Concern 855 · Working draft · editorial review in progress
Inventorship of AI-assisted inventions
AI-assisted inventorship concerns whether a human conceived an invention that qualifies for a patent, even when AI helped develop it.
Understanding the concern
A patent can protect a qualifying invention, such as a new technical process. When AI suggests a design, the question is not just who pressed the button. Patent offices must consider the human contribution to the claimed invention, as well as separate requirements such as novelty and usefulness.
US guidance issued in November 2025 applies the ordinary human inventorship standard and replaces the earlier 2024 guidance. AI cannot be named as an inventor under that guidance. A lab instrument may help a scientist discover a solution without becoming a co-inventor itself. Still, merely owning the instrument does not show that someone conceived the invention.
An example
A team uses AI to explore designs and must identify which people actually conceived the invention described in its patent application.
Illustrative unless identified as a documented case.
Words in plain English
- AI
- Software that learns patterns from examples or uses rules to perform tasks such as recognizing images or generating text. It can make mistakes and does not understand every situation as a person would.
Evidence and its limits
The source addresses US inventorship, not every test of patent eligibility or patentability. Other jurisdictions require their own analysis.
US Patent and Trademark Office · Official examination guidance
Revised Inventorship Guidance for AI-Assisted Inventions ↗ (opens in a new tab)November 2025 guidance rescinds the 2024 guidance and applies the ordinary human inventorship standard. Inventorship is distinct from novelty and other patent requirements.
Broader frameworks and background
These resources provide context. They do not establish every claim in this concern.
- EU AI Act — high-level summary (opens in a new tab)
regulation
- Council of Europe AI Convention (opens in a new tab)
regulation
- International humanitarian law (IHL)
framework
The body of law that governs the conduct of armed conflict and the protection of people who are not fighting, which applies to AI used in or for conflict.
A question to discuss
What did each human contribute to the specific invention, and is that contribution documented?
Keep track of different views, what needs checking, and any next step in your own discussion notes.
Open discussion notes →Principles for the conversation
Before you finish · reflect together
Virtues and principles to consider
Virtues are qualities we practice in how we treat people and make choices. They are not scores for judging someone. Use these ideas to explore what a thoughtful response could look like.
Justice
Justice means fair treatment, fair procedures, and attention to who receives benefits and burdens. It asks whether people with less power can be heard and seek repair.
Look at outcomes across different groups and individual cases. Provide a usable way to challenge decisions and correct harm. Equal wording in a policy does not guarantee equal treatment in practice.
Ask together: Who benefits, who bears the cost, and who can challenge the decision?
Accountability
Accountability means being answerable for decisions and taking responsibility for repair. It requires more than saying that the software made the choice.
Name the person or team responsible, keep useful records, and give them authority to correct problems. Make the route to a complaint clear to the people affected.
Ask together: Who will answer for the outcome and help put things right?
Dignity
Dignity means recognizing each person's worth regardless of usefulness, status, or a system's score. People deserve respect and a voice in matters that affect them.
Explain important decisions, avoid humiliating treatment, and keep room for a person's story. Do not treat a prediction as a complete account of who someone is.
Ask together: Does this use treat each person as someone whose experience matters?
Editorial ratings
These are editorial judgments from the register, not measured probabilities or predictions about your situation.
About the register and scoring →More ways to explore
Search for more writing
For more specific or recent material, open a search below or ask for a web summary. AI-generated summaries can contain mistakes; open the original articles to check them.