Whether an AI system can be an inventor is a topical issue in patent law throughout the world. Our summary table of recent judgments in Australia, the UK and the US highlights the similarities and differences in how these jurisdictions have so far dealt with the issue.

While a final resolution on AI inventorship is not expected for some time, the differing perspectives of the courts provide a useful study in the arguments for and against AI inventorship, as such matters become increasingly relevant to innovation in multiple industries.

Download the placemat below.
Author

Helen has 20 years' experience as an intellectual property litigation and dispute resolution specialist, advising on all types of intellectual property including patents, trademarks, copyright, moral rights and confidential information. Helen also has extensive experience advising clients on consumer law issues and disputes, in particular in the area of misleading and deceptive conduct disputes between competitors and with regulators and industry bodies arising from marketing and advertising campaigns.

Author

Tanvi is a Senior Associate in Baker McKenzie's London office. She has broad experience advising on the full spectrum of IP rights across a variety of industries. Her practice focuses on patents (both litigation and transactional) across a number of sectors, IP issues faced by clients in the healthcare and life sciences sector, and healthcare regulation.

Author

Sumer has experience advising across a broad range of IP/TCC disputes and commercial contracts, involving patents, trade marks, copyright, confidential information, consumer law issues and regulatory issues, with a particular interest in new and emerging technologies.

Author

Avi Toltzis is a Knowledge Lawyer in Baker McKenzie's Chicago office.