shutterstock_561931702laurent-t
10 August 2021PatentsRichard Hamer, Lauren John and Alexandra Moloney

DABUS: decoding Australia’s AI decision

In a world first judicial decision, Justice Beach of the Federal Court of Australia determined that an AI machine can be named as an inventor on a patent application. The decision, Thaler v Commissioner of Patents, is the first judicial determination in the world permitting a non-person to be named as an inventor. A non-human inventor can still not be an applicant or grantee of a patent—only a natural person or corporation can apply for or be granted a patent.

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Patents
6 March 2023   Enlightened arguments from both parties at the UK Supreme Court made for interesting viewing, says Mike Williams of Marks & Clerk.
Jurisdiction reports
12 May 2023   Recent Australian decisions have resulted in both new opportunities to challenge patent term extensions in Australia and new patent prosecution practices to shield against them. We summarise here what is known about PTE, and the areas that are ripe for further challenge.
Patents
6 May 2022   The Federal Court of Australia has ruled that local stapler company Airco Fasteners infringed a patent from Fortune 200 engineering firm Illinois Tool Works.