UK declares that AI cannot be patented inventions

The UK's Intellectual Property Office has decided artificial-intelligence systems cannot patent inventions for the time being.

UK declares that AI cannot be patented inventions

The UK's Intellectual Property Office has decided artificial-intelligence systems cannot patent inventions for the time being.

Patents give the creator of an invention the right to own it.

Recent IPO consultations revealed that many experts were skeptical that AI is capable of inventing without human assistance.

According to the government, current law allows humans to patent inventions made using AI assistance. However, this is not true despite "misperceptions".

The Court of Appeal decided against Stephen Thaler last year. He had claimed that his Dabus AI system should have been recognized as the inventor in two patent applications for:

Two-to-one, the judges sided with the IPO. They had instructed him to list a person as inventor.

Lady Justice Laing wrote in her judgment that "only a person can have right - a machine cannot."

"A patent is a statutory rights and can only be granted to one person."

The IPO stated that it will "need to understand the IP system that should protect AI-devised inventions" and committed itself to advancing international negotiations with a view towards keeping the UK competitive.

A court in Australia ruled that AI systems could be inventors for patent purposes in July 2021. This was also a case brought by Mr Thaler.

A similar ruling was issued by South Africa days earlier.

However, the Australian decision was overturned after an appeal.

Large amounts of data from the internet are used by many AI systems to train.

On Tuesday, the IPO announced plans to amend copyright law so that anyone can have legal access - not just those who are conducting non-commercial research as currently - to use AI technology and other 'data mining techniques for the public good.

While rights holders can still charge access fees to their works, they will no longer be allowed to charge additional for the ability to mine them.

A growing number of people use AI tools like DALL.E 2 for images that resemble human art.

The Register reported that Mr Thaler sued the US Copyright Office for refusing to recognize a software system "author" of an image.

During the consultation, the IPO stated that the UK was among only a few countries that would protect computer-generated works without any human creator.

It states that the "author" of a computer-generated work is "the person who makes the necessary arrangements for its creation."

Protection lasts 50 years after the work was done.

Equity, a union representing performers in performing-arts, demanded that copyright laws be amended to protect actors from AI content like "deepfakes", which are generated from images of their faces or voices.

The IPO acknowledged that it was taking this matter seriously. However, at this point, it stated that the impact of AI technology on performers is still unclear.

It added, "We will keep those issues under review."

Yorum yapabilmek için üye girişi yapmanız gerekmektedir.

Üye değilseniz hemen üye olun veya giriş yapın.

NEXT NEWS