The Supreme Court of the UK has been urged to decide on whether or not artificial intelligence (AI) may be properly listed as an inventor in order to gain patent rights.
Dr. Stephen Thaler, a prominent figure in the field of technology, is involved in a lengthy debate with the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) over its refusal to recognize an AI he developed as the author of two patents.
American developer Dr. Thaler claims ownership of two innovations made by an AI system he calls DABUS, a container for holding food or drink and a light beacon.
'Plainly Ridiculous'
In the case now being heard in the UK Supreme Court, one lawyer claimed that considering AI to be an inventor is "plainly ridiculous," as reported by Bloomberg.
According to court documents obtained by The Independent, IPO attorney Stuart Baran argued that if AI could be considered an inventor, then "my cat Felix," "cosmic forces," or "£134.87" would "all have simply to be waved through" as patent innovators as well.
Dr. Thaler filed the first lawsuit in 2019, disputing the patent office's decision to deny his applications for patents on a food container and a blinking light that credited his AI, DABUS, as the inventor.
After having his appeals rejected by the UK's High Court and Court of Appeal, Dr. Thaler has taken his case to the Supreme Court. Both US courts and the European Patent Office have denied similar applications.
Judges have so far ruled that a human must be designated as the inventor, but Dr. Thaler is certain that he is authorized to the copyrights on inventions by his AI system, of which he is the sole creator and user.
However, Baran, the IPO's lawyer, says that recognizing AI as an inventor might pave the way for other non-human entities, such as animals or abstract concepts, to be recognized in the same way.
Further Analysis
Even though the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Thursday, Mar. 2, Business Insider has learned that the IPO is not anticipating a ruling until much later. There have been several intellectual property conflicts around the development of AI software, and this decision might have far-reaching consequences.
Attorney for Dr. Thaler reportedly informed the Supreme Court that his client is "entitled to the rights of the DABUS inventions" since there is no requirement in the UK that an idea must be created by a human author to be patented," as per Reuters' report.
UK officials agree, after a consultation in 2021, that AI-created works are eligible for patent protection, so long as a person is considered the creator. Judges in Dr. Thaler's prior appeals regarded the Patents Act 1977 to mean that an inventor had to be a "natural person."
