DABUS gains territory in South Africa and Australia: Revisiting the AI-inventorship question

Desmond Oriakhogba
{"title":"DABUS gains territory in South Africa and Australia: Revisiting the AI-inventorship question","authors":"Desmond Oriakhogba","doi":"10.47348/saipl/v9/a5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper draws from and builds upon DO Oriakhogba ‘What If DABUS Came to Africa? Visiting AI Inventorship and Ownership of Patent from the Nigerian Perspective’ (2021) 42(2) Business Law Review 89. It reviews the recent granting of a patent by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) to Dr Stephen Thaler in respect of the DABUS-generated invention in South Africa and the judgment of the Australian Federal Court (FCA) upholding AI-inventorship. The review, which is based on desk research, is conducted against a backdrop of statutory provisions and case law from both countries, the provisions of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and relevant literature dealing with the inventorship question. The paper determines whether, without reform of the extant patent law and policy, recognition of artificial intelligence (AI) as an inventor does not undermine the foundational concept of human inventorship, and the central focus on human creation and agency for intellectual property protection in South Africa and Australia. In connection with this, the paper asks and examines the question of whether the CIPC patent grant and the FCA judgment can stand judicial scrutiny under the extant patent regimes in South Africa and Australia.","PeriodicalId":357543,"journal":{"name":"South African Intellectual Property Law Journal","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Intellectual Property Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/saipl/v9/a5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper draws from and builds upon DO Oriakhogba ‘What If DABUS Came to Africa? Visiting AI Inventorship and Ownership of Patent from the Nigerian Perspective’ (2021) 42(2) Business Law Review 89. It reviews the recent granting of a patent by the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) to Dr Stephen Thaler in respect of the DABUS-generated invention in South Africa and the judgment of the Australian Federal Court (FCA) upholding AI-inventorship. The review, which is based on desk research, is conducted against a backdrop of statutory provisions and case law from both countries, the provisions of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and relevant literature dealing with the inventorship question. The paper determines whether, without reform of the extant patent law and policy, recognition of artificial intelligence (AI) as an inventor does not undermine the foundational concept of human inventorship, and the central focus on human creation and agency for intellectual property protection in South Africa and Australia. In connection with this, the paper asks and examines the question of whether the CIPC patent grant and the FCA judgment can stand judicial scrutiny under the extant patent regimes in South Africa and Australia.
DABUS在南非和澳大利亚获得了地盘:重新审视人工智能发明的问题
本文取材于DO Oriakhogba的《如果DABUS来到非洲会怎样?》从尼日利亚的角度看人工智能的发明和专利所有权”(2021)42(2)商业法律评论89。它审查了公司和知识产权委员会(CIPC)最近就南非dabus产生的发明向Stephen Thaler博士授予专利以及澳大利亚联邦法院(FCA)支持人工智能发明权的判决。此次审查是在案头研究的基础上进行的,背景是两国的法定规定和判例法、《专利合作条约》(PCT)的规定以及涉及发明人问题的相关文献。本文确定了在不改革现有专利法和政策的情况下,承认人工智能(AI)作为发明人是否会破坏人类发明人的基本概念,以及南非和澳大利亚对人类创造和知识产权保护机构的核心关注。与此相关,本文提出并考察了CIPC专利授权和FCA判决在南非和澳大利亚现行专利制度下是否能够经受司法审查的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信