"Concerns Over Excessive Infringement in Creative Fields Due to 'Denial' of AI Invention and Patent Rights"

A survey revealed that the majority of the public holds a 'negative' perception regarding granting inventor status to artificial intelligence and awarding patent rights for inventions made by AI. The respondents also expressed caution about AI excessively infringing on human creative domains.

On the 14th, the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) released the results of a 'Public Survey on AI Inventors.' The survey was conducted from July 20 to September 30 on the KIPO website, involving 1,204 general public participants from a non-expert group and 292 experts including patent attorneys, researchers from large corporations, and public research institutions.

Among the general public group, 49.5% of respondents were in their 20s to 30s, indicating that interest in AI is concentrated among younger generations. In the expert group, patent attorneys accounted for 48.6% and university and public institution researchers 33.6% of participants. Additionally, 23 individuals from the arts sector and 29 students participated in the expert group survey.

The survey revealed differences in perspectives on AI between the general public and experts. While 70% of the general public perceived AI as an 'inventive partner,' 66% of experts viewed AI as a kind of 'inventive tool.'

The general public recognized AI as a partner due to the increasing use of high-performance AI such as Chat GPT in daily life (translation, consultation, search, etc.) and the perception that AI development is progressing very rapidly.

Conversely, experts evaluated AI as still being at the level of a tool assisting humans, based on the fact that many aspects still need improvement in specialized fields such as invention development. This difference in perception explains the divergence between the two groups.

Provided by the Korean Intellectual Property Office

The expert group's negative perception of AI was similarly reflected in their views on recognizing AI as an inventor and patent holder.

In the survey conducted among experts, 60.8% opposed recognizing AI as an inventor, and 75.6% opposed recognizing AI as a patent holder.

This suggests an underlying perception that "AI is not yet suitable to act as a subject of legal rights and obligations."

If AI's contribution to an invention is acknowledged and patent rights must be granted, the majority opinion was that the AI user (human) should hold the patent rights.

Provided by the Korean Intellectual Property Office

Both the general public and expert groups agreed that patents contributed to by AI should be recognized with a shorter protection period than the current patent term of 20 years. In this case, 75% of the general public and 65% of experts expressed opinions favoring a lower level of protection than current patents or no protection at all.

KIPO analyzed that the background for viewing the protection level for AI-contributed patents as low stems from concerns that "AI can produce many inventions in a short time, potentially excessively infringing on human creative domains."

Detailed information about the survey results is available to anyone on the KIPO website.

In particular, KIPO plans to present the survey results as a topic at the 'Korea-China-Japan Intellectual Property Office Heads Meeting' scheduled for the end of this month and to propose it as an agenda item at next year's IP5 (Korea, China, Japan, the US, and Europe) Heads Meeting to be held in Korea.

Lee In-sil, Commissioner of KIPO, stated, "We confirmed through the public survey that there is high national interest in AI," adding, "Going forward, KIPO will take a leading role in discussions on AI-related patent systems with IP5 and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to establish internationally harmonized patent systems."

Meanwhile, the debate over granting inventor status and patent rights to AI is not limited to Korea, and this controversy was ignited by American AI developer Steven Taylor.

Diagram of the invention process of 'Dabus'. Dabus is an artificial intelligence developed by American AI expert Steven Taylor. Provided by the Patent Office.

Steven Taylor claimed that the AI he developed, ‘Dabus,’ independently created two inventions including a food container by learning general knowledge, and filed international patents (PCT) listing Dabus as the inventor in 16 countries including Korea.

However, KIPO ruled that "patent applications listing AI, which is not a natural person, as an inventor are not permitted," invalidating the application. Currently, most countries including the US, Europe, and Australia maintain the position (including Supreme Court rulings) that it is difficult to grant legal status to AI as an inventor.

Nonetheless, there is a consensus that this stance may change in the long term.

Despite major countries' courts denying AI inventor status, recent cases of AI contributing to the creation of works in fields such as art and music are emerging daily. Additionally, AI has shortened semiconductor chip development from several months to six hours and improved the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines by over 100 times, expanding its scope and contribution. It is difficult to ignore these developments indefinitely.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.