The 2024 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) guidance on AI inventorship introduced a 'significant contribution' standard for human inventorship. This essay critiques the guidance, arguing that it creates a legal inconsistency with the established requirement for complete human conception under patent law. The author contends that the lack of legal justification for this approach risks undermining the validity of patents generated with substantial AI assistance, potentially destabilizing the foundations of patent law.
The USPTO's guidance on AI inventorship introduces a 'significant contribution' standard that fundamentally contradicts the legal requirement for complete human conception in patent law.
By allowing AI to have a role in inventorship, the USPTO's approach threatens to undermine the validity of patents that involve significant AI assistance.
Collection
[
|
...
]