← All Authorities
United States Leading Case patents

Thaler v Vidal

43 F.4th 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2022)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Year2022
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Under the US Patent Act, an 'inventor' must be a natural person; an artificial intelligence system cannot be named as an inventor on a patent application.

Key Principle

An artificial intelligence system cannot be listed as an 'inventor' on a patent application under the Patent Act; an 'inventor' must be a natural person.

Area of Law

ip

Related Cases

Cantarella Bros Pty Ltd v Modena Trading Pty Ltd (2014) 254 CLR 337

Foreign words used as trademarks are assessed for descriptiveness in the Australian English-speaking market; Italian words for coffee were registrable as not inherently descriptive.

Phonographic Performance Company of Australia Ltd v Commonwealth (2012) 246 CLR 561

Statutory licence scheme for sound recordings validly enacted under constitutional copyright power and did not constitute an unjust acquisition of property.

Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd (2012) 248 CLR 42

An ISP that failed to act on infringement notices did not authorise subscribers' copyright infringement via BitTorrent, as it lacked the requisite control over the infringing acts.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Thaler v Vidal and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Thaler v Vidal