Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The advancement of AI, especially generative AI, has brought the inventor designation debate back to the forefront. Can an AI system be considered an inventor when it does not have legal personality? This paradox, highlighted by the DABUS case, requires the exploration of both practical and legal as-pects. Even though the EPO considers AI-generated inventions to be “computer-implemented inven-tions”, the key question that more and more people are asking is this: Can AI really invent something new independently, or is it just a tool for human inventors? Most countries, including those in the EU, maintain that only humans can be inventors and therefore patents cannot be granted to machines, regardless of their capabilities, thus supporting the European human-centred approach. To elucidate this complex issue, we aim to analyze cases like DABUS, taking into account the advances in AI and the position of experts. This will help identify challenges and potentially redefine the legal landscape for AI-generated inventions in the future.
Irina Buzu (Mon,) studied this question.