Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 183 posts

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#21

Post by Communitivity »

What is the difference between an invention created by a person that was informed through AI outputs, and an invention created without any use of AI? An invention is an invention. If it is novel then someone put in the work to get it , such as possibly training the model and definitely the prompts. Most likely the invention as spit out by the AI is not going to be usable as is. Anyone seen the six fingered hands some image AIs make? So a human will need to revise it, modify it, and test it by building a working prototype.

In my opinion, the human should get the patent. Anything else smacks to me of a knee-jerk reaction along the lines of "AI bad!", though there is certainly a lot of that reaction going around. AI, or more properly LLMs, are a tool like fire - nothing more, nothing less. Does it invalidate the patent if you use CAD/CAM in the creation of your invention? If not, then neither should using LLMS.

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#22

Post by nonameiguess »

Delumine wrote: post #17
lallysingh wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone challenged your patent, they can try to prove that you used an AI.

But there are AIs made to self-correct that they aren't AI. Humanizing their work. Likewise If I use AI to give me a blueprint of an idea, but I use my brain and methodologies to "reverse-engineer" it, how is this even enforced. I doubt someone submitting to the USPTO is going to include "AS A LLM" somewhere in the submission lol.

And people who poison their spouses generally try to make it look like an accident. No law is perfectly enforceable but that is a secondary question to what should be the law.

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#23

Post by teeray »

tivert wrote: post #12
pfdietz wrote: post #2

AI could, however, poison the well for human patents, by making inventions and putting them into public view. Let's have LLMs churn out millions of discoveries, stick them on a public web site, then use that as a resource to kill other patents.

> AI could, however, poison the well for human patents, by making inventions and putting them into public view. Feb 29, 2025, Washington, DC: "A Federal Court ruled today that AI-generated text does not qualify as prior-art...."

If it isn't considered prior art, then that de-facto makes it possible to patent AI-generated content by laundering them through humans.

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#26

Post by Delumine »

KoolKat23 wrote: post #18
Delumine wrote: post #10

One thing I never understood.. is who actually checks for honesty in this space? For example we heard AI can't patent inventions, or copyright pictures/images. But how do you prove that my picture, or invention even used AI? If I remove watermarks from AI pictures, either through code or photoshop; Or just credit myself for the invention (I made it up in my head), how is this enforced? I see the only way of this AI s…

You misunderstand it, you can use AI or whatever as a tool but the patent must be applied for under your name with you as the creator.

I don't see a reason why anyone would want to patent their invention under an LLM though

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#27

Post by cal85 »

Delumine wrote: post #10

One thing I never understood.. is who actually checks for honesty in this space? For example we heard AI can't patent inventions, or copyright pictures/images. But how do you prove that my picture, or invention even used AI? If I remove watermarks from AI pictures, either through code or photoshop; Or just credit myself for the invention (I made it up in my head), how is this enforced? I see the only way of this AI s…

Some rules are just very hard to enforce when a new technology comes along. And when that happens, breaking the rules becomes widespread (eg, downloading MP3s back in Napster days), and industries are eventually forced to find new business models (like most recorded music moving to cheap subscription services, and musicians focusing more on live shows to make money). I’m not saying this is good or bad, it’s just how it is. Sometimes a business model is only viable in a world before some specific technology comes along and disrupts it.

EDIT: btw I'm just addressing the thing you asked about, but I don't think it's relevant to the article. The headline just says that an AI tool can't be a patent holder itself - which is obvious; AI tools are not legally people, so they can't register patents any more than they can hold shares in a company or vote in elections. Doesn't mean people can't patent inventions that they used AI tools to develop.

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#28

Post by smolder »

Communitivity wrote: post #21

What is the difference between an invention created by a person that was informed through AI outputs, and an invention created without any use of AI? An invention is an invention. If it is novel then someone put in the work to get it , such as possibly training the model and definitely the prompts. Most likely the invention as spit out by the AI is not going to be usable as is. Anyone seen the six fingered hands some…

The patent system is barely useful at this point because of the low friction - giant companies spamming the patent office with concepts they may or may not ever use. I think this rule is about keeping the patent office/system hobbling along. To allow the friction to drop even further for companies with the resources to generate patents via AI means that the abuse will escalate, and the patent office will struggle harder. Those companies would also be afforded a big legal advantage by this abuse, in a way certainly not predicted or intended by designers of the patent system.

Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says

#29

Post by jhardy54 »

Communitivity wrote: post #21

What is the difference between an invention created by a person that was informed through AI outputs, and an invention created without any use of AI? An invention is an invention. If it is novel then someone put in the work to get it , such as possibly training the model and definitely the prompts. Most likely the invention as spit out by the AI is not going to be usable as is. Anyone seen the six fingered hands some…

The article clearly states that patents can be filed for AI-generated inventions. The only limitations are:

- The patent owner must be human.

- The patent owner must have made some “significant” contribution to the invention.

Please be sure to read the article before commenting!

Post reply on HN