Fenwick’s Antonia Sequeira and Fredrick Tsang recently sat down with Science to discuss the trillion-dollar question on everyone’s minds: If AI discovers a drug, who owns and monetizes it?
While an appellate court decision said AI cannot be a sole inventor, the legal landscape is largely undeveloped, with new guidance from the patent office providing some additional direction, they said.
“Though there haven't been many case decisions coming out that change the landscape, the U.S. Patent Office a few months ago issued a new guidance on how it will handle inventions that might involve an AI assistant,” Tsang told Science.
“The guidance treats AI more as a computer or laboratory tool that humans are using,” Sequeira added. “But ultimately, it's the courts that will tell us what the state of the law will be. There's definitely a great deal of uncertainty on how it's all going to settle down.”
Their ranging Q&A explores possible pitfalls and mitigation steps while using AI, the role (and rights) of AI developers, alternative profit models, and more.
“Going forward, AI will only become more and more standard. Eventually, investors are going to demand that you use AI. They won't want to wait 15 years; they'll want results in five,” Sequeira told Science. “Sorting this out now helps accelerate development, which ultimately benefits patients.”
Read the full interview at Science.