21/04/2020
In a change to Covid-19 related topics I attended a webinar yesterday around AI learning and patents. Patents require the inventor (a real person) to be named. There are a few instances appearing now where the purported inventor is an AI machine, one more well published example being Dr. Thaler's DABUS creating machine:
https://lnkd.in/f5A-HN5
This poses some real problems for patents. Is the patent eligible if the inventor is not a person? Was the AI machine really the inventor or was the person behind the programming the inventor? Even patent offices have struggled with this. The USPTO saw no harm in allowing DABUS to be the inventor for a food container invention - see US10,423,875. Europe on the other hand struggled with this and have raised objections to the naming of DABUS as the inventor.
Even more curious is the description Dr. Thaler provides on how DABUS works that is hard if not impossible to understand, particularly when Dr. Thaler describes the AI learning as having 'mental health issues'.
To my mind we are not there yet and AI learning does not give rise to inventions alone - somewhere behind the AI is a programmer that sets the boundaries for AI learning and which directs the process. That said, who knows what the future holds?
The Artificial Inventor behind this project “DABUS” is a patented AI system created by Dr. Stephen Thaler. It is a “Creativity Machine,” which refers to a particular type of connectionist artificial intelligence. Such systems contain a first artificial neural network,