EmbeddingGemma 2: an open, lightweight multimodal embedding model
deepmind.google·6d ago
AI Engineering
MIT Technology Review·Aug 21·5 min read
When AI designs a drug, who gets the credit?
TL;DR
Insilico Medicine's AI platform proposed a new drug for pulmonary fibrosis, but when patenting, the company credited only human inventors, highlighting a gap in intellectual property law.
✦ Why It Matters
Consider how your AI contributions are recognized in patent applications to protect your innovations.
Key Takeaways
- Understand the current legal framework for AI-generated inventions.
- Document human contributions in AI-driven projects for patent applications.
- Stay informed about evolving intellectual property laws related to AI.
- Consider potential legal challenges when patenting AI-generated innovations.
Full Summary
Insilico Medicine utilized its generative AI to identify a potential drug for pulmonary fibrosis, claiming the molecule was 'discovered by' the AI. However, when filing for a patent, the company listed only human inventors, including its CEO, raising questions about the role of AI in innovation.
A legal case involving an AI named DABUS established that current US law recognizes only humans as inventors, despite AI's capability to generate novel ideas. This situation underscores the need for evolving intellectual property laws to accommodate AI contributions.
As AI systems become more autonomous in drug discovery, the challenge will be determining the extent of human involvement necessary for patent eligibility. The US Patent and Trademark Office currently treats AI as a tool, complicating the patent landscape for AI-generated inventions.