To date, AI services have been used to create optical illusions and inexplicable images, convincing fake news and controversial pornography. Someone is trying to establish AI as a proper “creator” of useful things, but the law has put obstacles in their way.
See also: How is artificial intelligence (AI) affecting the job search?
A new ruling from the UK’s Supreme Court has reiterated that algorithms are not the same as humans, and that artificial intelligence cannot be considered a creator. The Court has rejected an application by American computer scientist Stephen Thaler to file a patent application for inventions created by DABUS, a “creative machine” he designed.
Thaler previously tried to register DABUS as an inventor with the UK Patent Office (IPO), but the Office rejected his request, claiming that patents can only be assigned to people or a company. Thaler's creative machine appeared to be instrumental in the creation of a new food container and a flashing light back in 2019.
The Supreme Court is now reinstating its decision to dismiss Thaler’s appeal in a unanimous decision. Justice David Kitchin said the case did not involve the broader question of whether technical advances brought about by autonomous machines and powered by artificial intelligence should be patentable. Patents can only be granted to human creators, and the inventor must be a “natural person” for patents to be effectively enforceable.
See also: How artificial intelligence affects the Greek market
DABUS’s ambitions to become the first patentable AI were previously dashed by the US, which ruled against Thaler in the same way as the British Court. Intellectual property expert Rajvinder Jagdev points out that similar decisions have been made by other European courts and Australia, confirming that inventors “must be natural persons.”
Thaler’s legal representatives said the UK ruling would be detrimental to the development of the industry and the application of artificial intelligence. The High Court confirmed that UK patent law is “currently wholly inadequate” to protect “inventions” related to artificial intelligence. A Department of Commerce spokesman welcomed the ruling, however, saying it clarifies the current patent status for “artificial intelligence machines”.
There are legitimate questions about how the patent and intellectual property system should evolve to deal with such creations, the IPO said. Giles Parsons, another intellectual property lawyer, said the Supreme Court’s decision was “expected” and would not have a significant impact on the patent system for now. AI algorithms are still considered tools , not agents, Parsons said.
See also: Addressing cybersecurity challenges through artificial intelligence and machine learning
Advantages and disadvantages of AI
The main benefits of AI in business include automating processes, increasing productivity, and personalizing customer service. AI allows businesses to analyze large volumes of data to gain a deeper understanding of their customers' needs and offer more personalized services.
However, implementing AI in business does not come without challenges. The need for large amounts of data to train AI models can be a hurdle, while data protection and customer privacy are important issues that need to be addressed.
Furthermore, implementing AI requires significant investments in technology and skilled personnel, which may not be feasible for all businesses. Also, a lack of understanding of AI’s capabilities and limitations can lead to misguided investments and failed implementation efforts.
Finally, AI may lead to changes in work structure and skill requirements, which may have implications for workers and require additional education and training.
Source: techspot
