AI inventors: deference for legal personality without respect for innovation?

Abstract

Legal personality is the cornerstone of the operation of law and legal systems. Similarly, innovation provides the core justification for intellectual property rights. Artificial Intelligent systems have demonstrated the ability to produce novel inventions. Ordinarily, the inventor is the recipient of patents for their inventions. However, AI systems lack legal personality. The issue becomes should, and if so, how should patent law protect inventions for those who lack legal personality. The paper analyses three jurisdictions, the UK, the US and Australia, and their respective approaches to AI inventors to explore the conflict between having deference for legal personality questions and respect for future innovation where the inventor is uncertain. The paper argues that legal personality is essential for the intercourse of patent rights and that refusing the entitlement of patents to AI systems is the correct approach. It further argues that statutory reform would be desirable to focus on ensuring that the end user of AI systems is adequately incentivised to create inventions beneficial to society.