Artificial intelligence cannot be named the inventor of the patent, and machines and humans cannot be placed in a nearly equal position.
The verdict released by the British Supreme Court on December 20, local time showed that a U.S. computer scientist lost the case when applying for a patent for the invention created by its artificial intelligence system.American scientist Stephen Thaler hopes to obtain two invention patents in the UK. He said that these inventions were designed by his artificial intelligence system named "Dabus".The British Intellectual Property Office had previously rejected his patent registration application because the inventor must be humans or companies, not a machine, and then Taylor appealed to the British Supreme Court."The inventor must be a natural person."
In fact, this is not the first time Taylor has encountered such a thing.Earlier this year, Taylor lost a similar lawsuit in the United States, and the US Supreme Court also rejected his demand.
Taylor made an application to the US Patent and Trademark Office. He believed that his "DABUS" had designed a beverage rack and an emergency sign without external intervention, and he should have patent ownership.However, the US government rejected a patent for the artificial intelligence system that is not a "not human".
By August, US judge Beryl Howell ruled that only works by artificial intelligence with human author can obtain copyright, and confirmed that the US Copyright Administration rejected Taylor's application for its "DABUS" system.
At present, artificial intelligence is a tool, not a natural person.However, although artificial intelligence cannot become a patent "inventor" in the short term, the subsequent situation may change, but that is also a future thing.
Source | Content Organization Self -DC Board Daily Interface News
Edit | Beijing Gaowo Intellectual Property (ID: gaowoip-com)