While AI’s rapid development and ever-increasing proliferation have facilitated substantial efficiency gains across a myriad of industries, unanswered legal questions regarding the consequences of its use have rendered the utility of AI precarious. This is especially true in the realm of intellectual property, where the use of AI presents direct challenges to such fundamental conceptions as creativity, inventiveness, and ownership (on which traditional legal frameworks of copyright and patent law rest).
With respect to patents, whether and how legal protections could extend to inventions facilitated by the use of AI remained uncertain until this past February, when the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) provided its first comments on the matter. In a federal register notice, it provided the following inventorship guidance for AI-assisted inventions:
Only humans can be inventors for the purposes of patent ownership. Accordingly, AI systems may not be listed as inventors.
While AI-assisted inventions are not inherently problematic, the patentability of the underlying invention rests on “significant contribution” from a human inventor.
The USPTO has acknowledged a number of outstanding questions related to subject matter eligibility and obviousness, noting that the guidance represents its current position and is only the first in what it expects will be an iterative process. Inventors can expect the periodic issuance of supplements as the jurisprudence and technology develop.
Notably, the USPTO has cautioned that the guidance “does not constitute substantive rulemaking and does not have the force and effect of law.”
Authors: Arash Rouhi and Roy Friedman 2023/2024 Articlng Student-At-Law
As reported by Reuters, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated an $81 million award against Boeing, in a suit brought by Zunum Aero, an aircraft startup, accusing Boeing of stealing trade…
As reported by Mason Hayes & Curran, the Federal Court of Australia has reportedly found the supermarket chain, Aldi, liable for copyright infringement regarding illustrations used on the…
Carnegie Hall has reportedly commenced an action against Carnegie Diner and Café for trademark infringement.In its complaint filed with the United States District Court, Southern District of New York…
In Bell Canada et al. v. Millennium Funding, Inc. et al., 2025 FCA 153, Bell Canada and Bell Aliant (collectively, “Bell”) appealed an order granting the Respondents’ (collectively, “Millenium…
Goyard, the Parisian brand established in 1853 and still privately owned, has reportedly faced a surge in counterfeit bags flooding the market. The company refrains from advertising, avoids e-commerce…
The US Supreme Court has declined to revisit a copyright dispute over alleged similarities between Ed Sheeran’s 2014 hit, “Thinking Out Loud”, and Marvin Gaye’s 1973 classic, “Let’s Get It On…
