Invention Inventor Litigation 
The IPKat
DECEMBER 13, 2021
One question that has recently been in the headlines around the world, thanks to the Artificial Inventor Project, is whether or not an AI system can be regarded as an inventor. Setting aside issues of statutory interpretation, Abbott’s proposal (and hence the Thaler litigation) rests on two prongs, both deeply flawed.
Patently-O
MAY 10, 2022
DABUS apparently created two inventions–a “neural flame” and a “fractal container.” ” But, Thaler refused to name himself as inventor. Rather, he says that it was DABUS who did the inventing. But, the PTO refused to issue the patent without a human listed inventor. ” 35 U.S.C.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The IP Law Blog
NOVEMBER 9, 2023
Can you imagine the accolades someone would receive if they contributed to an invention that improves bacon? Well, it turns out that not all contributions count when it comes to being an inventor of a patent for a better method of precooking bacon. Also, Howard was not named as an inventor. The dispute arose between HIP, Inc. (“HIP”)
IP Watchdog
SEPTEMBER 7, 2021
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued a decision granting a Motion for Summary Judgment for the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and upholding the Office’s view that AI algorithms cannot be listed as inventors on U.S.
IP Watchdog
AUGUST 5, 2024
If you are an inventor of a consumer product there are reputable companies looking for inventions and ideas to bring to market, and their business model is built on taking products to market over and over again, and they are in constant need of new products and improvements.
Patently-O
AUGUST 4, 2021
A world first – South Africa recently made headlines by granting a patent for ‘a food container based on fractal geometry’ to a non-human inventor, namely an artificial intelligence (AI) machine called DABUS. Guest Post by Meshandren Naidoo and Dr. Christian E.
The IP Law Blog
AUGUST 5, 2021
Commissioner of Patents , case number VID 108 of 2021, in the Federal Court of Australia, an Australian Federal Judge became the first known jurist to rule that inventions developed by artificial intelligence can qualify for patent protection. In Thaler v. And, nothing in the Act dictates the contrary conclusion.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
136 
Let's personalize your content