Wed. Oct 27th, 2021

Picture for the article titled Australian Court Rules, Yes, AI could be a discoverer

Pictures: Ben Stansall (Getty Images)

Considered to be just a win for all robot-types, this week, a federal court ruled that an artificially intelligent machine could actually be an inventor – a decision that came after a year-long global legal battle.

The verdict comes after years of research by Ryan Abbott, a law professor at the University of Surrey, who began applying for patents in 17 countries around the world earlier this year. Abbott – Who Work Focusing on the intersection between AI and the law – the first two international patent filings were introduced as part of this Artificial Discovery Project At the end of 2019. Both patents (to make a regular Food containers, and for an emergency cancellation) has been listed as the inventor of a creative nervous system called “DABUS”.

The Inventor of artificial intelligence Listed here, Dabus, Dr. Made by Stephen Theler, who Describes It is As an “engine of creativity” capable of creating fancy ideas (and discoveries) based on communication within the novel Trillion Computational neurons that are arranged with. Despite being an impressive part of the instrument, last year, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Ruled That an AI cannot be listed as an inventor in a patent application – specifically mentioning that under the country’s current patent law, only “natural persons”, Shortly after being recognized, Thaler Lawsuit The USPTO and Abbott represented him in the case.

Most recently, the case has been caught in a legal stalemate – with the presiding judge Advising So that the case can be handled better than Congress.

Dabas also had problems gaining recognition in other countries. A spokesman for the European Patent Office told the BBC: 2019 Interview Systems like DABUS under the country’s current law are simply “a tool used by a human inventor”. The Australian court initially refused Recognize AI inventors, Notice early this year In the United States, patents can only be granted to humans.

Or at least, Australia’s position was until Friday, when Justice Jonathan Beach Reversed The decision was made in federal court in Australia. New Beach Every Ruling, Dabus can’t be a patent applicant or grantor – but it is To be able to Listed as an inventor. In this case, the other two roles will be filled by Thaler, the designer of DABUS.

“In my view, an inventor recognized under the law could be an artificial intelligence system or device,” Beach said. Wrote. “I have to fight the underlying concept of recognizing patentable inventions and the growing nature of their creators. We are both creation and creation. Why can’t we create our own creation?”

It is unknown at this time what he will do after leaving the post. But it is possible that South Africa has something to do with it. The day before the beach, the country’s official judgment, the South African company and the intellectual property commission returned First done The Patent Office will officially recognize DABUS as the inventor of the above food container.

It is worth mentioning here that each country has different values ​​as part of the patent rights process; There are some critics Note Given that the AI ​​inventor was given a pass for South Africa and “everyone should be ready”, it is “not surprising” that future patent allowances are coming. So while the United States and the United Kingdom pointed the finger at Thalen, we’re still waiting to see how patents have been filed in another country – including Japan, India, And Israel– Shake it off. But in a very short time, we know that DABUS will eventually be recognized as an inventor Somewhere

Source link

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *