Legal Regime of Inventions Created by Artificial Intelligence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26512/lstr.v16i1.48972Schlagworte:
Artificial Intelligence. Patentability Conditions. Rights to Inventions. Patent. Technological Revolution. Patent Law Regulation.Abstract
[Purpose] The purpose of this study is to examine the concept of artificial intelligence (AI) as an object of civil legal relations, with a specific focus on its status as an inventor. The study aims to define the characteristics of AI as an inventor, including its intangible nature, resemblance to the human brain, autonomy, data collection and processing capabilities, learning ability, and generation of novel results, particularly in the realm of inventions.
[Methodology/Approach/Design] The research employs a range of methodologies, including functional and logical analysis, deduction, induction, synthesis, and dogmatic approaches. It highlights the need for legal regulation concerning AI as an inventor, with particular attention given to the legal regime surrounding inventions created by AI.
[Findings] Based on the unique aspects of AI as an object of civil legal relations and its capacity to create inventions, the study proposes extending the existing legal and patent framework to address these relations with certain specificities. The conditions for patentability of AI-generated inventions should mirror those for human inventions, as they operate in the same technological field.
[Practical Implications] It is not recommended to grant AI the status of a legal entity. Instead, the study suggests indicating in the patent that the invention was created with the assistance of a specific AI, without conferring personal non-property rights to AI itself. Property rights to inventions generated by AI should be legally assigned to the user of the AI, unless agreed upon differently by the parties involved.
[Originality/Value] Given the advancements in AI technologies and their ability to create patentable inventions, there is an urgent need for comprehensive and effective legal regulation. Currently, such regulation is lacking at both the national and international levels, underscoring the significance and value of this study.
Downloads
Literaturhinweise
Abbott, R. (2016). I think, therefore I invent: Creative computers and the future of patent law. Boston College Law Review, 57(4), 1079-1125.
An official website of the European Union. (2018). Artificial intelligence for Europe. Available at http://surl.li/jgtmk.
Artificial Intelligence: Main capabilities and scientific disciplines. Available at http://surl.li/jgtia.
Barlybayev, A., & Sharipbay, A. (2015). An intelligent system for learning, controlling and assessment knowledge. Information (Japan), 18(5), 1817-1827.
Barlybayev, A., Sabyrov, T., Sharipbay, A., & Omarbekova, A. (2017). Data base processing programs with using extended base semantic hypergraph. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 569, 28-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56535-4_3
Borysova, V. I., Ivanova, K. Y., Iurevych, I. V., & Ovcharenko, O. M. (2019). Judicial protection of civil rights in Ukraine: National experience through the prism of European standards. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 10(1), 66-84.
Budstandart. (1994). DSTU 2938-94 “Information processing systems. Basic concepts. Terms and definitions”. Available at http://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page.html?id_doc=77434.
Buil, R., Piera, M. A., Gusev, M., Ginters, E., & Aizstrauts, A. (2015). Mas simulation for decision making in urban policy design: Bicycle infrastructure. In International Conference on Harbour, Maritime and Multimodal Logistics Modelling and Simulation (pp. 95–102). Bergeggi: I3M Conference.
Buiten, M. C. (2019). Towards intelligent regulation of artificial intelligence. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 10(1), 41-59.
Carrillo, M. R. (2020). Artificial intelligence: From ethics to law. Telecommunications Policy, 44(6).
Cherniavskyi, S., Vozniuk, A., & Hribov, M. (2023). Legality of traditional techniques, means and modern technologies of visual surveillance. Scientific Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, 28(1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.56215/naia-herald/1.2023.09
Dau, Zh., & Jin, B. (2023). The copyright protection of AI-generated works under Chinese law. Juridical Tribune, 13(2), 242-260.
European Commission For The Efficiency Of Justice (CEPEJ). (2018). European ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment. Available at http://surl.li/gbpst.
European Commission. (2021). Ethics by design and ethics of use approaches for Artificial Intelligence. Available at http://surl.li/jguxh.
European Parliament. (2020). European Parliament resolution on intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies. Available at http://surl.li/jgvbv.
European Parliament. (2017). Report with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics. Available at http://surl.li/jgvsd.
European Patent Office. (28 January 2020). EPO grounds for its decision to refuse two patent applications naming a machine as inventor. Available at https://www.epo.org/newsissues/news/2020/20200128.html.
European Patent Office. (5 October 1973). Convention on the Grant of European Patents. Available at https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/epc/2020/e/ma1.html.
European Patent Office. (March 2022). Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office. Available at https://link.epo.org/web/epo_guidelines_for_examination_2022_hyperlinked_en.pdf
Ginters, E. (2019). Augmented reality use for cycling quality improvement. Procedia Computer Science, 149, 167-176.
Gruson, D., Helleputte, T., Rousseau, P., & Gruson, D. (2019). Data science, artificial intelligence, and machine learning: opportunities for laboratory medicine and the value of positive regulation. Clinical Biochemistry, 69, 1-7.
Intellectual Property Office. (04 December 2019). Decision of IPO. BL O/741/19. Available at http://surl.li/jgukk.
Intellectual Property Office. (2022). The Patent Office Annual Report and Accounts. Available at http://surl.li/jgvtv.
Kostruba, A. V., & Lukianov, D. (2019). Multivariability of rights in the structure of corporate legal relations. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, 10(7), 2035-2039.
Lawson, C. (2017). Technology and the extension of human capabilities. In Technology and Isolation (pp. 99-113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mammen, C. E. (2022). AI as Inventor. In The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence: Global Perspectives on Law and Ethics (pp. 240-256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nussibaliyeva, A., Carbone, G., Mussina, A., & Balbayev, G. (2019). Study of Artificial Vision on the Adaptive Filter Basis for Implementation in Robotic Systems. Mechanisms and Machine Science, 73, 2319-2328. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20131-9_229
O’Sullivan, S., Nevejans, N., Allen, C., Blyth, A., Leonard, S., Pagallo, U., & Ashrafian, H. (2019). Legal, regulatory, and ethical frameworks for development of standards in artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomous robotic surgery. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, 15(1).
OBSERVER. (2015). Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and Bill Gates Warn about Artificial Intelligence. Available at http://surl.li/jgvon.
OECD Legal Instruments. (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449). Available at https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0449.
Pashkov, V. M., Harkusha, A. O., & Harkusha, Y. O. (2020). Artificial intelligence in medical practice: Regulative issues and perspectives. Wiadomosci Lekarskie, 73(12-2), 2722-2727.
Radutnyi, O. E. (2018). Artificial intelligence, information security and lawmaking process (criminal law aspect). Information & Law, 1(24), 149-158.
Stahl, B. C., Rodrigues, R., Santiago, N., & Macnish, K. (2022). A European Agency for Artificial Intelligence: Protecting fundamental rights and ethical values. Computer Law & Security Review, 45, 2-11.
Stephens, K., & Bond, T. (2018). Artificial intelligence: Navigating the IP challenges. PLC Magazine, 39-45.
Surden, H. (2019). Artificial intelligence and law: An overview. Georgia State University Law Review, 35, 19-22.
Taeihagh, A. (2021). Governance of artificial intelligence. Policy and Society, 40(2), 137-157.
Temirbekov, E. S., Jomartov, A. A., Zaurbekov, N. S., & Zaurbekova, G. N. (2016). The pneumatic delivery device weft laying on multi-colored looms STB. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Seriya Teknologiya Tekstil'noi Promyshlennosti, 364 2016-January(4), 120-125.
The Times. (2021). Patently brilliant… AI listed as inventor for first time. Available at http://surl.li/jgvql.
United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2019). Decision of USPTO on Application No. 16/524,350. Available at http://surl.li/jgunp.
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (1994). Law of Ukraine “On the Protection of Rights to Inventions and Utility Models”. Available at https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3687-12#Text.
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2020). The concept of artificial intelligence development in Ukraine. Available at https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1556-2020-%D1%80/conv#Text.
Vertinsky, L., & Rice, T. M. (2002). Thinking about thinking machines: Implications of machine inventors for patent law. Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law, 8(2), 574-613.
Whitlow, L. (2020). When the invented becomes the inventor: Can, and should AI systems be granted inventorship status for patent applications? Legal Issues in the Digital Age, 2(2), 3-23.
WIPO. (2019). Project “Artificial inventor”. Available at https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/ru/2019/06/article_0002.html.
World Economic Forum. (10 April 2018). Artificial intelligence collides with patent law. Available at http://surl.li/jgtjr.
Yanisky-Ravid, S., & Liu, X. (2018). When artificial intelligence systems produce inventions: The 3A era and an alternative model for patent law. Cardozo Law Review, 39, 2215-2263.
Yaroshenko, O. M., Sliusar, A. M., Sereda, O. H., & Zakrynytska, V .O. (2019). Legal relation: The issues of delineation (on the basis of the civil law of Ukraine). Asia Life Sciences, (2), 719-734.
Yu, X., Zhang, R., Zhang, B., & Wang, H. (2021). Challenges of artificial intelligence to patent law and copyright law and countermeasures. In The Future of Intellectual Property (pp. 150-168). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Downloads
Veröffentlicht
Zitationsvorschlag
Ausgabe
Rubrik
Lizenz
Copyright (c) 2024 Law, State and Telecommunications Review
Dieses Werk steht unter der Lizenz Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International.
By submitting this paper to the Law, State and Telecommunications Review,
I hereby declare that I agree to the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
