10 August 2021PatentsRichard Hamer, Lauren John and Alexandra Moloney
DABUS: decoding Australia’s AI decision
In a world first judicial decision, Justice Beach of the Federal Court of Australia determined that an AI machine can be named as an inventor on a patent application. The decision, Thaler v Commissioner of Patents, is the first judicial determination in the world permitting a non-person to be named as an inventor. A non-human inventor can still not be an applicant or grantee of a patent—only a natural person or corporation can apply for or be granted a patent.
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk
12 May 2023 Recent Australian decisions have resulted in both new opportunities to challenge patent term extensions in Australia and new patent prosecution practices to shield against them. We summarise here what is known about PTE, and the areas that are ripe for further challenge.
6 May 2022 The Federal Court of Australia has ruled that local stapler company Airco Fasteners infringed a patent from Fortune 200 engineering firm Illinois Tool Works.