US Supreme Court rejects computer scientist's lawsuit over AI-generated inventions

Argentina Noticias Noticias

US Supreme Court rejects computer scientist's lawsuit over AI-generated inventions
Argentina Últimas Noticias,Argentina Titulares
  • 📰 Reuters
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 36 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 18%
  • Publisher: 97%

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge by computer scientist Stephen Thaler to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's refusal to issue patents for inventions his artificial intelligence system created.

The justices turned away Thaler's appeal of a lower court's ruling that patents can be issued only to human inventors and that his AI system could not be considered the legal creator of two inventions that he has said it generated.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and a federal judge in Virginia rejected his patent applications for the inventions on the grounds that DABUS is not a person. The patent-focused U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuitthose decisions last year and said U.S. patent law unambiguously requires inventors to be human beings.

Thaler's supporters in his case at the Supreme Court include Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig and other academics who said in a brief that the Federal Circuit's decision "jeopardizes billions in current and future investments, threatens U.S. competitiveness and reaches a result at odds with the plain language of the Patent Act."

Hemos resumido esta noticia para que puedas leerla rápidamente. Si estás interesado en la noticia, puedes leer el texto completo aquí. Leer más:

Reuters /  🏆 2. in US

Argentina Últimas Noticias, Argentina Titulares

Similar News:También puedes leer noticias similares a ésta que hemos recopilado de otras fuentes de noticias.

Supreme court declines oil companies' request to shift climate suits to federal courtThe U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear arguments from oil companies on why a...
Leer más »

Supreme Court justices ‘at each other’s throats’ as abortion pill access upheld legal expert saysSupreme Court justices ‘at each other’s throats’ as abortion pill access upheld legal expert saysThe Supreme Court blocked in full a decision by Texas-based U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk made on April 7 that invalidated the Food and Drug Administration’s longtime approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito publicly dissented from the decision. Joy Reid and her panel discuss.
Leer más »

Supreme Court Rules to Protect Access to the Abortion Pill — For NowSupreme Court Rules to Protect Access to the Abortion Pill — For NowThe court’s ruling means mifepristone will continue to be legal as the case makes its way through the courts.
Leer más »

The Supreme Court fight over an abortion pill: What’s next?The Supreme Court fight over an abortion pill: What’s next?Nothing will change for now. That’s what the Supreme Court said Friday evening about access to a widely used abortion pill.
Leer más »

What’s next for abortion pill after Supreme Court’s orderWhat’s next for abortion pill after Supreme Court’s orderNothing will change for now. That’s what the Supreme Court said Friday evening about access to a widely used abortion pill. A court case that began in Texas has sought to roll back Food and D…
Leer más »

What’s next for abortion pill after Supreme Court’s actionWhat’s next for abortion pill after Supreme Court’s actionHere's a look at the abortion drug at issue, how the case got to the nation’s highest court and what’s next in the legal process.
Leer más »



Render Time: 2025-04-12 15:51:51