3 ms·
> No, the ruling is more than that it must be filed in the name of a human. It also says 'a real person must have made a “significant contribution”'. This is s
by O1111OOO 3y ago
> No, the ruling is more than that it must be filed in the name of a human. It also says 'a real person must have made a “significant contribution”'.
This is so interesting... it sounds to me that operators can have AIs "inventing" things and publicly sharing these things. Creating so much stuff (like bitcoin but for AI) covering virtually everything - from science to music.
And because no humans contributed to these inventions, they all essentially become Public Domain.
Because AIs can churn out inventions at breathtaking speeds... they might leave nothing for humans to invent, nothing to copyright, nothing to attached words like Intellectual Property to.
Information is Free? Infinite monkey theorem?
- advisedwang 3y agoIt remains to be seen if AI can really invent significant things on its own. I don't think there's been any examples of it so far, and today's AI are really limited by what is in their corpus. Perhaps in 5 years? Isn't that what they say for every promising technology though? Anyway if AI is capable of that, there will be bigger changes to society than intellectual property!
- Vilian 3y agothat's why patent system in US is broken, in Australia you need to use your patent in a year after submiting it, AI only gonna worse the already broken US system