brikema squashed all of the project’s arguments, she didn’t say an AI could never be listed as an inventor.

“As technology evolves, there may come a time when artificial intelligence reaches a level of sophistication such that might satisfy accepted meanings of inventorship. But that time has not yet arrived, and, if it does, it will be up to Congress to decide how, if it at all, it wants to expand the scope of patent law,” Brikema said.

Share This:

Previous post
Next post
Kainat

Kainat Batool

author

Keeping up to date with emerging fashion trends as well as general trends relating to fabrics, colors and shapes. Ability to generate ideas and concepts, using initiative and think outside of the box. Commercial awareness and Business Orientation. Interpersonal, Communication and Networking Skills. Currently looking for freelancing projects under the following status: Fashion Design Social media Marketing Graphic Design Fashion Portfolios Fashion Consulting Textile Design (Patterns and Prints) Fashion Styling Project handling

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Recent
Blockchain

Polkadot or SafeMoon: what shot in 2022?

August 7, 2022
Blockchain

The Future of Free to Play Gaming

July 29, 2022
Business

7 Ways Big Data is Beneficial for

July 25, 2022
Technology

A Guide to Select the Best Network

July 14, 2022
RELATED Stories for you
Polkadot or SafeMoon
Blockchain

Polkadot or SafeMoon: what shot in 2022?

by Kate Thrall August 7, 2022

Shiba Inu, Dogecoin, and Dogelon Mars all reached astounding prices in 2021, making it

NFTs
Blockchain Technology

The Future of Free to Play Gaming

by Kate Thrall July 29, 2022

Free to play gaming platforms are becoming more popular with the introduction of blockchain

big data
Business Marketing

7 Ways Big Data is Beneficial for

by Kate Thrall July 25, 2022

The marketing industry is constantly searching for avenues to utilize the massive volumes of

Copyright © 2022 Ringomo. All Right Reserved.