3 ms·

That's like listing Microsoft Word as an author. Its worth noting that global patent offices have rejected AI listed as the inventor on patents - this has gone

That's like listing Microsoft Word as an author. Its worth noting that global patent offices have rejected AI listed as the inventor on patents - this has gone through trial and appeal an been heard by a panel of five judges at the highest level, who struck down the idea. Patents require a human inventor. https://www.nexttv.com/news/court-ai-systems-cant-create-patentable-inventions https://www.nexttv.com/news/court-ai-systems-cant-create-pat...

EGreg 4y ago
Replace the judges with AI and see what it says. Just wait until the AI takes over the courts LOL
- qvrjuec 4y ago
  Fortunately the AI will have been trained on human legal opinion and will rule the same way
narrator 4y ago
That's because if you said AI invented something and there was fraud or it was stolen from someone else the people who were making money off the patent would just say "Oops! nobody should get fined or go to prison because the computer did it all by itself." Imagine if Elizabeth Holmes said the AI told her the Theranos machine worked. It lied, so you have to put the AI in prison now.
- thereisnospork 4y ago
  This is going to get really interesting really soon I think, whether an 'AI' can be capable of inventive "thought": Could, for instance, one teach an AI to come up with the concept of a screw[0] from training it on inclined planes and nails? Or at least, everything but screws/bolts, and any other form of rotary inclined plane. If AI can come up with a former novelty, there is no reason AI couldn't come up with a new one. [0]Undeniably an invention, if trivial now.
hollasch 4y ago
A patent is a contract between the government and the inventor. The government grants a protected monopoly over the patented invention. In exchange, the inventor turns over all details of the invention to the public. The primary purpose of patents is to get as many ideas out to the general public as soon as agreeable, circulating in the public technology space. For this to make sense, the patented idea must be "non-obvious". That is, it must be something that one would reasonably expect could be kept secret — this is what patents protect against. If an idea can plop out of an AI, and that AI is generally available, then it is "obvious" in the sense that it's accessible to anyone, and thus the inventor does not deserve any special protection, because the people are not getting any meaningful exchange for what could be a real secret.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

EGreg 4y ago

Replace the judges with AI and see what it says. Just wait until the AI takes over the courts LOL

qvrjuec 4y ago
Fortunately the AI will have been trained on human legal opinion and will rule the same way

narrator 4y ago

That's because if you said AI invented something and there was fraud or it was stolen from someone else the people who were making money off the patent would just say "Oops! nobody should get fined or go to prison because the computer did it all by itself." Imagine if Elizabeth Holmes said the AI told her the Theranos machine worked. It lied, so you have to put the AI in prison now.

thereisnospork 4y ago
This is going to get really interesting really soon I think, whether an 'AI' can be capable of inventive "thought": Could, for instance, one teach an AI to come up with the concept of a screw[0] from training it on inclined planes and nails? Or at least, everything but screws/bolts, and any other form of rotary inclined plane. If AI can come up with a former novelty, there is no reason AI couldn't come up with a new one. [0]Undeniably an invention, if trivial now.

hollasch 4y ago

A patent is a contract between the government and the inventor. The government grants a protected monopoly over the patented invention. In exchange, the inventor turns over all details of the invention to the public. The primary purpose of patents is to get as many ideas out to the general public as soon as agreeable, circulating in the public technology space. For this to make sense, the patented idea must be "non-obvious". That is, it must be something that one would reasonably expect could be kept secret — this is what patents protect against. If an idea can plop out of an AI, and that AI is generally available, then it is "obvious" in the sense that it's accessible to anyone, and thus the inventor does not deserve any special protection, because the people are not getting any meaningful exchange for what could be a real secret.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]