On 19 July 2024, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in Comptroller – General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks v Emotional Perception AI Limited [2024] EWCA Civ 825 following a hearing on 14-15 May 2024. The Court of Appeal judgment overturns the first instance decision of the High Court and upholds the…
Blurring the edges between reality and make-believe, the Metaverse is part of an aspirational Web 3.0, characterised by certain features including an immersive 3D virtual space, interoperability, and real-time operation. While there is no consensus on its definition, certain foundational technologies such as AI (artificial intelligence) and XR (extended reality), which includes VR (virtual reality),…
On February 20, 2024, a Brazilian Congressman introduced a bill to amend the national IP Statute (Law #9,279/96) and regulate the ownership of inventions generated by artificial intelligence systems. Bill #303/2024 proposes the addition of a paragraph to Article 6 of the IP Statute, which regulates ownership of inventions, with the following wording: “in the…
On 20 December 2023, the UK Supreme Court handed down its highly anticipated judgment in the case of Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks [2023] UKSC 49, unanimously ruling that only a natural person can be named as an inventor on a patent application. In doing so, the Supreme Court upheld the decisions…
To ensure you don’t miss out on interesting IP law developments reported on our other IP blogs, we will, on a regular basis, provide you with an overview of the most-read posts from each of our IP law blogs. Here are the most popular posts over the past few months. Top 3 Kluwer Copyright…
Artificial Intelligence Systems or Devices cannot be “inventors” under the Australian Patents Act, the Full Federal Court has confirmed. The inventor of a patent must be a natural person. Does there need to be legislative change to address the role of Artificial Intelligence in the Australian patents scheme? An expanded five judge appeal bench of…
The article “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” analyses the reasoning of Beach J in the Thaler decision at first instance, noting that this decision is the first judicial consideration in Australia relating to the impact…
Can an artificial intelligence (“AI”) machine be an inventor and can the machine’s owner apply for a patent? These were two of the key questions which the Court of Appeal grappled with in Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents [2021] EWCA Civ 1374. The Court, by a 2-1 majority, answered both these questions, as well…
Two recent decisions in South Africa and Australia have accepted the fanciful thesis that an AI could be an inventor. I have no intention of commenting these decisions here, I simply want to try to understand how such a farfetched (and useless) idea, could have gained such ground in such a short time. Let’s say it right away: although…
[KEYPOINT]: A historic Federal Court decision says an artificial intelligence system is capable of being named as an “inventor” under the Patents Act 1990, with potentially significant ramifications for technological innovation and the patent system in Australia. In the first judicial determination in the world of its type, the Australian Federal Court has held that…
