AI systems cannot be named as the inventor of patents, UK’s top court rules

The Supreme Court in the United Kingdom ruled on Wednesday that an artificial intelligence (AI) system cannot be registered as the inventor of a patent. This decision denies machines the same status as humans. The court concluded that under the current law, an inventor must be a person to apply for patents.

This ruling marks the end of a lengthy legal battle in Britain. American technologist Stephen Thaler has been striving to get his AI, known as DABUS, listed as the inventor of two patents. Thaler asserts that DABUS autonomously created a food-and-drink container and a light beacon. He believes he is entitled to rights over these inventions. However, tribunals in the United States and the European Union have rejected similar applications by Thaler.

In 2019, the UK Intellectual Property Office rejected Thaler's application. They stated they were unable to officially register DABUS as the inventor because it is not a person. Thaler then took his appeal to the Supreme Court, where a panel of judges unanimously dismissed the case. The judges stated that DABUS is not a person, let alone a natural person, and it did not devise any relevant invention. Legal experts have said this case demonstrates how Britain's laws have not kept pace with technology. They argue that policies should be updated in light of the remarkable recent developments made by AI, as evidenced by start-up OpenAI's ChatGPT and similar generative AI systems that can rapidly produce new poems, songs and computer code. Nick White, a partner at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys, said that as AI systems continue to advance in sophistication and capability, there is no denying their ability to generate new and non-obvious products and processes with minimal, or perhaps even without any, ongoing human input. He suggested that change may be on the horizon, but it will most likely come from the policymakers, rather than the judges.