article thumbnail

AI-Assisted Inventions: Are They Patentable? Who is the Inventor?

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) may change how we invent: many envision a collaborative approach between human inventors and AI systems that develop novel solutions to problems together. Such AI-assisted inventions present a new set of legal issues under patent law. On February 13, 2024, the U.S. 101 and 115.

Inventor 130
article thumbnail

Discerning Signal from Noise: Navigating the Flood of AI-Generated Prior Art

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch This article explores the impact of Generative AI on prior art and potential revisions to patent examination standards to address the rising tidal wave of AI-generated, often speculative, disclosures that could undermine the patent system’s integrity. Still, seemingly qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C.

Art 109
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

AI as an Inventing Tool – it’s Implications for Patent Law

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch Berkely Center for Law & Technology is hosting a great half-day virtual-conference this week: “AI as an Inventing Tool – it’s Implications for Patent Law” organized by Prof. It is then interesting to think about whether the level of skill in the art is changed by the addition of AI.

article thumbnail

The Legacy of A.B. Dick and Motion Picture Patents: How these 100+ Year Old Ruling Reshaped Patent Law

Patently-O

” The dissenters saw a fundamental distinction between a patentee’s exclusive rights in the patented invention itself versus contractual rights in unpatented articles used with the invention. Soon thereafter, the “Oldfield Bill” proposed a number of limitations on patent rights.

article thumbnail

Anticipation and Obviousness in Patent Law: An Analysis of Recent IPR Decisions

Intellectual Property Law Blog

16, 2023) , the case addresses the Board’s anticipation and obviousness determinations in two IPRs (IPR2020-00002 and IPR2020-00004), where the Board held the claims in the challenged patents unpatentable as anticipated by, or obvious in view of, the asserted prior art. Patent Nos. Background Palette Life Sciences, Inc.

article thumbnail

The relevance of G 2/21 to machine learning inventions (T 2803/18)

The IPKat

The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) decision in G 2/21 related to the evidence requirement for a purported technical effect relied on for inventive step. The Board of Appeal in T 2803/18 , in particular, highlights how G 2/21 may be relevant to inventions in the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning.

article thumbnail

De Forest Radio v. GE: A Landmark Supreme Court Decision on the Invention Requirement

Patently-O

By Dennis Crouch In 1931, the United States Supreme Court decided a landmark case on the patentability of inventions, De Forest Radio Co. The case involved a patent infringement suit over an improved vacuum tube used in radio communications. Background The patent at issue, U.S. General Electric Co. , 571 (1931).