Remove 2022 Remove Intellectual Property Remove Inventor Remove Ownership
article thumbnail

Intellectual Property Rights in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Navigating Challenges and Seizing Opportunities

IIPRD

Abstract This paper delves into the profound integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into contemporary life and its impact on intellectual property rights (IPR). Analyzing the convergence of AI and IPR laws, it elucidates the challenges and ambiguities in recognizing AI as inventors or creators.

article thumbnail

Australia’s Reversal of its DABUS decision on AI-Generated Inventions: How Does this Impact an Imminent Canadian Discussion on AI Inventorship?

IPilogue

Reversing what seemed like a victory for supporters of AI-owned intellectual property, the full bench of the Federal Court of Australia has confirmed the majority view of the world: only human inventors can own patent rights to their creations. This signals a shift in Canadian attitudes towards AI ownership of their work.

Invention 111
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

USPTO Request for Comments on AI as an Inventor

LexBlog IP

PatentNext Summary: Following the August 2022 Federal Circuit decision in Thaler v. 2022), in which the court ruled that artificial intelligence (AI) could not be an inventor by itself, the USPTO has now requested comments regarding AI and inventorship. Vidal , 43 F.4th 4th 1207 (Fed.

article thumbnail

When is an IP agreement between a university and a student inventor unfair?

The IPKat

In its last judgment of 2022, the Patents Court issued a decision in the case of Oxford University Innovation Ltd v Oxford Nanoimaging Ltd [2022] EWHC 3200 (Pat)). Though this part of the judgement was heavily focused on contract law, some significant points regarding student inventors were determined. But unfair?

article thumbnail

The Corporation as an Inventive Artificial Intelligence

Patently-O

Research Handbook on Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence (Edward Elgar Press, Forthcoming 2022) (R. But, the law persists in most nations as it has for more than 200 years that patentable inventions must begin with a human person, the inventor. Abbott, ed.). I would love to get your suggestions and feedback.

Invention 111
article thumbnail

Australian Appeals Court Seems Sceptical of Push to Name DABUS ‘AI’ as Inventor

LexBlog IP

The appointment of an expanded panel (three judges is usual), including the Chief Justice, is notable, and suggests that the court considers the question of whether a machine can be an inventor for the purposes of the Patents Act 1990 to be one of particular legal importance.

article thumbnail

An Update on AI Inventorship and Authorship Cases

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch In 2022, the Federal Circuit held that an invention is only eligible for a US patent if a human conceived of the invention. In addition, standard property law principles of ownership, as well as the work-for-hire doctrine, apply to make Plaintiff Dr. Stephen Thaler the copyright’s owner. Vidal , 43 F.4th

Invention 125