Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password


AC Friendly (17617)

AC Friendly
(email not shown publicly)

Journal of AC Friendly (17617)

The Fine Print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Thursday July 07, 22
08:31 AM
Techonomics

The UK's Intellectual Property Office has decided artificial-intelligence systems cannot patent inventions for the time being:

A recent IPO consultation found many experts doubted AI was currently able to invent without human assistance.

Current law allowed humans to patent inventions made with AI assistance, the government said, despite "misperceptions" this was not the case.

Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled against Stephen Thaler, who had said his Dabus AI system should be recognised as the inventor in two patent applications, for:

  • a food container
  • a flashing light

The judges sided, by a two-to-one majority, with the IPO, which had told him to list a real person as the inventor.

"Only a person can have rights - a machine cannot," wrote Lady Justice Laing in her judgement.

"A patent is a statutory right and it can only be granted to a person."

But the IPO also said it would "need to understand how our IP system should protect AI-devised inventions in the future" and committed to advancing international discussions, with a view to keeping the UK competitive.

Originally spotted on The Eponymous Pickle.

Previously:
When AI is the Inventor Who Gets the Patent?
AI Computers Can't Patent their Own Inventions -- Yet -- a US Judge Rules
USPTO Rejects AI-Invention for Lack of a Human Inventor
AI Denied Patent by Human-Centric European Patent Office
The USPTO Wants to Know If Artificial Intelligence Can Own the Content It Creates
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Asks If "AI" Can Create or Infringe Copyrighted Works

Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Reply to Article Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07 2022, @11:58AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07 2022, @11:58AM (#1258669)
    I didn't think that any governments were allowing AI created "things" to be patented at all and their decision makes sense given the basis for IP law in the first place, at least in the UK. Please see "Eastern Standard Tribe" by Cory Doctorow for where this might be applicable.
(1)