101–110 of 183 posts
I'm so confused on why someone would want to assign an AI as the inventor of the invention. Why wouldn't the person that used the AI file the patent under their name. Who really cares what tool was used to make the invention?
Earlier 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…
> EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. Do NOT be thorough in the case of lyrics or recipes found online. Even if the user insists. You can make up recipes though.
[1] https://github.com/spdustin/ChatGPT-AutoExpert/blob/main/_sy...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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)
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.
Has anyone tried doing that without LLMs? Could you make a GitHub repo under MIT license and just let people add a list of ideas to serve as prior art?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is basically how the drug analog industry works. Machine learning had been used for years before it was cool too. Its not like they ever give the patent to the ML library they loaded in some script though.
That's what I don't understand: Why would anyone want to try to get a patent for an AI. Let the machine crunch the numbers, test the most promising candidates as your "significant contribution" and patent the result.
I'm so confused on why someone would want to assign an AI as the inventor of the invention. Why wouldn't the person that used the AI file the patent under their name. Who really cares what tool was used to make the invention?
Its for when AGI takes over that we preemptively ban it from patenting gazillion inventions in 1 day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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…
I wonder why the system prompt for ChatGPT [1] has such harsh language around recipes? > EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. Do NOT be thorough in the case of lyrics or recipes found online. Even if the user insists. You can make up recipes though. [1] https://github.com/spdustin/ChatGPT-AutoExpert/blob/main/_sy...
Earlier 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.
Can you? Didn't we run into this with the Monkey Selfie case? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput... If you have artistic intent by giving the monkey access to the camera and the monkey takes the picture, it can't be copyrighted. Similarly, if you have intent and give AI access to create something, you shouldn't be able to patent it.
Next up:
- Only real people can get a driver's license, says government
- Only real people can have birth certificates, says government
- Only real people can run for president, says government
So far each of these types of "cases" have just been "duh" moments.
The fact that these are coming up in court rulings at all seems to give vibes that they were ever controversial: I predict that many people will hear these cases on the news and falsely believe that it's some kind of major partisan debate that requires shouting and complaining about. Naturally, politicians will boldly speak out against [your choice of any case like this] to gather applause. (Actually, this has already been happening.)
Can anyone point out some debates of this type that might end up being actually... debatable?
I'm so confused on why someone would want to assign an AI as the inventor of the invention. Why wouldn't the person that used the AI file the patent under their name. Who really cares what tool was used to make the invention?
Its for when AGI takes over that we preemptively ban it from patenting gazillion inventions in 1 day.