the health strategist
platform
the most compreehensive knowledge portal
for continuous health transformation
and digital health
Joaquim Cardoso MSc.
Chief Research and Strategy Officer (CRSO),
Chief Editor and Senior Advisor
December 20, 2023
The UK Supreme Court recently ruled that artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be recognized as an inventor in patent applications under current law, as it stipulates that only a person or entity can be designated as the inventor.
Dr. Stephen Thaler’s dispute with the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) over naming his AI creation, DABUS, as the inventor for two patents has culminated in the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision.
Thaler claimed DABUS autonomously generated inventions — a food or drink container and a light beacon.
However, both the IPO and the courts maintained that an inventor must be a person or a legal entity, denying Thaler’s request to recognize AI as an inventor.
Thaler’s attempt to register DABUS as the inventor for patents was rejected by the UK IPO in 2019, followed by subsequent denials by the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
The Supreme Court upheld that DABUS, as an AI, lacks the legal status of a person and cannot be deemed an inventor, supporting the IPO’s stance.
Key Points:
- The ruling clarifies that current patent law in the UK does not permit AI systems to be acknowledged as inventors, affirming that only individuals or legal entities can be designated as such.
- Judge David Kitchin highlighted the absence of legal provisions considering a machine as a creator and emphasized that patent law requires identification of a person or entity as the inventor.
This decision reflects a global debate on AI-generated content and inventions, raising questions about legal protection and attribution for AI-created material in various jurisdictions.
