In a groundbreaking ruling, the UK Supreme Court has dismissed a bid by a U.S. computer scientist, Stephen Thaler, to secure patents for inventions developed by his artificial intelligence system. Thaler sought patents for innovations created by his ‘creativity machine,’ DABUS, but the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) rejected the application, contending that inventors must be natural persons or companies, not machines.
The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the IPO’s decision, emphasizing that, according to UK patent law, an inventor must be a human. Notably, the court clarified that its decision didn’t address the broader question of the patentability of technical advancements produced by autonomously acting AI.
Thaler’s legal team argues that this ruling underscores the inadequacy of current UK patent law in safeguarding inventions autonomously generated by AI, with potential repercussions for industries relying on AI-driven technological progress. While aligning with global precedents, the decision prompts considerations about the evolving landscape of AI and patent regulations, emphasizing the need for adaptive legal frameworks in the face of technological advancements.
