Is an artificially intelligent machine allowed to patent its inventions? The larger implications of this question were not relevant to a US federal judge. The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), in April 2020, ruled that only natural persons can be considered the inventor of a patent. A US court ruled Thursday that this is what the law technically states (via Bloomberg).
This is not the case in every country. Australia and South Africa decided to reverse the trend, granting one patent, and reinstating another patent application by Steven Thaler, an AI researcher. Thaler's AI system DABUS was said to have created a flashing light as well as a new type food container. Thaler, who is part of The Artificial Inventor Project which advocates for AI recognition worldwide, was the one who sued the US.
The entire US decision against Thaler can be read at the bottom of the post. But it's pretty straightforward when you break it down.
According to the US Patent Act, inventors must be individuals.
Earlier legal decisions clarified that individuals must be considered people and not companies.
Also, it is quite clear that the Patent Act refers to people.
Artificial intelligence systems are not like people
Oh, and while the court can only overrule US agencies decisions if they are arbitrary, capricious or clearly illegal, in this case the USPTO already explained its reasoning for why it will continue to maintain the status quo as of April 2017. Before it issued its ruling, it also requested public comment.
The bigger question was answered by Leonie Brinkema, US District Judge.
There may be a day when artificial intelligence is able to reach a level of sophistication that allows it to satisfy the accepted definitions of inventorship. However, that time is still not here and Congress will decide if, if any, they want to expand the patent law's scope.
