USPTO and Court Guidance Clarifies Rules for AI Inventorship
What happened
The United States Patent and Trademark Office and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit provided guidance on inventorship concerning artificial intelligence. The guidance confirms that an inventor must be a natural person who significantly contributes to the conception of the invention. This follows a case where artificial intelligence was the sole contributor to the conception of the invention.
From mondaq.com
Why it matters
Patent protection generally requires an invention to be useful, adequately described, novel, and non-obvious. The guidance clarifies that while corporations and universities cannot be named as inventors, they may be listed as applicants or owners, addressing the growing issue of inventions generated with AI involvement.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office is currently addressing the establishment of professional conduct standards regarding the use of artificial intelligence in its processes.
From mondaq.com
Who's involved
- United States Patent and Trademark OfficeAgency providing guidance on patentability and inventorship
- thalerParty involved in a case challenging AI inventor status
Keep exploring
The entities involved
-
United States Patent and Trademark Office
agency in the United States Department of Commerce
-
thaler
silver coin used throughout Europe for almost four hundred years
Nothing else this week.