Patentability of AI-Generated Inventions: Is a Reform of the Patent System Needed?

Ramalho, Ana

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3168703

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Intellectual property (IP) laws will change —As more digital content will be AI-generated, the question of “who owns it?” will arise; already, there are discussions of reforming IP statutes, e.g., for digital media and patented inventions, in the face of large-scale generative AI (Ramalho, 2018 ; Abbott and Rothman, 2022 ).…”

Section: Practical Ai Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Dawn of the dialogue: AI's leap from lab to living room

Procko,

Elvira,

Ochoa

2024

Front. Artif. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior to the advent of mainstream Large Language Models, e.g., ChatGPT, there were two contexts of AI use: theoretical and technical. The former involves the mathematics behind AI constructs, as well as new AI research; the latter encompasses the substance of AI use, i.e., programming, training, execution, etc. With the recent proliferation of Large Language Models for content generation, such as texts, images, and videos, there arises a new context of AI use: practical. This aspect of AI use is unique, in that practical users do not need theoretical or technical AI knowledge to prosper: they need only know how to prompt. In effect, the practical context of AI use is a black-box approach. These three contexts of AI converge in a unique intersection of AI knowledge. This emerging AI perspective is important to consider, as most AI users, now and in the future, will possess no deep knowledge of AI.

show abstract

Section: Practical Ai Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Dawn of the dialogue: AI's leap from lab to living room

Procko,

Elvira,

Ochoa

2024

Front. Artif. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patent law grants exclusive rights to inventors to prevent others from making, using, selling, or importing their patented inventions for a limited period. To be patentable, an invention must meet certain criteria, including novelty, non-obviousness, and utility (Ramalho, 2018). In the context of AI, determining the patentability of AI inventions presents unique challenges.…”

Section: Intellectual Property Rights and Aimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As AI technologies transcend national borders, businesses operating in multiple jurisdictions must navigate a patchwork of regulations and legal frameworks governing the development, deployment, and use of AI systems. This lack of harmonization creates uncertainty, complexity, and compliance burdens for businesses, hindering innovation and impeding cross-border trade (Cihon, 2019, Ramalho, 2018. Harmonizing AI regulations requires international cooperation and coordination among governments, regulatory authorities, industry stakeholders, and civil society organizations.…”

Section: Regulatory Challenges and Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating the Legal Complexities of Artificial Intelligence in Global Trade Agreements

Etinosa Igbinenikaro,

Adefolake Olachi Adewusi

2024

Int. j. appl. res. soc. sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to revolutionize global trade, it brings with it a host of legal complexities that challenge traditional frameworks within international trade agreements. This abstract explores the emerging problem of integrating AI into global trade agreements, identifies its purpose in addressing these challenges, highlights existing research gaps, and outlines the structure of the study. The proliferation of AI technologies in global trade presents a myriad of legal challenges, including issues related to intellectual property rights, data protection, liability, and regulatory frameworks. Existing international trade agreements often lack specific provisions addressing AI, leading to ambiguity and inconsistency in legal interpretation. Moreover, the rapid pace of technological advancement outpaces the ability of legal frameworks to adapt, exacerbating the problem. The purpose of this study is to analyze the legal complexities arising from the integration of AI into global trade agreements and to propose potential solutions for addressing these challenges. By examining existing legal frameworks, case studies, and scholarly literature, this research aims to provide insights into the development of AI-inclusive trade policies that foster innovation while safeguarding against potential risks and inequalities. While there is a growing body of literature addressing the intersection of AI and various legal domains, such as ethics, privacy, and labor law, there remains a notable gap in the understanding of how AI impacts international trade agreements specifically. Existing research primarily focuses on domestic regulatory frameworks, leaving a dearth of comprehensive analysis on the implications of AI for global trade governance. This study seeks to fill this gap by exploring the unique legal challenges posed by AI in the context of international trade agreements. This study will begin by providing an overview of the current landscape of AI technologies and their applications in global trade. It will then analyze the existing legal frameworks within international trade agreements and identify areas of ambiguity and inconsistency concerning AI. Subsequently, the study will explore case studies and examples of AI implementation in trade, examining the legal implications and challenges encountered. Finally, the research will propose recommendations and policy guidelines for integrating AI into future trade agreements, ensuring coherence, fairness, and adaptability in the face of technological innovation. Keywords: Law, Business Law, Legal, Artificial Intelligence, Trade Agreement.

show abstract

“…They suggest a recalibration of the definitions for an inventive step, prior art, and non-obviousness, and standardizing, or at least balancing, guidelines regarding who or what may be considered a "person having ordinary skill in the art". [Kop M., 16;Ramalho A., 2018]. For example, a person operating with an AI would likely embody a different definition of "ordinary skill" from someone doing the same research or production without the use of a machine.…”

Section: Change Is Inevitable and The Sooner The Bettermentioning

confidence: 99%

When the Invented Becomes the Inventor: Can, and Should AI Systems be Granted Inventorship Status for Patent Applications?

Whitlow

2020

LIDA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial Intelligence ("AI") systems have become vastly more sophisticated since the term was first used in the 1950s. Through the advent of machine learning and artificial neural networks, computers utilizing AI technology have become so advanced that a team of attorneys in the United Kingdom claim that their AI machine, DABUS, actually created patentable inventions. The team went so far as to file patent applications with the European Patent Office, the UK Intellectual Property Office, and the US Patent and Trademark Office. All applications named DABUS as the inventor. This sparked a heated debate within academic and legal communities that centered around whether AI can be an inventor, and, if so, what this might mean for the current state of patent law. This paper discusses the purposes of patent law through a brief look at its history, in an effort to highlight why patent law as it stands may no longer be one-size-fits-all. It considers the evolution of AI systems to explain how one might determine that a machine could be "creative" and therefore justifiably named as inventor. It surveys popular opinions and organizes them on a spectrum ranging from those who believe that patent law should stay as it is and that AI cannot be an inventor, to those who, more dramatically, advocate for the abolition of patent protection for AI inventions. This paper suggests that legislators be proactive in traversing this technological minefield rather than reactive, as technology will continue to outpace, and trample, law if left to its own machinations.

show abstract

Patentability of AI-Generated Inventions: Is a Reform of the Patent System Needed?

Cited by 16 publications

References 36 publications

Dawn of the dialogue: AI's leap from lab to living room

Dawn of the dialogue: AI's leap from lab to living room

Navigating the Legal Complexities of Artificial Intelligence in Global Trade Agreements

When the Invented Becomes the Inventor: Can, and Should AI Systems be Granted Inventorship Status for Patent Applications?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About