• 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

AI patentability and sufficiency: new UK guidance

September 22, 2022, Gowling WLG

AI patentability and sufficiency: new UK guidance

The UKIPO has today published guidance on patenting artificial intelligence (AI) inventions, together with some useful example scenarios. It will be essential reading for patent specialists working on patenting “applied AI” and “core AI”, including training methods and datasets. The guidance focusses on patentability but also touches on sufficiency of disclosure.

The guidance should be a useful companion to the EPO’s Guidelines of Artificial intelligence and machine learning. The new UK guidance cites and discusses key EPO decisions, but puts more weight on UK case law, noting “decisions made by the UK courts relating to the Patents Act 1977 are binding on our practice, whilst the European Patent Office (EPO) Board of Appeal decisions are considered strongly persuasive.” It does not emphasise the discrepancies between UKIPO and EPO practice or offer specific guidance on resolving them.

The explanations and examples of “applied AI” and “core AI” will be useful to patent specialists and may also prove an effective guide to their clients wishing to understand for themselves the broad outlines of what is patentable and what is not. Given the lack of UK case law on the patentability of AI the detailed examples (albeit non-binding) are very welcome.

The discussion of sufficiency is brief, reciting the principles set out by Kitchin J in Eli Lilly & Company v Human Genome Sciences Inc [2008] EWHC 1903 (Pat) (31 July 2008) and noting a specific EPO decision (T 0161/18 (Äquivalenter Aortendruck/ARC SEIBERSDORF) in which the claimed neural network could not be reworked without disclosure of suitable input data.

The guidance is not about the patentability of inventions by AI. That is an issue to be considered by the UK Supreme Court and which, ideally, will be the subject of harmonised international patent law reform. This is being discussed (again) as I type, in WIPO’s sixth discussion of AI: “Frontier technologies – AI Inventions”.

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, Intellectual Property Tagged With: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Intellectual Property, Patents, Tech

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