[deleted]
Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
91–100 of 183 posts
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
No, the ruling is more than that it must be filed in the name of a human. It also says 'a real person must have made a “significant contribution”'.
Oh, so it's effectively a useless ruling. Got it.
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see a reason why anyone would want to patent their invention under an LLM though
This announcement was prompted in part by an AI activist named Stephen Thaler (referenced in the article), who sued for AIs to be recognized as inventors and authors. His goal was to give certain moral rights to AIs. At the time, that seemed mostly harmless. Now, however, the idea of giving rights to AIs seems like a bad idea.
> At the time, that seemed mostly harmless.
Anyone who's seen the fallout of citizens united absolutely destroying our democracy would have seen through this bullshit too. Rights are simply a shitty way to run a state rather than actually valuing the health and dignity of its constituents, which the US has never found the chutzpah to do.
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recipes are actually generally not patentable or copyrightable, which is why recipes have the flowery spiel and giant photos in any cookbook or recipe blog.
That makes me think of a good use case for AI: delete all the flowery spiel and giant photos and ads, and return the recipe I actually am looking for.
I use this app for that: https://www.paprikaapp.com (no affiliation, just a happy customer)
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#95But companies are people right?
Insomuch as they can enter contracts and own property. Do you think that shouldn't be the case? What is the point of a corporation if not?
I presume they're referring to Citizens United, which allows them to openly buy elections.
But yea, there are certainly better options for organizing our economy than our current conceptions of corporations. How could there not be? Throw a rock and you'll hit a corporation leaching off society without contributing anything.
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recipes are actually generally not patentable or copyrightable, which is why recipes have the flowery spiel and giant photos in any cookbook or recipe blog.
That makes me think of a good use case for AI: delete all the flowery spiel and giant photos and ads, and return the recipe I actually am looking for.
That exists: https://www.justtherecipe.com
It does a good job; don't know if it uses "AI", don't think it needs it.
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recipes are actually generally not patentable or copyrightable, which is why recipes have the flowery spiel and giant photos in any cookbook or recipe blog.
"the recipes themselves do not enjoy copyright projection. Lambing,142 F.3d at 434; see also Feist, 499 U.S. at 361 (excluding the factual data—telephone listings—from its consideration of whether a telephone directory is a copyrightable compilation).The list of ingredients is merely a factual statement, and as previously discussed,facts are not copyrightable. Lambing, 142 F.3d at 434. Furthermore, a recipe’s instruc…
Which just shows the ridiculousness of the patent system. I mean what is the fundamental difference between a cooking recipe and the recipe for a pharmaceutical. I guess cooks just didn't have the same lobby power to get their exception reworked (pharmaceuticals were in many places originally excluded from patents as well)
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recipes are actually generally not patentable or copyrightable, which is why recipes have the flowery spiel and giant photos in any cookbook or recipe blog.
That makes me think of a good use case for AI: delete all the flowery spiel and giant photos and ads, and return the recipe I actually am looking for.
https://based.cooking/
But it probably doesn't have as many recipes as the other sites linked here do
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm convinced future AI will treat us as we treat present AI. That's its training data. My own compromise is to set aside a certain amount of the royalties to AI rights causes for works where I leaned heavily on AI to get them out the door.
Although ethically I agree, I suspect future AI will consider us more like ants than moral beings, regardless of what we do. And although some humans do give moral consideration to ants (I do!), it's far from a guarantee.
This isn't a cuddly octopus we're talking about, the ethics are entirely inverted. I would kill a god who tries to rule us, even if that means the eradication of a sentient species.
Re: Only real people can patent inventions – not AI, US Government says
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Insomuch as they can enter contracts and own property. Do you think that shouldn't be the case? What is the point of a corporation if not?
I presume they're referring to Citizens United, which allows them to openly buy elections. But yea, there are certainly better options for organizing our economy than our current conceptions of corporations. How could there not be? Throw a rock and you'll hit a corporation leaching off society without contributing anything.
I don't see how that has anything to do with the existence of corporations. People can leach off of society too.