https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020079499&_cid=P12-KCS16F-43450-1 https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO20... Th

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020079499&_cid=P12-KCS16F-43450-1 https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO20... This is the patent application, as far as I can tell. And as others have noted, this is obviously a political stunt—the article makes that clear as well. Frustratingly, it doesn't seem like there's anything interesting or useful happening in the actual patent. It would not surprise me to find that they had been rejected in part because the idea seems to be either literally impossible to implement or basically uninteresting, depending on your interpretation. Also, as a non-lawyer, this stunt requires talking out of both sides of one's mouth. They necessarily assert that they have the authority to speak on behalf of the machine listed as the inventor in order to assign ownership of the patent, so why not just assert oneself as the inventor?