AI Cannot Patent Their Creations Says European Patent Office

AI Cannot Patent Their Creations Says European Patent Office

Contents

AI is not legally capable of inventions says the European Patent Office in landmark case. The question is, will that change in the future?

You Are Reading :[thien_display_title]

AI Cannot Patent Their Creations Says European Patent Office

Artificial intelligence cannot patent an invention, according to the European Patent Office. Over the last few years, AI has become far more powerful and this has led to questions regarding the similarities and differences between humans and machines at the cognitive level. Recently, that’s also included various patent offices around the world being asking similar questions.

While debate rages on regarding the kinship between AI and humans, AI has continued to evolve and creation has become a key component to its development. With AI becoming more autonomous in its development and capabilities, the issue for those involved is who owns anything that’s created by AI. Take art, for example. If an AI creates something artistic and it is clearly new compared to what’s been created before, then who owns the artwork? The AI? The owner or creator of the AI? No one at all? It is questions like this that have caused debate among those within the industry at a philosophical level, although the question becomes even more serious when AI starts developing products or designs that can be sold to the general public.

It was an instance like this that recently led to a team of researchers in the UK filing two patents on behalf of an AI. The AI in question is DABUS and the team credited the AI with creating a new food container and new “devices and methods for attracting enhanced attention.” However, the European Patent Office has now come to a conclusion on the patents and the answer is a clear “no,” marking a first for the AI industry. The EPO has now denied both patent claims where DABUS was listed as the inventor. In its short, but direct remarks, the EPO said the overall decision was based on the fact that the rules state an inventor “has to be a human being, not a machine.”

See also  Among Us Every New Color Revealed So Far

AI Cannot Be A Patent Holder, Yet

Interestingly, the EPO did also state that this decision was reached after “hearing the arguments” during “oral proceedings” that were not open to the public. This suggests the decision was not denied at the immediate application level, even though based on the EPO’s reasoning, the application was doomed by the paperwork alone. This may be some indication that the EPO took the application seriously and considered the outcome more carefully than it probably needed to. In other words, more than it probably would have if the questions raised by this application were not ones the EPO were already considering.

With this verdict having now been reached, it is likely that patent offices elsewhere will come to a similar conclusion with any further applications with an AI inventor. However, if patent offices are already contemplating AI at an inventor level, and based on the reasoning given, it may be the case they are also looking at how the rules might have to be changed in the future to permit applications like this making it over the first hurdle. If changes to the rules were made, then it would open the door to inventions by machines to be patented. Although, it might also open the door to many more questions, including whether artificial intelligence is entitled to patent royalties?

Editors Note: A previous version of this article incorrectly referred to the EPO as a European court.

Link Source : https://screenrant.com/ai-not-inventors-patent-ruling/

Reviews -