It’s a slippery slope

David G. Henry, "Subject: Opposition to AI-Inventor Patents," Email to aipartnership, 9-24-2019, https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/David-Henry-01_RFC-84-FR-44889.pdf

In my opinion, patents should not be granted on the basis of artificial intelligence “inventors”. As I have taught my law students for many years, the patent system (as well as other intellectual property protections) represent a carve‐out from our otherwise free enterprise system. The latter serving the purpose of providing ever better and more affordable goods and services through the process of competition.

The Framers and society since then were willing to make the collective societal sacrifice represented by limited monopolies, for the express purpose of promoting and rewarding innovation that solves our unmet needs and problems.

I have very strong reservations toward extending this reward system to inanimate systems and objects. This reservation is, in part, based on a seemingly nonsensical concept of somehow intrinsically rewarding an inanimate object. Further, offering patent protection to inanimate inventors will quite literally put humans (who “own“ this society) in competition with such inanimate properties.

I am sure that contrary arguments can be made, including that the reward of patent protection for AI‐invented technology ultimately rewards the human developers of the AI device or system. Even so, I stand by my opposition to that which I see as a slippery slope, the ultimate end of which cannot now be reliably predicted.