AI not allowed to patent

Pro Search

3 steps completed
Artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be listed as an "inventor" for the purposes of obtaining a patent in the United States, as established by the Federal Circuit decision in Thaler v. Vidal14. This decision aligns with the current interpretation of U.S. patent law, which requires that an inventor be a natural person37. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued guidance stating that while AI can assist in the development of inventions, only human beings can be named as inventors on U.S. patents710. The case of Thaler v. Vidal involved Stephen Thaler, who attempted to file patent applications with an AI system named DABUS (Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience) credited as the inventor. The USPTO rejected these applications, and the Federal Circuit upheld this decision, confirming that under U.S. law, AI cannot be an inventor34. Despite this, AI-related inventions themselves are patentable under U.S. patent law, provided they meet the standard criteria of non-obviousness, utility, and patent eligibility37. The USPTO has a long history of granting patents for AI-based inventions, as long as the applications are attributed to human inventors37. The USPTO's recent guidance clarifies that patents can cover AI-assisted inventions when a natural person has made a "significant contribution" to the invention. This guidance emphasizes the importance of human ingenuity and investment in AI-assisted inventions while ensuring that innovation is not unnecessarily restricted10. Internationally, similar decisions have been made, with courts in the UK and other jurisdictions also ruling that AI cannot be named as an inventor on patent applications617. These decisions reflect a broader consensus that existing patent laws are not equipped to handle AI-generated inventions and that new policies may be needed to address this issue51116. In summary, while AI cannot be listed as an inventor, AI-related inventions are patentable as long as they are attributed to human inventors, and the human contributors have made significant contributions to the invention134710.
what is the difference between a design patent and an invention patent
what is the significance of the federal circuit decision in thaler v. vidal
what are the implications of the uk court ruling that ai cannot be listed as an inventor on a patent application
EPO rules that AI will not be recognised as an inventor for the purpos
AI can't hold patents to U.S. inventions (for now) | Reuters
Google argues that AI should not be considered an inventor under ...
AI Hardware Not Caught by Patent Computer… | Mason Hayes Curran
Court Affirms that Patent Inventors Must Be Human | Jones Day
AI Systems are not humans! US Court denies the patent right to ...
View More