The ruling aligns with similar decisions made by courts in Europe, Australia, and the US, reinforcing the global consensus that inventors must be humans. Despite the setback, individuals can still use AI in the inventive process and seek patents, as long as they are identified as the inventor. The case has sparked discussions about the need for ongoing evaluation of how intellectual property law should address AI-created innovations.
Key takeaways:
- The UK's highest court has ruled that artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be designated as an inventor on patent applications, setting a precedent in patent law.
- The decision was a blow to US computer scientist Stephen Thaler, who had sought to secure patents for inventions supposedly devised by his AI system, DABUS.
- The ruling mirrors similar decisions made by courts in Europe, Australia, and the United States, reinforcing the global consensus that inventors must be natural persons.
- Legal experts emphasized that the judgment does not prevent individuals from using AI in the inventive process, as long as they are identified as the inventor on patent applications.