The Inventorship Paradox within Generative AI

Irina Buzu

Intellectus, 2024, issue 1, 34-47

Abstract: The advancement of AI, especially generative AI, has brought the inventor designation debate back to the forefront. Can an AI system be considered an inventor when it does not have legal personality? This paradox, highlighted by the DABUS case, requires the exploration of both practical and legal aspects. Even though the EPO considers AI-generated inventions to be “computer-implemented inventions”, the key question that more and more people are asking is this: Can AI really invent something new independently, or is it just a tool for human inventors? Most countries, including those in the EU, maintain that only humans can be inventors and therefore patents cannot be granted to machines, regardless of their capabilities, thus supporting the European human-centred approach. To elucidate this complex issue, we aim to analyze cases like DABUS, taking into account the advances in AI and the position of experts. This will help identify challenges and potentially redefine the legal landscape for AI-generated inventions in the future.

Keywords: artificial intelligence; inventions; autonomy; legal status. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://agepi.gov.md/sites/default/files/intellectus/Intellectus_1_2024_34.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:awf:journl:y:2024:i:1:p:34-47

DOI: 10.56329/1810-7087.24.1.03

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Intellectus from State Agency on Intellectual Property (AGEPI)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AGEPI ().