[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 73 (Monday, April 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23408-23410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07953]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: PTO-P-2022-0045]
USPTO AI Inventorship: Notice of Public AI Inventorship Listening
Session--West Coast
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public listening session.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) plays an
important role in incentivizing and protecting innovation, including
innovation enabled by artificial intelligence (AI), to ensure continued
U.S. leadership in AI and other emerging technologies (ET). On February
14, 2023, the USPTO published a Federal Register Notice requesting
comments regarding AI and Inventorship. The USPTO is announcing a
public listening session on May 8, 2023, titled ``AI Inventorship
Listening Session.'' The purpose of the listening session is to seek
stakeholder input on the current state of AI technologies and
inventorship issues that may arise in view of the advancement of such
technologies, as set forth in the questions posed in the Federal
Register Notice of February 14, 2023.
DATES: The AI Inventorship Listening Session will be held on May 8,
2023, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. PT (1 p.m. to 6 p.m. ET). Anyone seeking
to attend in-person or speak, in-person or virtually, at the listening
session must register by 9 a.m. PT (12 p.m. ET) on May 2, 2023. Anyone
seeking to attend virtually at the listening session must register by 2
p.m. PT (5 p.m. ET) May 7, 2023. Seating is limited for in-person
attendance.
ADDRESSES:
The public AI Inventorship Listening Session will take place
virtually and in-person at Stanford University, Paul Brest Hall, 555
Salvatierra Walk, Stanford, CA 94305. All major entrances to the
building are accessible to people with disabilities. Registration is
required for both virtual and in person attendance. Information on
registration is available at https://www.uspto.gov/initiatives/artificial-intelligence/ai-and-emerging-technology-partnership-engagement-and-events. Registrants must indicate whether they are
registering as a listen-only attendee or as a speaker participant. More
information about requests to participate as a speaker is provided
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aleksandr Kerzhner, Supervisory Patent
Examiner, 571-270-1760 or Srilakshmi Kumar, Supervisory Patent
Examiner, 571-272-7769. You can also send inquiries to
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In June 2022, the USPTO announced the formation of the AI/ET
Partnership, which provides an opportunity to bring stakeholders
together through a series of engagements to share ideas, feedback,
experiences, and insights on the intersection of intellectual property
and AI/ET. To build on the AI/ET Partnership efforts, in February 2023,
the USPTO issued a Federal Register Notice titled ``Request for
Comments Regarding Artificial Intelligence and Inventorship,'' 88 FR
9492 (February 14, 2023) (available at https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2023/02/14/2023-03066/request-for-
[[Page 23409]]
comments-regarding-artificial-intelligence-and-inventorship). The AI
Inventorship Request for Comments (RFC) posed 11 questions for public
comment on the current state of AI technologies and inventorship issues
that may arise in view of the advancement of such technologies,
especially as AI plays a greater role in the innovation process. As
indicated by the AI Inventorship RFC, the USPTO will hold stakeholder
engagement sessions that will be announced in the Federal Register and
posted on the AI/ET Partnership web page at https://www.uspto.gov/aipartnership. The USPTO is announcing the second of these stakeholder
engagement sessions through this notice.
II. Public Listening Session
The USPTO will hold a public listening session on May 8, 2023 at
Stanford University, Paul Brest Hall, 555 Salvatierra Walk, Stanford,
CA 94305. The listening session will be held virtually and in person
from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. PT (1 p.m. to 6 p.m. ET). For registration,
please visit https://www.uspto.gov/initiatives/artificial-intelligence/ai-and-emerging-technology-partnership-engagement-and-events.
Registrants must indicate whether they are registering as a listen-only
attendee or as a speaker participant.
Requests to participate as a speaker must include:
1. The name of the person desiring to participate;
2. The organization(s) that person represents, if any;
3. Contact information (zip code, telephone number, and email
address);
4. Information on the specific topic(s) or question(s) from the RFC
of interest to the speaker (or their organization); and
5. Full text of comments to be articulated during the listening
session (discussed further below).
Speaking slots are limited, preference will be given to speakers
based on the specific topic or question(s) provided in the request to
participate. Selected speakers may be grouped by topic. Topics and
speakers will be announced a few days prior to the event and listening
session. Speakers may attend virtually or in person and are required to
submit their remarks for the listening session in advance through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. We will
inform each speaker in advance of their assigned time slot. Time slots
will be at least three minutes but may be longer, depending on the
number of speakers registered. USPTO personnel may reserve time to ask
questions of particular speakers after the delivery of a speaker's
remarks.
The listening session will be physically accessible to people with
disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodation, such as sign
language interpretation or other ancillary aids, should communicate
their needs to Sheila Sanchez at [email protected] as soon
as possible or at least seven (7) business days prior to the listening
session.
III. Questions From the AI Inventorship RFC for Discussion at Listening
Session
The purpose of the listening session is to obtain public input from
a broad group of stakeholders on the current state of AI technologies
and inventorship issues that may arise in view of the advancement of
such technologies, as set forth in the questions presented in the
Federal Register Notice titled ``Request for Comments Regarding
Artificial Intelligence and Inventorship,'' 88 FR 9492 (February 14,
2023) (available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/02/14/2023-03066/request-for-comments-regarding-artificial-intelligence-and-inventorship).
We encourage interested speakers to address the questions posed in
the AI Inventorship RFC and to submit research and data that explain
their comments on these questions. Official written comments to the
questions raised in the AI Inventorship RFC should be submitted as
outlined in the AI Inventorship RFC. For convenience, a list of the AI
Inventorship RFC questions is provided below in their entirety.
1. How is AI, including machine learning, currently being used in
the invention creation process? Please provide specific examples. Are
any of these contributions significant enough to rise to the level of a
joint inventor if they were contributed by a human?
2. How does the use of an AI system in the invention creation
process differ from the use of other technical tools?
3. If an AI system contributes to an invention at the same level as
a human who would be considered a joint inventor, is the invention
patentable under current patent laws? For example:
a. Could 35 U.S.C. 101 and 115 be interpreted such that the Patent
Act only requires the listing of the natural person(s) who invent(s),
such that inventions with additional inventive contributions from an AI
system can be patented as long as the AI system is not listed as an
inventor?
b. Does the current jurisprudence on inventorship and joint
inventorship, including the requirement of conception, support the
position that only the listing of the natural person(s) who invent(s)
is required, such that inventions with additional inventive
contributions from an AI system can be patented as long as the AI
system is not listed as an inventor?
c. Does the number of human inventors impact the answer to the
questions above?
4. Do inventions in which an AI system contributed at the same
level as a joint inventor raise any significant ownership issues? For
example:
a. Do ownership rights vest solely in the natural person(s) who
invented or do those who create, train, maintain, or own the AI system
have ownership rights as well? What about those whose information was
used to train the AI system?
b. Are there situations in which AI-generated contributions are not
owned by any entity and therefore part of the public domain?
5. Is there a need for the USPTO to expand its current guidance on
inventorship to address situations in which AI significantly
contributes to an invention? How should the significance of a
contribution be assessed?
6. Should the USPTO require applicants to provide an explanation of
contributions AI systems made to inventions claimed in patent
applications? If so, how should that be implemented, and what level of
contributions should be disclosed? Should contributions to inventions
made by AI systems be treated differently from contributions made by
other (i.e., non-AI) computer systems?
7. What additional steps, if any, should the USPTO take to further
incentivize AI-enabled innovation (i.e., innovation in which machine
learning or other computational techniques play a significant role in
the invention creation process)?
8. What additional steps, if any, should the USPTO take to mitigate
harms and risks from AI-enabled innovation? In what ways could the
USPTO promote the best practices outlined in the Blueprint for an AI
Bill of Rights \1\ and the AI Risk Management Framework \2\ within the
innovation ecosystem?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ai-bill-of-rights/.
\2\ See https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. What statutory changes, if any, should be considered as to U.S.
inventorship law, and what consequences do you foresee for those
statutory changes? For example:
[[Page 23410]]
a. Should AI systems be made eligible to be listed as an inventor?
Does allowing AI systems to be listed as an inventor promote and
incentivize innovation?
b. Should listing an inventor remain a requirement for a U.S.
patent?
10. Are there any laws or practices in other countries that
effectively address inventorship for inventions with significant
contributions from AI systems?
11. The USPTO plans to continue engaging with stakeholders on the
intersection of AI and intellectual property. What areas of focus
(e.g., obviousness, disclosure, data protection) should the USPTO
prioritize in future engagements?
Katherine K. Vidal,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2023-07953 Filed 4-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P