Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Control Strategies for Blood Pressure Regulation in the Diabetic Patients Post Surgery Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2024 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

The Challenge of Recognizing Artificial Intelligence as Legal Inventor: Implications and Analysis of Patent Laws

verfasst von : Kanishka Vaish, Rajesh Bahuguna, Samta Kathuria, Kapil Joshi, Rishika Yadav, Rajesh Singh

Erschienen in: Power Engineering and Intelligent Systems

Verlag: Springer Nature Singapore

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Innovations in AI have altered various industries, changed how we think of plausible solutions for any problem, and allowed us to create products, thoughts, and concepts that were previously unimaginable. As a result, more patent applications for inventions created by AI have been filed, raising several questions about the legal standing of AI as an inventor. In addition to offering a critical study of the worldwide legal system regulating the patenting of AI-generated work, this non-empirical research article explores the consequences and difficulties of acknowledging AI as an inventor. By reviewing the existing legal framework, examining inventorship criteria, analyzing challenges tied to legal inventorship for AI-generated inventions, reviewing relevant case law, and proposing potential solutions, this study sheds light on the complex legal, ethical, and social considerations involved. Furthermore, it suggests future research directions, including the exploration of dedicated patent laws and regulations for AI-generated inventions, as well as investigations into the ethical and social implications and potential consequences of acknowledging AI as a legal inventor.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Open Permissioned Blockchain Solution for Private Equity Funding Using a Global, Cross-Cloud Network Blockchain Platform
Nächstes Kapitel Comparative Analysis of Imbalanced Malware Byteplot Image Classification Using Transfer Learning
Literatur
1.
2.
Andresen SL (2002) John McCarthy: father of AI. IEEE Intell Syst 17(5), Article 5
3.
Kenneth-Southworth E, Li Y (2023) AI inventors: deference for legal personality without respect for innovation? J Intellect Prop Law Pract 18(1), Article 1
4.
Kokane S (2021) The intellectual property rights of artificial intelligence-based inventions. J Sci Res 65(2)
5.
Thaldar D, Naidoo M (2021) AI inventorship: the right decision? S Afr J Sci 117(11–12):1–3
6.
7.
Chesterman S (2020) Artificial intelligence and the limits of legal personality. Int Comp Law Q 69(4), Article 4
8.
Kretschmer M, Meletti B, Porangaba LH (2022) Artificial intelligence and intellectual property: copyright and patents–a response by the CREATe Centre to the UK Intellectual Property Office’s open consultation. J Intellect Prop Law Pract
9.
Lada M (2022) Artificial intelligence, inventorship and the myth of the inventing machine: can a process be an inventor? Inf Commun Technol Law 1–40
10.
George A, Walsh T (2022) Can AI invent? Nat Mach Intell 1–4
11.
Singh N, Bandyopadhyay TK, Sahoo N, Tiwari K (2021) Intellectual property issues in artificial intelligence: specific reference to the service sector. Int J Technol Learn Innov Dev 13(1), Article 1
12.
Yanisky-Ravid S, Jin R (2021) Summoning a new artificial intelligence patent model: In the age of crisis. Mich. St. L. Rev 811
13.
Narayanan RR, Durga N, Nagalakshmi S (2022) Impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on drug discovery and product development. Indian J Pharm Educ Res 56:S387–S397CrossRef
14.
Dharmapuri Selvakumar M (2022). A Robot in IP-the issues and need for legislation. J Intellect Prop Rights (JIPR) 25(6), Article 6
15.
Craig CJ (2022) The relational robot: a normative lens for AI legal neutrality—commentary on Ryan Abbott, the reasonable robot. Jerus Rev Leg Stud 25(1), Article 1
16.
Bennett B, Daly A (2020) Recognising rights for robots: can we? Will we? Should we? Law Innov Technol 12(1), Article 1
17.
Adde L, Smith J (2021) Patent pending: the law on AI inventorship. J Intellect Prop Law Pract
18.
Deshpande R, Kamath K (2020) Patentability of inventions created by AI—the DABUS claims from an Indian perspective. J Intellect Prop Law Pract 15(11):879–889CrossRef
19.
Heon L (2022) Artificially obvious but genuinely new: how artificial intelligence alters the patent obviousness analysis. Seton Hall Law Rev 53(1):8
20.
Ebrahim TY (2020) Artificial intelligence inventions & patent disclosure. Penn St. L Rev 125:147
21.
Lim PH, Li P (2022) Artificial intelligence and inventorship: patently much ado in the computer program. J Intellect Prop Law Pract 17(4):376–386CrossRef
22.
Vanherpe J (2021) IP and AI-A tale of two acronyms. Artif Intell Law; 2021/05/05–2021/05/05
23.
Gibson S, Newman J (2020) What happens when AI invents: is the invention patentable? AI Mag 41(4), Article 4
24.
Oriakhogba DO (2021) What If DABUS came to Africa? Visiting AI inventorship and ownership of patent from the Nigerian perspective. Bus Law Rev 42(2), Article 2
25.
Kanna R, Singh P (2021) Thaler v commissioner of patents [2021] FCA 879: DABUS-an ‘Inventor’? Indian J Artificial Intel L 2:7
26.
Liberman A (2022) One small step for ‘artificial intelligence’ and a giant leap for the Australian patent system? The Federal Court decision in Thaler v Commissioner of Patents. J Intellect Prop Law Pract 17(2), Article 2
27.
Jenkins G (2021) Thaler strikes again, down under: artificial intelligence systems as inventors not ruled out (yet). J Intellect Prop Law Pract
28.
29.
30.
del Mar Marono Gargallo M (2020) The concept of inventor in patent law and artificial intelligence systems. Cuad Derecho Transnacional 12:510
31.
Schiemer J, Tawse N, O’Rourke JS (2019) Artificial intelligence and intellectual property: who owns property created by an algorithm or a robot? In: SAGE business cases. The Eugene D. Fanning Center for Business Communication, Mendoza College
32.
Coguic L (2021) Forward thinking or right on time? A proposal to recognize authorship and inventorship to artificial intelligence. Indon J Int’l Comp L 8:223
33.
Gibson J (2021) Artificial intelligence and patents: DABUS and methods for attracting enhanced attention to inventors. Queen Mary J Intellect Prop 11(4), Article 4
34.
Rudzite L (2022) Certification as a remedy for recognition of the role of AI in the inventive process. Int Comp Jurisprud 8(1):112–128
35.
Kidd M (2020) Using AI to invent? Australasian Biotechnology therapeutics: should artificial intelligence be recognised for inventive activity 30(1)
36.
Fujii H, Managi S (2018) Trends and priority shifts in artificial intelligence technology invention: a global patent analysis. Econ Anal Policy 58:60–69CrossRef
37.
Adaka EE, Olubiyi IA (2022) Lessons for Nigeria: determining authorship and inventorship of artificial intelligence generated works. J Intellect Prop Inf Technol Law (JIPIT) 2(1):15–48
38.
Schwartz DL, Rogers M (2022) Inventorless inventions? The constitutional conundrum of AI-produced inventions. Harv J Law Technol 35(2)
39.
Naidoo M (2022) AI and legal personhood: an African perspective 906–906
40.
Foss-Solbrekk K (2021) Three routes to protecting AI systems and their algorithms under IP law: the good, the bad and the ugly. J Intellect Prop Law Pract 16(3), Article 3
41.
Saw CL, Chan S (2022) Of inventorship and patent ownership: examining the intersection between Artificial Intelligence and Patent Law. Singap J Leg Stud, Forthcoming
42.
Devarapalli P (2020) Submission in response to the WIPO’s ‘draft issues paper on intellectual property policy and artificial intelligence’(Ref. No. WIPO/IP/AI/2/GE/20/1). Devarapalli, Pratap, Submission in Response to the Wipo’s “Draft Issues Paper on Intellectual Property Policy and Artificial Intelligence”(Ref. No. Wipo/Ip/Ai/2/Ge/20/1)(Feb 14, 2020)
43.
Patra DSP (2022) Artificial inventors: a shift in traditional policy paradigm. J Intellect Prop Rights (JIPR) 26(3):119–126
44.
Koopmann T, Stubbemann M, Kapa M, Paris M, Buenstorf G, Hanika T, Hotho A, Jäschke R, Stumme G (2021) Proximity dimensions and the emergence of collaboration: a HypTrails study on German AI research. Scientometrics 1–22
45.
Chimuka G (2019) Impact of artificial intelligence on patent law. Towards a new analytical framework–[the Multi-Level Model]. World Patent Information 59:101926
Metadaten
Titel
The Challenge of Recognizing Artificial Intelligence as Legal Inventor: Implications and Analysis of Patent Laws
verfasst von
Kanishka Vaish
Rajesh Bahuguna
Samta Kathuria
Kapil Joshi
Rishika Yadav
Rajesh Singh
Copyright-Jahr
2024
Verlag
Springer Nature Singapore
Buch
Power Engineering and Intelligent Systems

Print ISBN: 978-981-9972-15-9

Electronic ISBN: 978-981-9972-16-6

Copyright-Jahr: 2024

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7216-6_25