Search for: "US Inventor v. Vidal" Results 1 - 20 of 48
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
Vidal that only natural persons can be inventors, and therefore, AI cannot be named as an inventor in a patent application. [read post]
27 Feb 2024, 10:02 am by Dennis Crouch
Cir. 2010) (SCT “directed us to construe the scope of analogous art broadly”); Airbus S.A.S. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 8:39 am by Taylor Berkoski
Vidal (Thaler) the holding 'that only a natural person can be an inventor, so AI cannot be.'... [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 1:42 pm by USPTO
Therefore, the USPTO is not, at this time, implementing any new requirement to disclose the use of AI, beyond that which is required in rare circumstances by USPTO rules.The USPTO will continue to presume that the named inventor(s) in an application are the actual inventor(s). [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 11:32 am by Camilla Hrdy
  On how copyright fair use doctrine will apply to AI training: Pam Samuelson gives a summary of on-point fair use cases that might be applied in asking whether training on copyrighted works is fair use, giving arguments for both sides. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 2:22 am by Eden Winlow (Bristows)
On 20 December 2023, the UK Supreme Court handed down its highly anticipated judgment in the case of Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks [2023] UKSC 49, unanimously ruling that only a natural person can be named as an inventor on a patent application. [read post]
This comes amidst a backdrop where AI models currently cannot be recognized as inventors, a stance reaffirmed in the Federal Circuit decision Thaler v. [read post]
18 Sep 2023, 2:44 pm by Dennis Crouch
  For me, the case is largely about the strong presumption that the listed inventors are correct. [read post]