British Supreme Court: patent "inventor" must be a natural person, not artificial intelligence

CTOnews.com December 21, Reuters reported that the British Supreme Court announced on the 20th local time that an American computer scientist lost the patent application for the invention created by his artificial intelligence system.

Previously on CTOnews.com.

American scientist Stephen Thaler filed two patent applications in the UK in 2018, one for a food packaging shape and the other for a flash lamp. He claims that these inventions were designed by his AI machine "DABUS."

The UK Intellectual Property Office rejected his patent application on the grounds that the inventor must be a human or company, not a machine. Thaler appealed to the British Supreme Court.

As a result of the current decision, the British Supreme Court rejected his claim because, under British patent law, the inventor of a patent must be a natural person.

In a written ruling, David Kitchin, Britain's top judge, pointed out that the case did not address the "broader" question of whether technological advances resulting from autonomous action by AI-driven machines should be patented.

In a statement, Mr Taller's lawyer said the ruling determined that Britain's patent law was currently "completely inadequate" to protect AI-generated inventions and was therefore "completely inadequate" to support any industry that relied on AI to develop new technologies.

Another local lawyer, Giles Parsons, said the Supreme Court ruling was "not surprising." At the same time, he did not believe that the decision would have a significant impact on the patent system at the present time. "That's because for now, AI is just a tool, not an agent. It is expected that this situation may change at a later stage, but we can address problems as they arise. "