AI considered inventor? A Swiss court settles

What if AI was considered, in its own right, as an inventor? The judicial system seems to be inclined to give credit to this approach.Image: Imago / Unsplash, Watson assembly

A 75 -year -old American researcher has developed an artificial intelligence capable of creating inventions. After a patent refused in Switzerland, justice has just partially reasoned.

Andreas Maurer / ch media

Stephen Thaler, an American researcher, has developed feelings for an artificial intelligence that he himself conceived. He had baptized his system Dabusacronym, in French, of autonomous start -up device of a unified sentience.

For several years, this enthusiast in the field of neural connections has been convinced that his AI has managed to develop emotions. The 75 -year -old man has no children “other than Dabus”, as he declared to The Economistbefore continuing:

Patents for the ideas of an AI

As strange as this story may appear, Thaler’s ideas have gone around the world, and triggered a fundamental debate about artificial intelligence. To pay tribute to its creation, the inventor has made patent requests in several countries since 2018.

Not for itself, but for an invention that Dabus would have designed, a container for foods capable of reheating them, and attracting attention by light signals in an emergency, for example when the deadline for consumption is exceeded.

Stephen Thaler.Image: Imago

But the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI) rejected its request in Switzerland, arguing that only humans can be recognized as inventors. Even the proposal to register Stephen Thaler himself as a inventor has been refused.

The administrative federal court has just ruled on this case. In his decision on June 26, published on Friday, he partially proves the American right, which could fuel a fundamental reflection on the subject.

What AI can, and cannot do

The court notes that AI systems “are not (yet) capable” of independently identifying problems or tasks or developing solutions without human intervention. However, with the development of their autonomy, the share of human influence decreases, and it becomes more difficult to identify the contribution of a person in the creative process.

According to the court, AI systems already contribute today to the development of patentable solutions, based on existing knowledge, measurement data and information.

Is AI an inventor? This is how AI illustrates this theme.Image: generated by AI / Openai

At the time when patent legislation was written, artificial intelligence did not yet exist. Inventors must therefore be natural persons, whose names and domicile must be indicated. Objects cannot be inventors, therefore recalls the court. For patent law, it is not anyway the invention process that counts, but the result, because even accidental discoveries can be protected by a patent.

The role of the human being in the process

On the other hand, a person who contributes to the process of data processing of AI can be considered (co-) inventor, underlines the court. It is this person who perceives the result produced by AI and recognizes a patentable invention.

On this basis, the court concludes that Stephen Thaler can be registered as co-inventor in the patent, which contrasts with what is commonly accepted, namely that the creations of the AI ​​cannot be attributed to anyone, and are therefore not protected.

However, the inventor maintains that his AI has designed the invention independently, without any contribution from him. He also described this process in a scientific publication. The Federal Institute of Intellectual Property nevertheless considers that this is technically not possible and, according to him, the publication has no scientific value.

The federal administrative court does not decide this question. What matters is that Stephen Thaler received the AI ​​technical solution and recognized a protectable invention there. As such, he is considered the inventor. The researcher can still appeal this decision in the Federal Court.

A case that has gone around the world

All over the world, the courts have reached similar conclusions, although certain nuances have appeared. The German Federal Court of Patents judged that a human being lodging a patent could be designated as inventor, but that the name of AI could only be mentioned.

In Australia, a court of first instance had recognized Dabus as inventor. A world first. But this decision was then canceled by a court of appeal.

So far, it is a human who has written this text, AI has only helped to seek sources, correct it and translate it. But what does this judgment mean for the future? AI answers us:

Translated from German by Joel Espi (and AI)

While continuing her convalescence after cancer diagnosed in early 2024, Kate Middleton delivered, during a visit to Colethchester hospital, a rare and sincere testimony on the tests of remission. A period “really, really difficult”.

It is not an official declaration or a calibrated press release made in Buckingham. It was around a discussion in a therapeutic garden that Kate Middleton confided.