Abstract：With the fact that artificial intelligence-generated inventions are not inventions of natural persons,it is difficult to fill in the “inventor”when filing patent applications based on them,which brings severe challenges to the current patent system with “inventions of natural persons” as its core.In order to avoid the chaos of applicants regarding natural persons as inventors for artificial intelligence-generated inventions,it is necessary to appropriately adjust the inventor system and respective patent application rules.In accordance with the basic principles of the patent law,the legal requirement of filling in the “inventor” as patent applicant is not to limit the inventor's exercise of the authorship right,but to protect the moral rights and economic benefits that the inventor should enjoy for his or her inventions and creations.To cope with the dilemma that artificial intelligence cannot be a legitimate inventor due to its lack of qualifications of a legal subject,it should be no longer mandatory to require patent applicants to fill in the inventors in the application documents.This way can solve the practical problem of filling in inventor in the process of patent application for artificial intelligence-generated inventions and ensure the freedom of inventors to properly exercise the right of authorship.
李青文. 人工智能对发明人制度的挑战及应对策略[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2023(8): 128-138.
Li Qingwen. The Challenge of Artificial Intelligence to the Inventor System and Its Countermeasures. , 2023(8): 128-138.
[1]The Artificial Inventor Project.Patents and applications[EB/OL]. (2021-07-28)[2023-01-18].https://artificial inventor.com/patent-applications/. [2]THALER V.Commissioner of patents,2021,FCA879[EB/OL]. (2021-07-30)[2023-01-18].https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2021/2021fca0879. [3]李宗辉.历史视野下的知识产权制度[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2015:119. [4]COLIN R D.An evolutionary step in intellectual property rights:artificial intelligence and intellectual property[J].Computer law & security review,2011,27 (6):616-617. [5]吴广海.专利法:原理、法规与案例[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2014:177. [6]ENRICO B,LUKE M,CHRISTOPHER A.Intellectual property aspects of robotics[J].European journal of risk regulation (EJRR),2018,9 (4):655-676. [7]Beech Aircraft Corp.v.EDO Corp.,990 F.2d 1237,1248 (Fed.Cir.1993)[EB/OL]. (1993-04-22)[2023-01-18].https://1.next.westlaw.com/. [8]MARIA M M G.The concept of inventor in patent law and artificial intelligence systems[J].Cuadernos de derecho transnacional,2020,12 (2):510-526. [9]斯拉茨基.发明分析与权利要求撰写——专利律师指南:第2版[M].吴军芳,马天旗,吕占江,等译.北京:知识产权出版社,2020:268-277. [10]CHRISTIANE M,CARRIE R.AI and IP:are creativity and inventorship inherently human activities[J].FIU law review,2020,14 (2):275-292. [11]琼斯.人工智能+:AI与IA如何重塑未来[M].张臣雄,译.北京:机械工业出版社,2018:4-7. [12]Tpro,Nikkei Computer.人工智能新时代:全球人工智能应用真实落地50例[M].杨洋,刘继红,译.北京:电子工业出版社,2018:23. [13]ERIKA K C.Artificial intelligence can invent but not patent-for now[J].Engineering,2020,6 (11):1212-1213 [14]HORTON M,KIM A.Inventorship:why AI is not smart enough yet[J].Managing intellectual property,2020,286:19-21. [15]DANL B.AI patents and the self-assembling machine[J].Minnesota law review headnotes,2021,105 (2):301-322. [16]BEN H,JOSHUA G.Patents in an era of infinite monkeys and artificial intelligence[J].Stanford technology law review,2015,19 (1):32-51. [17]MICHAEL S W.Artificial intelligence and patent ownership[J].Washington and Lee law review,2018,75 (4):1945-2004. [18]穆勒.专利法:第3版[M].沈超,李华,吴晓辉,等译.北京:知识产权出版社,2013:91. [19]梁志文.论人工智能创造物的法律保护[J].法律科学 (西北政法大学学报),2017,35 (5):156-165. [20]范长军.德国专利法研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2010:52. [21]青山纮一.日本专利法概论[M].聂宁乐,译.北京:知识产权出版社,2014:116. [22]罗杰·谢科特,约翰·托马斯.专利法原理:第2版[M].余仲儒,译.北京:知识产权出版社,2016:203-204. [23]刘磊.专利法的法益研究[M].沈阳:辽宁人民出版社,2017:69. [24]Beco Dairy Automation,Inc.v.Glob.Tech Sys.,Inc.,104 F.Supp.3d 1023,1036 (E.D.Cal.2015)[EB/OL]. (2015-05-08)[2023-01-18].https://1.next.westlaw.com/. [25]吴汉东.知识产权法学:第6版[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2014:122. [26]彭玉勇.专利法原论[M].北京:法律出版社,2019:61. [27]FRITZ W F.Muddy metaphysics of joint inventorship:cleaning up after the 1984 amendments to 35 U.S.C.116[J].Harvard journal of law & technology,1992,5 (2):153-208. [28]曹新明,马子斌.基于激励理论的人工智能发明人身份探究[J].科技与法律,2021 (2):42-50. [29]管育鹰.知识产权法学的新发展[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2013:93. [30]田村善之.日本现代知识产权法理论[M].李扬,译.北京:法律出版社,2010:73. [31]JAMES G.There's no such thing as a computer-authored work-and it's a good thing,too[J].Columbia journal of law & the arts,2016,39 (3):403-416. [32]陈全真.人工智能生成技术方案的专利授权:理论争议、政策考量及权属安排[J].科学管理研究,2022,40 (3):40-48. [33]曹建峰,祝林华.人工智能对专利制度的影响初探[J].中国发明与专利,2018,15 (6):53-57. [34]吴汉东.人工智能生成发明的专利法之问[J].当代法学,2019,33 (4):24-38. [35]邓建志,程智婷.人工智能对专利保护制度的挑战与应对[J].南昌大学学报 (人文社会科学版),2019,50 (2):15-24. [36]刘鑫.人工智能生成技术方案的专利法规制:理论争议、实践难题与法律对策[J].法律科学 (西北政法大学学报),2019,37 (5):82-92 [37]BASHEER S.Artificial invention:mind the machine[J].SCRIPTed:a journal of law,technology and society,2016,13 (3):334-358. [38]ANNA C C.AI:artificial inventor or the real deal[J].North Carolina journal of law & technology,2021,22 (3):447-486. [39]朱雪忠,张广伟.人工智能产生的技术成果可专利性及其权利归属研究[J].情报杂志,2018,37 (2):69-75. [40]刘友华,李麟.人工智能生成物专利保护的正当性及专利法因应[J].福建江夏学院学报,2018,8 (4):22-29. [41]李青文.科技伦理视阙下人工智能法律主体地位之否定:以机器能否具备自由意志能力为分析路径[J].科学管理研究,2022,40 (2):40-48. [42]吴汉东,张平,张晓津.人工智能对知识产权法律保护的挑战[J].中国法律评论,2018 (2):1-24. [43]MICHAEL M.Computer-generated inventions[J].Journal of the patent and trademark office society,2019,101 (2):224-251. [44]李宗辉.人工智能生成发明专利授权之正当性探析[J].电子知识产权,2019 (1):12-21.
2023, 
