This webinar took place on July 22, 2020. 

To download the slides from this presentation, please click here. To read an article adapted from this presentation, please click here. A replay of the webinar is below.

Description: Womble Bond Dickinson and the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology presented a July 22 webinar on “Artificial Intelligence and Patent Law: What Happens After DABUS?”

In August 2018, the USPTO published a request for comments, including a list of questions about how it should approach Artificial Intelligence (AI) and patent law. At about the same time, news reports carried many stories about the first patent applications naming an AI, called DABUS, as an inventor. 

Not quite a year later, we know that DABUS is not going to be issued any patents – in the US, the UK, or the EU. But the broader discussion of the role of AI in patenting is just getting under way.

Womble Bond Dickinson attorneys Brent BabcockBill Jacobs and Chris Mammen joined IBM IP Policy Counsel Yeen Tham for a discussion on:

  • When an invention is (or includes) AI.
  • What would it take for AI to be deemed an “inventor”? 
  • What are the dividing lines between AI-as-invention, AI-as-research-tool, and AI-as-inventor? 
  • What are the implications for AI and the level of skill in the art? 
  • Using AI to find relevant prior art 
  • If an AI is an inventor, is it measured against the POSITA or do we need a new AISITA standard.