Artificial intelligence and intellectual property rights: the USPTO DABUS decision
Barry Sookman
MAY 4, 2020
”‘ The petitioner also advanced policy considerations to support the position that a patent application can name a machine as an inventor. The Defendants argue, however, at para 102 of their brief that “copyright does not subsist in a work which is created by a computer with little if any human input.”
52 
Let's personalize your content