The UK Supreme Court ruled, artificial intelligence will not be able to be listed as an inventor in any patent application.
This ruling stems from a patent application filed by Dr. Stephen Thaler in 2018, which included two patents, one for food packaging design and the other for a flashlight design. In the patent application, Dr. Thaler did not list himself as the inventor, but instead listed the artificial intelligence system "DABUS" as the inventor.
However, the UK Intellectual Property Office requires Dr. Stephen Thaler to use a natural person as the inventor, and also believes that Dr. Stephen Thaler did not explain in detail in his application how the patent ownership was obtained from artificial intelligence.
Dr. Stephen Thaler subsequently appealed, arguing that his approach met all the requirements of the 1977 Patent Act. Following the court's dismissal, he subsequently appealed to the UK High Court and the Court of Appeal. However, both the UK High Court and the Court of Appeal subsequently rejected Dr. Thaler's arguments, refusing to recognize that artificial intelligence could be listed as an inventor in a patent.
In its ruling, the court held that technology created through artificial intelligence or machines cannot be considered an invention, and emphasized that the identification of the inventor must be based on the identity of a natural person.
Although Dr. Stephen Thaler argued that British patent law could not protect inventions created independently by artificial intelligence, and subsequently appealed to the US court, the court subsequently ruled that the invention must be made by a natural person, not artificial intelligence or a machine.
In addition to patented inventions, US courts have previously ruled that works of art created through artificial intelligence or machines areNo protection under copyright lawThe reason is that the creator must be a natural person.
