Here we discuss the complex issue of AI-assisted inventions and its implications for patent law. Robert Plotkin presents three perspectives on AI's role in invention, highlighting the challenges to traditional understandings of inventorship. Commenters offer rebuttals, arguing that AI itself cannot be an inventor and raising concerns about the legal definition of an inventor and the implications for future inventions. The debate centres on whether AI is merely a tool or a collaborator in invention, and who should be legally recognised as the inventor in AI-assisted creations. The discussion also touches on the legal implications for other non-human legal entities in patent law.

Show notes

📌 Here you can find the original post from Robert Plotkin on LinkedIn

📌 Here is an overview of AI-assisted invention processes on the 🔗dIPlex:

📌 Here is an overview of AI-generated inventions and patents 🔗dIPlex:

📌 Here you can find a case study on the application of AI for white spot analysis and systematic invention generation on the IP Business Academy blog from our master class training program with the European Patent Office (MIPLM Master for IP Law and Management):

📌 Here you can find Robert Plotkin on LinkedIn:

📌 Robert Plotkin is available for a free initial consultation, which you can find here

📌 His book, AI Armor: Securing the Future of Your AI Company with Strategic Intellectual Property

📌 Please note the current Call for Subject Matter Experts for the IP Business Academy

📌 Here you can find the newsletter 🎯𝗜𝗣 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗣𝘂𝗹𝘀𝗲 which reports every 14 days on the most important news worldwide in IP and IP management:

📌 The newsletter 🎯𝗜𝗣 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗣𝘂𝗹𝘀𝗲 also has an archive of all previous issues in which you can research topics, which you can find here: