Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 MAY 2022

Can an AI system be an inventor? Full Court says no.

Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Contributor
Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Corrs Chambers Westgarth is Australia’s leading independent law firm. We provide exceptional legal...

View firm profile
Explore more from Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Recent FC decision confirms that an AI system cannot be an Inventor. A number of other policy issues were also identified.

AustraliaIntellectual Property

In a decision that brings Australia into line with recent decisions in the US, Europe and the UK, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia has unanimously found that an artificial intelligence (AI) system cannot be an 'inventor', while also identifying a number of policy issues to be addressed.

The Full Court overturned Justice Beach's decision, in which his Honour found that an AI system could be an inventor for the purposes of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) (Act) and Patent Regulations 1991 (Cth) (Regulations).1 Instead, the Full Court held an 'inventor' must be a 'natural person' - based on the historical centrality of the role of a human inventor in patent applications, the scheme of the Act and Regulations, and the natural reading of section 15(1) of the Act.2

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

    Lawyers Weekly Law firm of the year 2021                  
Employer of Choice for Gender Equality (WGEA)

See more popular content from