AI 발명·특허출원을 통하여 살펴본 현행 특허법상 발명자 보호의 문제

It was a legal issue for AI invention to have been applied for patent in United Kingdom (UK), European Patent Office (EPO), and United States. UK Intellectual Property Office and EPO have rejected the attempt for patent registration of an AI as a official inventor. The grounds for such decision was that the applicant did not meet the requirement of the UK Patent Act and European Patent Convention; the designation of the real inventor such as his/her name and address. To say in other words is that the inventor is only human being. In light of inventor’s legal status and rights under the patent law of other countries, the legal infrastructure of the inventor protection under existing Patent Act of Korea (PAK) are vulnerable in responding to the technology-driven society reformation of rapid AI development. There is one property right that is the right to obtain patent to inventor or his/her successor which protects the right sourced an invention. In real the scope of the right is so broad or unclear to apply to a certain case. The right implies nothing but the expectation towards the patent grant until patent is issued by patent examiner after the completion of invention. It is necessary to revise the title of Article 33 of PAK. It could be the ‘right to apply for patent’ rather than ‘the right to obtain patent.’ The moral right of inventor such as the right of attribution has not been established since the legislation of PAK. When a named AI invention(not human invention) tries to apply and obtain patent, or when a person facilitating AI invention such as a programmer or a person who had the original idea for AI invention is considered as an inventor, the case is that they take a devious route in order to get the grant of patent. A standard of judgement and legal principle does not permit the grant of patent for the technical information from machine. As demanding the reward of AI innovative activities, the right of attribution is needed for the promotion of a inventor’s intellectual creation rather than for AI protection. The moral right reflects social evaluation for the creative activities of inventor to the public.