{"id":106263,"date":"2020-04-29T22:42:19","date_gmt":"2020-04-30T05:42:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/2020\/04\/us-patent-office-rules-that-artificial-intelligence-cannot-be-a-legal-inventor"},"modified":"2020-04-29T22:42:19","modified_gmt":"2020-04-30T05:42:19","slug":"us-patent-office-rules-that-artificial-intelligence-cannot-be-a-legal-inventor","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/2020\/04\/us-patent-office-rules-that-artificial-intelligence-cannot-be-a-legal-inventor","title":{"rendered":"US patent office rules that artificial intelligence cannot be a legal inventor"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a class=\"aligncenter blog-photo\" href=\"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog.images\/us-patent-office-rules-that-artificial-intelligence-cannot-be-a-legal-inventor3.jpg\"><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Bad news.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has ruled that artificial intelligence systems cannot be credited as an inventor in a patent, the <a href=\"https:\/\/content.govdelivery.com\/accounts\/USPTO\/bulletins\/287fdc9#.Xqcts2pR6ZQ.email\">agency announced<\/a> earlier this week. The decision came in response to two patents \u2014 one for a food container and the other for a flashing light \u2014 that were created by an AI system called DABUS.<\/p>\n<p>Among <a href=\"https:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/16524350_22apr2020.pdf?utm_campaign=subscriptioncenter&utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=\">the USPTO\u2019s arguments<\/a> is the fact that US patent law repeatedly refers to inventors using humanlike terms such as \u201cwhoever\u201d and pronouns like \u201chimself\u201d and \u201cherself.\u201d The group behind the applications had argued that the law\u2019s references to an inventor as an \u201cindividual\u201d could be applied to a machine, but the USPTO said this interpretation was too broad. \u201cUnder current law, only natural persons may be named as an inventor in a patent application,\u201d the agency concluded.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Bad news. The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has ruled that artificial intelligence systems cannot be credited as an inventor in a patent, the agency announced earlier this week. The decision came in response to two patents \u2014 one for a food container and the other for a flashing light \u2014 that were created [\u2026]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":556,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1506,1496,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-106263","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-food","category-law","category-robotics-ai"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106263","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/556"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=106263"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106263\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=106263"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=106263"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=106263"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}