Remove Invention Remove Inventor Remove Ownership Remove Reference
article thumbnail

Thaler v. Comptroller-General: Supreme Court Affirms that an AI Cannot be an Inventor under UK Patent Law

Intepat

Registration at UKIPO The case in question, originating in 2019, presents a groundbreaking legal dilemma: Can an artificial intelligence (AI) system be acknowledged as an inventor for the purposes of patent ownership? Uniquely, he declared that he was not the inventor; instead, he attributed the creations to his AI system named DABUS.

article thumbnail

Decoding Patent Ownership beginning with Core Principles

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s grant of summary judgment that an inventor, Dr. Mark Core, had automatically assigned a patent associated with his PhD thesis to his then-employer and education funder TRW. Dr. Core conceived of the invention while pursuing a Ph.D. 23-1001 (Fed.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Innovating the Term ‘Inventor’: AI and Patent Law

IPilogue

Recently, AI technology once again exceeded the legal community’s expectations by filing a patent for its invention of interlocking food containers. Under patent law, it is the general expectation that inventors are humans, not robots. But, it does not define the term “inventor” or specify whether an inventor must be human.

Inventor 106
article thumbnail

Joint Inventorship: AI-Human Style

Patently-O

Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently published examination guidance and a request for comments on the treatment of inventorship for inventions created with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Inventorship Guidance for AI-Assisted Inventions. Rather, the human must provide significant inventive contribution).

Inventor 117
article thumbnail

Parliamentary Standing Committee’s Recommendations Concerning AI and IP: A Little Late or Way too Early?

SpicyIP

In this post, I will be analysing the recommendations pertaining to the amendment of patent laws in order to facilitate inventorship and ownership by AI. Recommendations vis-à-vis Inventorship and Ownership. An important question that arises is can AI actually invent on its own?

Invention 122
article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Vacates District Court’s Claim Construction of the Term “Pipette Guiding Mechanism”

Intellectual Property Law Blog

The applicant, Malvern, unsuccessfully traversed the rejection on the merits, but removed the ’175 patent from prior art consideration by arguing that § 103(c)(1) applied, due to common ownership. After a change in ownership, Malvern sought supplemental examination of the ’175 patent under 35 U.S.C. § Cytogen, Inc. , 3d at 1167).

Invention 130
article thumbnail

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

IIPRD

Analyzing the convergence of AI and IPR laws, it elucidates the challenges and ambiguities in recognizing AI as inventors or creators. Ai doesn’t understand what it’s doing in the way that a person does but functionally what it is doing is the same thing that an author or an inventor may be doing.