The Supreme Court has ruled that artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be legally considered inventors to secure patent rights.
In a ruling on Wednesday, Britain’s highest court said that under current law, “the inventor must be an individual” to apply for a patent.
In a long-term patent dispute, an American engineer artificial intelligence A system he claims to be the inventor of.
The system, called DABUS, invented a food and drink container and a light beacon, according to Dr. Stephen Thaler.
The problem arose in 2019 when he received these patents and tried to list his company’s AI system as an inventor.
His case and subsequent appeal were rejected in the United States, and on Wednesday, after a three-year appeals process, he received a final dismissal of his appeal from Britain’s Supreme Court.
The bottom line of this case is whether you need to be a human being to obtain a patent.
Dr. Saylor’s team argued that the law does not require you to be the person in question to obtain a patent, and that because the artificial intelligence is the owner of the AI, it can apply for patents on its behalf. .
However, the Supreme Court justices unanimously dismissed the case, stating that to be considered an inventor under patent law a person must be a “natural person” and that Dr. Thaler had no idea why he could apply for a patent. He said that he did not state his claim. Instead of AI.
The judges considered the meaning of the term “inventor” in patent law and whether it included machines, but found that Mr. DABUS was not an inventor because only humans can devise inventions. He said he had come to a conclusion.
The judgment does not address whether AI created an invention, only whether AI can be considered an inventor under the Patents Act 1977.
Patents, which provide legal protection, are granted for inventions that are new, nonobvious, and meet a set of requirements.
read more:
AI experts sound the alarm as the world prepares for a big election year
Boots plans to release “personal shopper” using AI
We let AI plan Christmas – here are the results
Patent rights make it illegal for anyone other than the owner or someone authorized by the owner to make, use, import, or sell the invention in the country where the patent was granted.
Dr. Thaler was unsuccessful in his latest attempt to win legal protection for works produced by AI systems.
But as AI is increasingly used as a tool for creativity across society, such debates are likely to become even more common.
The question for policymakers is whether the 1977 Patents Act adequately describes the nature of invention and the role of technology today.
Source: news.sky.com
