Remove Inventor Remove Law Remove Patent
article thumbnail

Logical Fallacy in Patent Law: Analysing Abolkheir’s Challenge to the Soundness of Non-obviousness Test

SpicyIP

In his recent work published in the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice , Dr. Mo Abolkheir argues that the prevailing interpretation of ‘inventive steps’ places emphasis on the inventor’s imaginative capacity rather than the invention itself. student at National Law School of India University, Bengaluru.

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit asked to Decide whether US Patent Law Excludes Non-Human Inventors

Patently-O

Thaler filed for patent protection, but refused to name himself as the inventor — although he created DABUS, these particular inventions did not originate in his mind. The USPTO rejected the applications — explaining US patents must name a human inventor. Now the case is pending before the Federal Circuit.

Inventor 127
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Artificial Intelligence as the Inventor of Life Sciences Patents?

JD Supra Law

The question whether an artificial intelligence (“AI”) system can be named as an inventor in a patent application has obvious implications for the life science community, where AI’s presence is now well established and growing. For example, AI is currently used to predict biological targets of prospective drug molecules.

Inventor 145
article thumbnail

Conception for Joint Inventors

Patently-O

Most patents involve two or more joint inventors who all claim to have contributed significantly to the invention. Conception of the invention is typically seen as the critical legal determinant of invention and some courts have written that each joint inventor must have contributed substantially to the conception of the invention.*

Inventor 128
article thumbnail

AI-Assisted Inventions: Are They Patentable? Who is the Inventor?

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) may change how we invent: many envision a collaborative approach between human inventors and AI systems that develop novel solutions to problems together. Such AI-assisted inventions present a new set of legal issues under patent law. On February 13, 2024, the U.S. 101 and 115.

Inventor 130
article thumbnail

U.S. Court Rules Artificial Intelligence Cannot be an Inventor (Again)

IPilogue

Sabrina Macklai is an IPilogue Senior Editor and a 2L JD Candidate at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. . Emily Prieur is an IPilogue Writer and a 3L JD Candidate at Queen’s University Faculty of Law. . But while AI is creating new opportunities and innovations, the law has yet to catch up.

Inventor 129
article thumbnail

All Inventors are Human; All Humans are Inventors

Patently-O

Vidal ask the Supreme Court one simple question: Does the Patent Act categorically restrict the statutory term ‘inventor’ to human beings alone? In Thaler’s view, DABUS was the inventor since it was the “individual. But, the USPTO refused to award a patent because the listed inventor was inhuman.

Inventor 122