Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 JULY 2024

Market Intelligence Thought Leadership Award Winner

AI Cannot Be Named As Inventor - Insights From The Bundesgerichtshof's DABUS Decision

Norton Rose Fulbright
Explore more from Norton Rose Fulbright

The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof - BGH) in Germany recently issued a landmark ruling on the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in patent law.

GermanyTechnology
Ronak Kalhor-Witzel
Ronak Kalhor-Witzel

The Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof - BGH) in Germany recently issued a landmark ruling on the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in patent law.

The decision, on 11 June 2024, in the DABUS case (AZ X ZB 5/22), reinforces the principle that only natural persons can be named as inventors under patent law. This ruling has significant implications for the future of AI-generated inventions and patent applications globally.

Content

Key takeaways from the DABUS decision

  • Human influence is mandatory: the BGH emphasised that every AI-generated invention involves some level of human contribution. This influence does not need to be inventive or substantial; what matters is the presence of a human influence in the invention process. Consequently, the individual who had this decisive

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.

Register for freeORLog in

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.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Deepfakes, Chatbots, AI-Generated Text: European Commission Details Transparency Obligations Under The AI Act

The European Commission has published draft guidelines interpreting the AI Act's transparency obligations, establishing when and how organizations must disclose AI-generated content, deepfakes, and automated interactions. These guidelines clarify that deepfake labeling applies regardless of intent to deceive, that AI systems must identify themselves at the point of interaction, and that the editorial review exception for AI-generated text requires substantive human oversight with clear accountability.
European UnionTechnology
Greenberg Traurig
Greenberg Traurig
Article

Deepfakes, Chatbots, KI-Texte: EU-Kommission Konkretisiert Transparenzpflichten Der KI-Verordnung

The European Commission has published draft guidelines interpreting the AI Act's transparency obligations, establishing when and how organizations must disclose AI-generated content, deepfakes, and automated interactions. These guidelines clarify that deepfake labeling applies regardless of intent to deceive, that AI systems must identify themselves at the point of interaction, and that the editorial review exception for AI-generated text requires substantive human oversight with clear accountability.
GermanyTechnology
Greenberg Traurig
Greenberg Traurig
Article

Cybercrime & Compliance: Navigating Risks In A Digital World – A Conference Report

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer's Frankfurt Corporate Crime & Investigations team hosted a conference examining cybercrime threats, AI-driven attacks, and the evolving responsibilities of corporate leadership in building cyber resilience. Senior representatives from law enforcement, industry leaders, and global legal partners explored prevention strategies, incident response protocols, and the complex liability landscape facing organizations in an increasingly digital threat environment.
GermanyTechnology
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP