Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer merely a tool of invention. It has become an inventor. As AI systems increasingly contribute to the design and discovery of new technologies, their involvement raises novel challenges for patent law. This essay presents the first empirical test of whether jurors systematically perceive alleged patent infringement differently when a product is designed by AI rather than human engineers. In a controlled experiment involving a hypothetical patent dispute, participants were significantly more likely to find infringement, award higher damages, and judge business practices as less ethical when a putatively infringing device was designed by AI. These findings reveal a legally irrelevant but psychologically powerful distortion in adjudicating AI‐designed products, with serious implications for firms, innovation policy, and the future structure of patent incentives. We conclude by discussing strategies for business leaders, litigators, and policymakers as AI becomes a central actor in technological innovation.
Avery et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: