AI programs cannot be called patent inventors, Britain’s Supreme Court said in its landmark ruling rejecting putting machines on par with humans. The Supreme Court of Great Britain rejected the request of the founder of Imagination Engines Inc. Patent seeker Steven Thaler named the DABUS AI machine as the inventor. Patent laws require an inventor to be a natural person, and the justices unanimously rejected Thaler’s objection, saying “DABUS is certainly not a person.”

This decision is the first by any country’s highest court, though it is on par with decisions in the United States and the European Union. This becomes important as the UK looks to pioneer AI technology, with stakeholders debating security measures and regulations around it.

Thaler, who is seeking patents in many countries for the beverage container and flashing light, claimed that the inventor was DABUS and said, “Science has collided with common sense in a very important way.”

Robert Jehan, partner at law firm Williams Powell, who represented Thaler in the case, said the decision puts the UK at a significant disadvantage in supporting industries that rely on artificial intelligence and could hinder the disclosure of inventions by AI systems. “This shows how poorly UK patent law supports the aim of making the UK a global hub for data-driven innovation,” he added.

“Given that artificial intelligence is developing at an astonishing pace, this issue may need to be revisited in the future,” said Johan Liyanage, a partner at law firm Linklaters. “If the UK government is serious about establishing itself as an AI superpower, legislative intervention may be required to allow patentability of inventions created independently by AI systems,” Liyanage said.

According to the court, the decision does not address the broader question of whether technical advances made by an autonomous AI-enabled machine are patentable.

“The decision does not prohibit a person from using artificial intelligence to develop an invention, in which case a patent can be applied for, provided that person is identified as the inventor,” said Rajwinder Jagdev, partner at law firm Powell Gilbert. .

The judges agreed with government lawyers who argued that granting Thaler’s request would leave Britain in an exceptional situation. The lawyer argued that if Thaler’s request is accepted, future inventors could include “my cat Felix” or “space forces.”

The UK Intellectual Property Office said in an emailed statement following the decision that any changes to patent law that would help Britain become a global hub for AI could only come after discussion at an international level. “However, the Government will keep this area of ​​legislation under review to ensure that the UK patent system supports AI innovation and use of AI in the UK.” Source