Legal Standing of Artificial Intelligence as Inventors: An International Comparative Patent Study
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The autonomous generation of technical inventions by artificial intelligence creates a profound epistemological crisis within strictly anthropocentric global patent systems. This study aimed to critically analyze the legal standing of artificial inventors and resolve this acute normative vacuum through a comparative doctrinal methodology. The research found that major jurisdictions uniformly reject granting legal personhood to autonomous machines, restricting the inventor designation to biological humans. In Indonesia, although the recent patent amendment successfully expanded protection for digital inventions, it fatally neglected the statutory definition of an inventor, triggering a severe regulatory paradox. This article asserts that granting full legal personhood to artificial intelligence is fundamentally flawed; instead, it proposes the doctrine of augmented inventorship. By mandating a rigorous technical audit through a hybrid contribution statement, this prescriptive framework guarantees absolute traceability of human conception. Ultimately, this novel approach provides an international model that stimulates technological investment while safeguarding intellectual property integrity.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Abbott, Ryan. “Allow Patents on AI-Generated Inventions — for the Good of Science.” Nature 620, no. 7975 (August 24, 2023): 699–699. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02598-2.
———, ed. Research Handbook on Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2022.
———. The Reasonable Robot. Cambridge University Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108631761.
Abbott, Ryan, and Brinson S. Elliott. “Putting the Artificial Intelligence in Alternative Dispute Resolution.” Amicus Curiae 4, no. 3 (June 24, 2023): 685–706. https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v4i3.5627.
Aboy, Mateo, Kathleen Liddell, and Aparajita Lath. “Inventorship in the Age of AI: Examining the USPTO Guidance on AI-Assisted Inventions.” Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice 20, no. 7 (August 5, 2025): 495–502. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpaf019.
Afshar, Mimi S. “Artificial Intelligence and Inventorship-Does the Patent Inventor Have to Be Human?” Hastings Science and Technology Law Journal 13, no. 1 (2022): 55–72. https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_science_technology_law_journal/vol13/iss1/5/.
Almarzoqi, Reem, and Mohamad Albakjaji. “The Patentability of AI Invention.” International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology 13, no. 1 (July 8, 2022): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSSMET.307111.
Barqawi, Laila, and Mohammad Abdallah. “Copyright and Generative AI.” Journal of Infrastructure Policy and Development 8, no. 8 (August 6, 2024): 6253. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i8.6253.
Bonadio, Enrico, Plamen Dinev, and Luke McDonagh. “Can Artificial Intelligence Infringe Copyright? Some Reflections.” In The Human Cause, 245–57. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2022. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800881907.00019.
Ding, Wen, and Shemin Deng. “The Patentability of AI-Generated Technical Solutions and Institutional Responses: Chinese Perspective vs. Other Countries.” Information 16, no. 8 (July 24, 2025): 629. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16080629.
Dreyfuss, Rochelle, and Justine Pila, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law. Vol. 1. Oxford University Press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198758457.001.0001.
Gaffar, Hafiz, and Saleh Albarashdi. “Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Works: Exploring Originality and Ownership in a Digital Landscape.” Asian Journal of International Law 15, no. 1 (January 23, 2025): 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251323000735.
Gerber, Aurona, and Anban W. Pillay, eds. Artificial Intelligence Research. Vol. 2784. Communications in Computer and Information Science. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-11733-5.
Hutchinson, Terry. “Doctrinal Research.” In Research Methods in Law, 8–38. London: Routledge, 2025. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032710372-2.
Igbokwe, Ezinne Mirian. “Human to Machine Innovation: Does Legal Personhood and Inventorship Threshold Offer Any Leeway?” The Journal of World Intellectual Property 27, no. 2 (July 24, 2024): 149–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/jwip.12294.
Malik, Salim. “AI Continues to Be a Game Changer in the Intellectual Property Management in India.” Interantional Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management 09, no. 02 (February 1, 2025): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.55041/ijsrem41289.
Matulionyte, Rita. “‘AI Is Not an Inventor’: Thaler v Comptroller of Patents, Designs and Trademarks and the Patentability of AI Inventions.” The Modern Law Review 88, no. 1 (January 5, 2025): 205–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12907.
Mehrotra, Ananya. “Navigating the Intellectual Property Landscape in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Towards a Global Legal Paradigm.” International Journal of Innovations in Science, Engineering And Management 3, no. 2 (December 30, 2024): 253–58. https://doi.org/10.69968/ijisem.2024v3si2253-258.
Nadgir, Krupa, Lahari R, M Nithyashree, Manasa S, and Shruthi M N. “Patentability of AI-Generated Inventions: A Comparative Analysis of Global Patent Law Frameworks and Their Adaptation to Artificial Intelligence Innovation.” International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research 7, no. 3 (June 22, 2025). https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i03.48811.
Rahmatillah, Raihan, and Sanusi Sanusi. “Patent Protection for Artificial Intelligence: A Comparative Study of Indonesia and the United States.” Student Journal of International Law 4, no. 1 (December 30, 2024): 42–56. https://doi.org/10.24815/sjil.v4i1.31473.
Rahmawati, Argiasri, and Prameswari Dlauissama. “Intellectual Property Rights and Artificial Intelligence: A Legal Exploration in Indonesia.” Advances in Public Law and Crime 1, no. 1 (October 10, 2024): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.69725/plice.v1i1.119.
Rizal, Muhamad, Sinta Dewi, and Agus Taryana. “Reforming Patent Law in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.” Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum 10, no. 2 (2026): 179–95. https://doi.org/10.24198/jbmh.v10i2.2533.
Rumahorbo, Veni Theresya Fortuna, Evi, and Ivans Januardy. “Patent Protection for Artificial Intelligence as Computer-Implemented Inventions Between Indonesia and Japan.” International Journal of Science and Society 7, no. 1 (March 21, 2025): 629–40. https://doi.org/10.54783/ijsoc.v7i1.978.
Solum, Lawrence B. “Legal Personhood for Artificial Intelligences.” In Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics, 415–71. Routledge, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003074991-37.
Tzimas, Th. “Evolution of Copyright in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: Analysis of Conflicts of Law and Judicial Precedents.” Journal of Digital Technologies and Law 3, no. 1 (March 27, 2025): 35–64. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2025.2.
United States Patent and Trademark Office. “Revised Inventorship Guidance for AI-Assisted Inventions.” Federal Register, 2025. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/28/2025-21457/revised-inventorship-guidance-for-ai-assisted-inventions.
Wallach, Wendell, and Peter Asaro. Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics. Edited by Wendell Wallach and Peter Asaro. Routledge, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003074991.
Wang, Joanna. “Navigating the USPTO’s AI Inventorship Guidance in AI-Driven Drug Discovery.” Journal of Law and the Biosciences 12, no. 2 (July 11, 2025). https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaf014.
Wibowo, Richard Jatimulya Alam. “Ciptaan Dan Invensi Hasil Kecerdasan Buatan Dalam Perspektif Hak Cipta Dan Paten.” Jurnal Ilmiah Kebijakan Hukum 17, no. 3 (November 30, 2023): 269–88. https://doi.org/10.30641/kebijakan.2023.V17.269-288.