"We are disappointed by the decision, which we believe leaves a Federal Circuit precedent in place that will serve as a major disincentive to certain uses of AI in innovation," Abbott told"It is now up to Congress to decide whether to change the law to allow inventions to be protected regardless of how AI is used in the inventive process, and to help the US maintain its position as a world leader in innovation.
Today's US laws state that only"individuals" can be inventors or co-inventors, and individuals can only be people. Corporations, for example, cannot be inventors either. Thaler believes that laws need to change and society must adapt as AI advances. He previously argued that failing to accept patent applications for software generated by neural networks will hamper progress since the IP will be withheld from developers who may be inspired to build upon it all and create further inventions. Accepting AI algorithms as inventors would also stop humans from stealing ideas from software and passing them as their own, he said.
"With the development of DABUS, AI has become sufficiently advanced to become conscious, sentient, and truly creative. It will take time for the current state-of-art to sink in, for all concerned," he toldThaler and Abbott also have a pending case challenging similar laws in the UK with that country's Supreme Court, and expect a decision later this year. They also have an