4 ms·
This seems superfluous though doesn’t it? Why would anyone want the AI to be the inventor? I can still have my GPT4 minions writing 100 patents per hour and co
by shon 4y ago
This seems superfluous though doesn’t it? Why would anyone want the AI to be the inventor?
I can still have my GPT4 minions writing 100 patents per hour and corresponding with USPTO on my behalf, then as a natural person, collect the proceeds netted from my robo-patent-trolls.
Or is the USPTO concerned about AGI doing the same and robbing us fleshlings of our I’ll-gotten gains?
- swatcoder 4y ago> Why would anyone want the AI to be the inventor? Ideology and precedent. And proximate to both, personal vanity: someone responsible for an AI that was politically legitimized in a role usual reserved for "natural persons" will likely have made some lasting mark in history. Some people are very motivated by that kind of thing.
- ramoz 4y agoMakes sense, but where have the “Banksy” inventors been all these years… USPTO enforces that inventors legal name must be used. If I were the one arguing for sake of vanity, I’d go after the legal name policy vs AI. Maybe that was considered or trialed before.
- ramoz 4y agoI’m not an ip professional, but good luck to the patent trolls that think they can build exploitable legal language, patent validity, and novel descriptive claims using generative AI. AI can generate text, it can also review and conduct tasks such as prior art search or support analytics relative to exploitation discovery. Less if a cat-and-mouse if patent troll investments falter when their mass-generated suite of applications are all rejected.