New USPTO Rule: AI Can Assist — But Can’t Be an Inventor
.webp)
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
has released updated guidance clarifying how inventions created with assistance
from artificial intelligence will be handled under U.S. patent law. The new
rules make one point unmistakably clear—AI tools, no matter how advanced,
cannot be named as an inventor. According to the agency, only a human mind
can conceive an invention, and AI must be treated solely as a supporting
instrument.
Updated USPTO Guidelines on AI-Assisted Inventions
In the notice published on Friday, the USPTO emphasized that
AI-assisted creations will no longer be assessed under any special or
separate standard. Instead, the traditional inventorship requirements apply
exactly the same way they always have.
The office stated that generative AI models and other
machine-learning systems function like lab equipment, databases, or
software—they assist human thinking but do not replace it. Therefore, the
only individual who may be listed as an inventor is the human who actually
conceptualized the idea being claimed.
The notice explained:
AI platforms may generate insights, automate tasks, or help
shape concepts, but they remain tools controlled and guided by the human
inventor.
Earlier 2024 Guidance Withdrawn
The USPTO also withdrew its February 2024 guidelines, which
had explored applying joint-inventor standards when AI involvement was
significant. The agency clarified that the “Pannu factors”—a test
traditionally used to determine whether multiple human collaborators should be
recognized as co-inventors—do not apply when one participant is an AI system.
The office stressed that only human contributions are
evaluated when determining inventorship, not the degree or sophistication of AI
assistance involved.
Human Creativity Remains Central
Although inventors are free to use AI tools during any stage
of development, the USPTO underscored that applicants must still prove that a
human mind conceived and directed the invention. Simply relying on AI for
drafting text, generating ideas, or crunching data does not qualify the AI—or
even the human user—unless the person can demonstrate meaningful, creative
input.
In short, while AI may accelerate the invention process, the
legal recognition of invention remains strictly human.
#USPTO #AIRegulation #PatentLaw #AIGuidelines #TechPolicy
#InnovationNews #IntellectualProperty #AIandLaw #USPatents #LegalUpdates
#AIResearch #TechGovernance
