Rapid advances in artificial intelligence chatbots are challenging centuries-old principles of intellectual property and fueling calls for change in patent and copyright law.
A new wave of powerful “generative” AI chatbots, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Bard, both capable of generating plausible text and images in response to conversational prompts, are gaining ground in the legal community and wider society. It gives new urgency to the ongoing debate. Should AI systems be considered inventors and patents granted for their inventions? And what should regulators do when copyrighted material is fed into AI systems? is it?
US-based AI expert Steven Thaler has filed two patent applications naming his AI machine, Davas, as the inventor of shape-shifting food containers and flashing lights. It has been at the forefront of debate ever since. He filed a legal challenge to intellectual property offices around the world after they rejected his application and ruled that AI systems cannot be named as patent inventors. woke up
The European Patent Office seems to agree. Its spokesperson, Luis Berenguer, says AI will continue to be “a tool primarily for human inventors” for the foreseeable future.
Thaler, however, has had some success. In 2021, the Australian Federal Court ruled that Mr Davas could be an inventor for purposes of Australian law. Thaler then obtained a patent in South Africa naming Davas as the inventor. He is awaiting a decision by the British Supreme Court.
“Some concessions must be made, otherwise AI systems will think inventing behind the scenes while humans pretend to be authors and accuse them of wrongdoing,” Thaler told the Financial Times. Told.
Some lawyers say he has a point. Companies are increasing their investment in AI and leveraging it to create inventions. And they want to protect the resulting intellectual property that can be used to secure more investment. They argue that the logical response is to amend intellectual property laws so that AIs are listed as either inventors or co-inventors of patents.
“In the long term, it is impossible to keep AI out of the patent system,” says Bernd Holzgartner, partner at German patent law firm 2SPL. “The current legal framework was not designed to take this situation and the high degree of uncertainty into account.”
However, he added that AI and changes in patent law could take two to three years or more, as patent law “always evolves slowly.”
First, courts need to convince AI systems, not humans, that they are in control. And despite rapid progress in generative AI systems since late last year, experts say they still require significant human guidance, such as data scientists inputting “prompts” and instructions. says.
But if AI can develop patentable inventions ignoring human input, will patents designed to foster human innovation and economic growth become irrelevant?
“If AI could easily invent anything . Maybe,” says Mike Williams, a partner and AI specialist at Marks & Clark, a firm that specializes in intellectual property law. Hard.
Other areas of IP are also seeing a rise in AI lawsuits.
One of the most high-profile lawsuits is between film agency Getty Images and AI company Stability AI. In a lawsuit filed in London’s High Court in January, Getty Images alleged that Stability AI “illegally copied and processed millions of protected images.” [its] Copyright. . . It benefits the commercial interests of Stability AI, but it detrimental to content creators. “
Noam Shemtov, professor of intellectual property and technology law at Queen Mary University in London, said one possible industry-wide compromise would be for AI companies to use copyrighted data to train AI systems. It suggests the possibility of a collective licensing system that pays artists compensation for their use.
Such schemes are similar to license fees paid by restaurants, cafes, hotels and other businesses to perform music to the public.
Big AI companies hope to find a legal balance between AI interests and the rights of copyright holders.
“Copyright and intellectual property laws have adapted to new technologies in the past, and we believe they will apply to AI as well,” said OpenAI. “We want everyone to benefit from AI technology, and we are working with creators, rights holders, policy makers, academics and other stakeholders to address these issues.”
Given the speed of change in AI, intellectual property law may have to catch up for a while.
2SPL’s Holzgartner likens the use of AI in intellectual property to a picture that is just beginning.
“So far we’ve got a blank canvas with maybe a couple of lines on it. We’re a long way from knowing the full picture…about how to handle things.”
