Remove Designs Remove Inventor Remove Law Remove Patent
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

UK Supreme Court Rules that AI cannot be an ‘Inventor’ Under UK Patent Law

JD Supra Law

In Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2023] UKSC 49, the UK Supreme Court ruled that AI cannot be an ‘inventor’ for the purposes of UK patent law.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit asked to Decide whether US Patent Law Excludes Non-Human Inventors

Patently-O

Thaler filed for patent protection, but refused to name himself as the inventor — although he created DABUS, these particular inventions did not originate in his mind. The USPTO rejected the applications — explaining US patents must name a human inventor. Now the case is pending before the Federal Circuit.

Inventor 126
article thumbnail

Patenting with Artificial Inventors

LexBlog IP

Guidance on using AI to Invent Due to the quick rise of artificial intelligence (AI), most (if not all) of the laws relating to the US patent system were not written with AI in mind. Vidal , a Federal Court of Appeals case that determined whether AI can be listed as an inventor on a patent application.

article thumbnail

Accelerating Innovation for New Inventors: Inside the First-Time Filer Expedited Patent Pilot Program

JD Supra Law

Most inventors can attest to the surprise they felt upon learning that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) likely will not respond to their first patent application for a couple of years after filing. Essentially, the program allows. By: Dickinson Wright

article thumbnail

All Inventors are Human; All Humans are Inventors

Patently-O

Vidal ask the Supreme Court one simple question: Does the Patent Act categorically restrict the statutory term ‘inventor’ to human beings alone? In Thaler’s view, DABUS was the inventor since it was the “individual. But, the USPTO refused to award a patent because the listed inventor was inhuman.

Inventor 120
article thumbnail

Artificial intelligence is not breaking patent law: EPO publishes DABUS decision (J 8/20)

The IPKat

The EPO Board of Appeal has published its full decision on the question of whether a machine can be an inventor ( J 8/20 ). The Board of Appeal had previously announced its decision to refuse two European patent applications naming an algorithm ("DABUS") as the sole inventor at the end of last year ( IPKat ).