3 Minutes
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has clarified how generative artificial intelligence fits into the patent process: it can help inventors, but it cannot be named as an inventor. The updated guidance explains how applicants should treat AI as one of many tools used during invention.
USPTO reframes generative AI as part of the inventor's toolbox
In newly published guidance, the USPTO likens generative AI to laboratory equipment, software, and research databases — useful aids in the creative process but not independent creators. Reuters reported the agency's update, which follows a federal appeals court ruling that only natural persons can be designated as inventors on patent applications and issued patents.
John Squires, head of the office, summed up the stance: "Systems of AI, including generative AI and other computational models, are tools used by human inventors. They may provide services or generate ideas, but they remain instruments in the hands of the human who produced the claimed invention."
What the guidance means for patents and inventorship
The USPTO made clear there is no separate review track for inventions that used AI. Traditional inventorship rules still apply: only people can be listed as inventors, and when multiple humans collaborate — even with AI assistance — established co-inventor principles govern. The updated guidance also adds clarity on patentability questions for innovations developed with AI help, such as drug candidates identified or optimized using generative models.
Imagine a research team that uses a generative model to propose molecular structures. According to the new guidance, the model's output can inform the work, but the patent application should identify the human contributors who conceived the inventive aspects. In short: AI can accelerate discovery, but legal credit goes to people.
Practical steps innovators should take
- Document human contributions clearly — record who conceived the inventive concepts and when.
- Log AI prompts, model versions, and datasets used to show the role the system played.
- Describe AI's role in patent filings: treat it as an enabling tool rather than an inventor.
- Consult patent counsel early when AI materially influences inventive steps or claims.
The guidance aims to bring practical clarity as AI becomes more common in labs and design workflows. While the current legal position — that only humans can be inventors — remains unchanged, the USPTO notes that future technological or legal developments could prompt further updates. For now, companies and researchers can continue to rely on generative AI to boost creativity, but they must preserve and document the human authorship behind any claimed invention.
Leave a Comment