Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart PLLC
Newsletter – Volume 23, Issue 18
Share on Social
AI: Artificial Inventor? USPTO Reenters the Conversation
By Kameron F. Bonner
In a previous edition of Fish Tank, we discussed the advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) inventorship with an AI system called Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience (DABUS) being declared a patent inventor in South Africa and Australia, despite the U.S. taking a different approach with a Federal Circuit Court in Thaler v. Vidal affirming the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) position that only natural persons (i.e., human beings) can be named inventors on U.S. Patents.
Now, the USPTO has re-entered the conversation, recognizing the significance of the Thaler decision and the uncertainty around AI contributions to inventions. In mid-February of 2023, the USPTO released a Request for Comments Regarding AI and Inventorship, which is part of a broader initiative to explore the role of AI in innovation as discussed in a recent Director’s Blog by Kathi Vidal, Director of the USPTO.
However, despite USPTO and Federal Circuit Court opinions suggesting that inventions made by human beings with the assistance of AI may be eligible for patent protection, there is still much uncertainty over just how much AI assistance is too much. As companies begin to take advantage of the unique efficiencies and benefits of AI, including the utilization of chatbots like ChatGPT and Bard, answering the questions surrounding inventorship for AI-created inventions only increases in importance. This is especially true for biotechnology and AI-developing companies.
In comments submitted to the USPTO by the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) and tech giant Microsoft, a common theme emerged which characterized AI as a “tool” that facilitates human invention-making and hence the use of AI should not outright preclude inventorship, which is a prerequisite to patentability. This approach treats AI as a human-directed tool, aiding the people using the AI systems, which is not fundamentally different from using other technical tools in the invention-creation process.
Whether the USPTO adopts this interpretation remains to be seen. The issue of inventorship for AI-created or AI-assisted inventions will have significant implications on the future of innovation and creativity for companies that develop and use AI technology. While the discussion around AI inventorship unfolds, companies should be aware of alternative ways to protect their AI-generated inventions, such as trade secrets.
Kameron is a partner and registered patent attorney at Fishman Stewart PLLC, specializing in Intellectual Property with ten (10) years of experience counseling clients on patent, trademark, and related contractual matters. Kameron’s practice encompasses all aspects of preparing, procuring, and enforcing worldwide IP rights. Check out his full bio here.
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
In the US, Thanksgiving is quickly approaching. For many, Thanksgiving and (American) football go hand-in-hand, with the Detroit Lions’ game as much a staple of the holiday as turkey and pie. However, this year’s game arrives amid controversy: Lions’ legendary Hall of Famer Barry Sanders is facing a lawsuit alleging copyright infringement.
After three years of litigation, a court has held that the “beat that goes on” for Cher’s right to continue receiving royalties on songs created during her marriage to Sonny Bono, despite attempts by Sonny’s widow, Mary Bono, to invoke federal copyright termination rights to end those payments.
Watching scary movies is a time-honored Halloween tradition, and one of the greatest movies to watch this time of year is “Ghostbusters” which premiered in 1984.
The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ordered the cancellation of four U.S. trademark registrations for SUPER HERO and SUPER HEROES owned jointly by Marvel Characters, Inc. and DC Comics.
Halloween is coming up at the end of this month, and we are celebrating a little early with the spooky copyright story of Jap Herron!
In 2023, California artist Joe Morford lost his copyright infringement lawsuit against Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan. Morford claimed that Cattelan's viral artwork "Comedian," which features a banana duct-taped to a wall, was a copy of his own work, "Banana and Orange."
Last month, Outkast filed suit against ATLiens Touring, seeking an injunction against ATLiens Touring’s continued use of ATLiens and seeking damages.
Imagine opening a brand-new box of 64-color Crayola Crayons. Take a whiff. No matter how or where or when you grew up, this is a scent you know. We all know. But is that enough to obtain a US federal trademark registration?
Historically, “bad word” marks would have been refused as “immoral” or “scandalous.” That changed due to the Supreme Court’s 2019 Iancu v. Brunetti decision.
Fourteen teams of the US National Basketball Association (NBA) have been sued in federal district court for copyright infringement. The complaints were filed by companies claiming to own rights in various musical works.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
