The USPTO's guidelines build on existing case law, including a federal appeals court ruling that only actual people can be listed as inventors on US patents. The guidelines provide examples of how they could be applied, such as an inventor who uses an AI chatbot to design a part for a remote-control car would not be eligible for a patent unless they can show their significant contribution to the design process. The guidelines are expected to clarify the boundaries of patent protections as AI is increasingly used in the inventive process, but also raise concerns about potential litigation and unproductive patents.
Key takeaways:
- The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued guidelines stating that a real person must have made a “significant contribution” to an invention to obtain a patent, and only a human can be named as an inventor on a patent.
- The guidelines provide reassurance to innovators that their inventions involving AI can be patented, while also establishing expectations about how AI could impact a patent application.
- The USPTO has provided examples of how these guidelines could work, such as an inventor who uses an AI chatbot to design a part for a remote-control car would not be eligible for a patent unless they can show they made a significant contribution to the design.
- While the guidelines don't require inventors to disclose the use of AI, there are concerns it could encourage patent trolls to apply for broad patents that don't lead to actual creations but serve as the basis for bogus patent lawsuits.