• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy
  • Home
  • About
  • Posts
  • Blogs
    • B2022
    • The IP Blog
    • Public Law & Regulation
    • AI
    • The Unified Patents Court

LoupedIn

Will the US drive greater IP protection for AI?

June 23, 2021, Gowling WLG

Will the US drive greater IP protection for AI?

The US National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence has concluded that IP policy for AI is a US “national security priority” and has called for a review of patent eligibility for AI-related inventions and IP protection for data. An upcoming “Global Emerging Technology Summit” on 13 July may drive the agenda forward.

There has been growing interest in the protection of AI-related assets over the last five or so years. A number of authorities have published reports and held significant consultations, including the EPO’s Guidelines on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, the European Commission’s report on AI-assisted creativity and invention, WIPO’s series of “Conversations” on Intellectual Property and Artificial Intelligence and the UK Government’s “Call for Views”.

So far, however, there has been little concrete change to IP law in this area. Notable cases have clarified the status quo. These include the DABUS cases, which have confirmed that inventions by AI are not patentable in the US, UK or before the EPO, and the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G1/19, confirming the “Comvik” approach to the the inventiveness of computer-implemented simulations. (One exception is the EU’s Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, which adopted and extended the UK’s exception to copyright infringement for “text and data mining”.)

A warning from the US National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence that IP policy for AI is a “national security priority” might accelerate legislative change in the US and drive the timeline for change elsewhere. The Commission published its Final Report in March and IP practitioners should read Chapter 12 (on IP) and the related “Blueprints for Action”. Among the recommendations are consideration of expanding patent eligibility for AI-related inventions and IP protection of data. In the Commission’s view, the US Government should give companies alternatives to relying on trade secrets, which “do not contribute to accessible technical knowledge in the public domain” and which raise concerning “long-term effects on AI and other emerging technology developments and competitiveness”.

The National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence has announced a “Global Emerging Technology Summit” on 13 July “to convene key democratic nations, international organization leaders, and private sector entities to define parameters for collaboration on global emerging technology issues”. Details are here.

About the author(s)

Gowling WLG
See recent postsBlog biography

Gowling WLG is an international law firm operating across an array of different sectors and services. Our LoupedIn blog aims to give readers industry insight, technical knowledge and thoughtful observations on the legal landscape and beyond.

  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    Ensuring the emerging geography of AI doesn’t become a TRAIN-wreck
  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    Celebrating Black History Month: Stories from our community
  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    No revocation carve-out and related actions – 2nd UPC decision on the merits
  • Gowling WLG
    https://loupedin.blog/author/gowlingwlg/
    The first UPC decision on the merits is here

Gowling WLG

Gowling WLG is an international law firm operating across an array of different sectors and services. Our LoupedIn blog aims to give readers industry insight, technical knowledge and thoughtful observations on the legal landscape and beyond.

Filed Under: AI, Analysis, Intellectual Property Tagged With: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Intellectual Property

Views expressed in this blog do not necessarily reflect those of Gowling WLG.

NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Information made available on this website in any form is for information purposes only. It is not, and should not be taken as, legal advice. You should not rely on, or take or fail to take any action based upon this information. Never disregard professional legal advice or delay in seeking legal advice because of something you have read on this website. Gowling WLG professionals will be pleased to discuss resolutions to specific legal concerns you may have.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Sole(ly) aesthetic? The Birkenstock Sandal goes to the Federal Court of Justice
  • UK Litigation Funding: reform or retain?
  • Arbitration Act 2025 receives Royal Assent

Tags

Artificial Intelligence (AI) (62) Autonomous vehicles (11) b2022 (19) Birmingham 2022 (8) Birmingham 2022 Commonwealth Games (15) Brexit (23) Climate change (16) Collective defined contribution (6) COP26 (11) Copyright (11) COVID-19 (23) Cyber security (7) Data protection (8) Defined contribution (7) Dispute Resolution (14) Employment (14) employment law (11) Environment (18) Environmental Societal Governance (9) ESG (50) ESG and pensions (11) General Election 2024 and pensions (8) Intellectual Property (86) IP (10) Life sciences (7) litigation funding (8) net zero (6) Patents (40) Pensions (53) Pension Schemes Act 2021 (11) Pensions dashboards (7) Pensions in 2022 (10) Pensions law (43) Procurement (7) Public Law & Regulation (39) Real Estate (27) Retail (8) sustainability (21) Tech (58) The Week In Pensions (11) Trademarks (16) UK (15) unified patents court (9) UPC (39) Week in HR (8)

Categories

Archives

Gowling WLG is an international law firm comprising the members of Gowling WLG International Limited, an English Company Limited by Guarantee, and their respective affiliates. Each member and affiliate is an autonomous and independent entity. Gowling WLG International Limited promotes, facilitates and co-ordinates the activities of its members but does not itself provide services to clients. Our structure is explained in more detail on our Legal Information page.

Footer

  • Home
  • About
  • Gowling WLG
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • Cookie Policy

© 2025 Gowling WLG