Some rules are just very hard to enforce when a new technology comes along. And when that happens, breaking the rules becomes widespread (eg, downloading MP3s b

Some rules are just very hard to enforce when a new technology comes along. And when that happens, breaking the rules becomes widespread (eg, downloading MP3s back in Napster days), and industries are eventually forced to find new business models (like most recorded music moving to cheap subscription services, and musicians focusing more on live shows to make money). I’m not saying this is good or bad, it’s just how it is. Sometimes a business model is only viable in a world before some specific technology comes along and disrupts it. EDIT: btw I'm just addressing the thing you asked about, but I don't think it's relevant to the article. The headline just says that an AI tool can't be a patent holder itself - which is obvious; AI tools are not legally people, so they can't register patents any more than they can hold shares in a company or vote in elections. Doesn't mean people can't patent inventions that they used AI tools to develop.