A world first SA grants patent to an AI System
At first glance, a recently granted South African patent relating to a “food container based on fractal geometry” seems fairly mundane.
The innovation in question involves interlocking food containers that are easy for robots to grasp and stack.
On closer inspection, the patent is anything but mundane. That’s because the inventor is not a human being – it is an artificial intelligence (AI) system called DABUS
DABUS (which stands for “device for the autonomous bootstrapping of unified sentience”) is an AI system created by Stephen Thaler, a pioneer in the field of AI and programming. The system simulates human brainstorming and creates new inventions. DABUS is a particular type of AI, often referred to as “creativity machines” because they are capable of independent and complex functioning. This differs from everyday AI like Siri, the “voice” of Apple’s iPhones.
The patent application listing DABUS as the inventor was filed in patent offices around the world, including the US, Europe, Australia, and South Africa. But only South Africa granted the patent (Australia followed suit a few days later after a court judge gave the go-ahead).
South Africa’s decision has received widespread backlash from intellectual property experts. Some have labeled it a mistake, or an oversight by the patent office. However, as a patent and AI scholar whose Ph.D. aims to address the gaps in patent law created by AI inventorship, I suggest that the decision is supported by the government’s policy environment in recent years. This has aimed to increase innovation and views technology as a way to achieve this.
Creativity machines
Creativity machines can process and critically analyses data, learning from it. This process is known as machine learning. Once the machine learning phase has occurred, the machine can “autonomously” create without human intervention. As has been seen in the COVID pandemic, as just one example, AI can solve problems humans were unable to – and also much faster than people can.
Over the years there have been many kinds of creativity machines. Before DABUS, Thaler built another AI which created novel sheet music, and which he credited with inventing the cross-bristle toothbrush design. He filed a patent for the cross-bristle design, and it was granted – proving AI’s ability to generate truly novel inventions that meet the standards for patents. However, Thaler listed himself, rather than the AI, as the inventor at that time.
When it came to the food container invention by DABUS, Thaler, assisted by Ryan Abbott of the University of Surrey, decided instead to list DABUS as the rightful inventor, as the invention was entirely devised by the AI. This was the start of their push for AI to be recognized as inventors the world over.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office rejected these applications in the formal examination phase. They gave three reasons. First, their respective patent laws only provide for human inventors – not AI – as indicated by the use of pronouns such as “him” and “her” in their text. Second, ideas, for patents, require the element of “mental conception” – something of which only a human mind is capable. Finally, inventorship comes with rights, which AI is not legally capable of possessing.
Read the full story on theconversation.