Close Menu
TechCentralTechCentral

    Subscribe to the newsletter

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn
    WhatsApp Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn YouTube
    TechCentralTechCentral
    • News

      Court battle brewing over contentious Joburg CCTV by-law

      7 July 2025

      Biometrics boss slams home affairs over R10 ID query fee

      7 July 2025

      TCS | Connecting Saffas – Renier Lombard on The Lekker Network

      7 July 2025

      Rain’s new Loop lets you carry your Wi-Fi and music everywhere

      7 July 2025

      Medupi unit 4 rejoins grid, easing winter load shedding fears

      7 July 2025
    • World

      Cupertino vs Brussels: Apple challenges Big Tech crackdown

      7 July 2025

      Grammarly acquires e-mail start-up Superhuman

      1 July 2025

      Apple considers ditching its own AI in Siri overhaul

      1 July 2025

      Jony Ive’s first AI gadget could be … a pen

      30 June 2025

      Bumper orders for Xiaomi’s YU7 SUV heighten threat to Tesla

      27 June 2025
    • In-depth

      Siemens is battling Big Tech for AI supremacy in factories

      24 June 2025

      The algorithm will sing now: why musicians should be worried about AI

      20 June 2025

      Meta bets $72-billion on AI – and investors love it

      17 June 2025

      MultiChoice may unbundle SuperSport from DStv

      12 June 2025

      Grok promised bias-free chat. Then came the edits

      2 June 2025
    • TCS

      TechCentral Nexus S0E4: Takealot’s big Post Office jobs plan

      4 July 2025

      TCS | Tech, townships and tenacity: Spar’s plan to win with Spar2U

      3 July 2025

      TCS+ | First Distribution on the latest and greatest cloud technologies

      27 June 2025

      TCS+ | First Distribution on data governance in hybrid cloud environments

      27 June 2025

      TCS+ | First Distribution on cloud cost management in Microsoft Azure

      26 June 2025
    • Opinion

      In defence of equity alternatives for BEE

      30 June 2025

      E-commerce in ICT distribution: enabler or disruptor?

      30 June 2025

      South Africa pioneered drone laws a decade ago – now it must catch up

      17 June 2025

      AI and the future of ICT distribution

      16 June 2025

      Singapore soared – why can’t we? Lessons South Africa refuses to learn

      13 June 2025
    • Company Hubs
      • Africa Data Centres
      • AfriGIS
      • Altron Digital Business
      • Altron Document Solutions
      • Altron Group
      • Arctic Wolf
      • AvertITD
      • Braintree
      • CallMiner
      • CambriLearn
      • CYBER1 Solutions
      • Digicloud Africa
      • Digimune
      • Domains.co.za
      • ESET
      • Euphoria Telecom
      • Incredible Business
      • iONLINE
      • Iris Network Systems
      • LSD Open
      • NEC XON
      • Network Platforms
      • Next DLP
      • Ovations
      • Paracon
      • Paratus
      • Q-KON
      • SevenC
      • SkyWire
      • Solid8 Technologies
      • Telit Cinterion
      • Tenable
      • Vertiv
      • Videri Digital
      • Wipro
      • Workday
    • Sections
      • AI and machine learning
      • Banking
      • Broadcasting and Media
      • Cloud services
      • Contact centres and CX
      • Cryptocurrencies
      • Education and skills
      • Electronics and hardware
      • Energy and sustainability
      • Enterprise software
      • Fintech
      • Information security
      • Internet and connectivity
      • Internet of Things
      • Investment
      • IT services
      • Lifestyle
      • Motoring
      • Public sector
      • Retail and e-commerce
      • Science
      • SMEs and start-ups
      • Social media
      • Talent and leadership
      • Telecoms
    • Events
    • Advertise
    TechCentralTechCentral
    Home » World » One man’s quest to grant an AI a patent gathers momentum

    One man’s quest to grant an AI a patent gathers momentum

    By Agency Staff22 August 2021
    Twitter LinkedIn Facebook WhatsApp Email Telegram Copy Link
    News Alerts
    WhatsApp

    Ryan Abbott’s eight-year quest to put man and machine on a near-equal footing under international patent law is finally seeing positive results.

    Recent decisions from South Africa and Australia that an artificial intelligence machine can be listed as inventor on a patent is putting greater pressure on the US and Europe to resolve debates over what it means to be an inventor.

    “We’re moving into a new paradigm where not only do people invent, people build artificial intelligence that can invent,” said Abbott, a University of Surrey law professor and author of the 2020 book, The Reasonable Robot: Artificial Intelligence and the Law.

    Read: In a world first, SA grants a patent listing an AI as the inventor

    “Most of the time there is someone who qualifies as an inventor,” he said. “It will increasingly be the case where someone doesn’t qualify as inventor, and that’s the problem.”

    Courts in the US and UK are expected to issue rulings later this year, and policymakers are gathering information on how to deal with the rising use of AI. Promotion of artificial intelligence is a key part of US legislation before congress to increase research funding and better compete with China. AI is identified as one of the “must-win technologies of the future” by the Biden administration.

    Putting the wrong name as inventor can be costly — rendering the patent unenforceable or invalid, and eliminating a crucial competitive advantage.

    It’s an issue of public importance. Are there companies cheering us on? Yes, especially companies whose business model is using AI

    Abbott, who’s focused on AI and the law since 2013, said corporations are unwilling to push the issue if it means not being able to obtain legal protection for their products. So he set up the Artificial Intelligence Project and enlisted Imagination Engines founder Stephen Thaler to build a machine whose main purpose was to invent.

    The result was Dabus, a “creativity machine” that “invented” a beverage container and a “device for attracting enhanced attention”. He and a group of lawyers — all working for free — filed patent applications in 17 jurisdictions listing Dabus as the inventor.

    Rebuffed

    “It’s an issue of public importance,” Abbott said. “Are there companies cheering us on? Yes, especially companies whose business model is using AI.”

    Until the late July rulings in South Africa and Australia, Abbott’s team was consistently rebuffed. US district judge Leonie Brinkema in April told Abbott that he has an “uphill battle” in overturning a rejection by the US Patent and Trademark Office. A UK court heard arguments in July on the same question. The European Patent Office has scheduled a hearing in December.

    “If you can get patents from innovations derived from AI, it may influence where you’re going to invest in this technology,” said Kate Gaudry, a patent lawyer with Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton who specialises in tech inventions.

    Artificial intelligence uses a machine to perform steps that mimic the work of a human mind but at lightning speed, and promises to transform everything from drug discovery to autonomous cars. Current AI technology isn’t quite there yet, though “this area of tech is evolving very quickly, so the sooner we say what we’re going to do, the better”, Gaudry said.

    AI computers can identify new drug molecules or identify new uses for old drugs, but it still takes human researchers and lots of money to develop those results into a new medicine, said Hans Sauer, deputy general counsel for BIO, the trade group for biotechnology companies. Life sciences companies still see AI as a tool, but if patent offices decide the AI did all the work, it could mean no patent is issued at all.

    Dabus is a test case, but “it’s more important to get it right, even if it takes time”, Sauer said.

    US law makes clear that an inventor must be a human, and to list AI as an inventor would require a change in the law

    The congressionally mandated National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, headed by former Google chairman Eric Schmidt, spent two years studying the ethical, investment and legal issues surrounding AI. In a March report, it found that the US “lacks the comprehensive IP policies it needs for the AI era and is hindered by legal uncertainties in current US patent eligibility and patentability doctrine”.

    The complexity of the questions means no easy — or fast — answers. US law makes clear that an inventor must be a human, and to list AI as an inventor “would require a change in the law and it’s unclear to me if there is the appetite” for that, said former PTO Director Andrei Iancu.

    Seeking comment

    The US patent office has gathered input from a range of companies and individuals on how to address AI both as an invention and potential inventor, and is seeking comment on how patent eligibility affects investment. It also created a dataset of the 13.2 million US patents and published applications related to machine learning.

    The issue of inventorship is just a small part of the quandary over how to deal with AI, such as what types of AI software are eligible for a patent and who owns the massive amounts of data required to “teach” the machines. There’s also the question of how examiners compare the work of humans in a lab against the exponential computing power of a machine to determine if an idea is unique.

    “A decision clarifying which AI inventions are eligible for patenting would be much more impactful than whether an AI could be labelled an inventor,” said Michael Portnov, a lawyer with Fish & Richardson who specialises in machine-learning patent applications.

    The answer may be a new type of patent, just as there are for certain plants or non-functional designs, Iancu said. Abbott suggests eliminating the name of inventors altogether, and just naming the owner of the patent, which would be an individual or company.

    In 1980, the US supreme court ruled that living organisms created in a lab could be patented, a decision widely seen as opening the door for the modern biotechnology industry. Abbott says the Dabus cases could do the same for artificial intelligence.

    That 1980 decision said “a patent protects anything under the sun made by man”, Abbott said. “Now it will be anything under the sun made by AI.”  — Reported by Susan Decker, (c) 2021 Bloomberg LP



    Dabus Ryan Abbott top
    Subscribe to TechCentral Subscribe to TechCentral
    Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email Copy Link
    Previous ArticleAre we living in a simulation?
    Next Article JSE to adjust caps following Naspers, Prosus havoc

    Related Posts

    South Africa was wrong to patent an AI’s ‘invention’

    8 December 2022

    18GW in unplanned breakdowns cripple Eskom

    2 November 2021

    Nersa kicks the Karpowership can down the road

    13 September 2021
    Company News

    Huawei launches next-gen fibre-to-the-room solution

    7 July 2025

    Remote monitoring tools: IT lifesavers or hacker gateways?

    7 July 2025

    The school placement crisis is getting worse

    7 July 2025
    Opinion

    In defence of equity alternatives for BEE

    30 June 2025

    E-commerce in ICT distribution: enabler or disruptor?

    30 June 2025

    South Africa pioneered drone laws a decade ago – now it must catch up

    17 June 2025

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    © 2009 - 2025 NewsCentral Media

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.