{"id":222814,"date":"2019-12-04T11:30:41","date_gmt":"2019-12-04T06:00:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=222814"},"modified":"2019-12-09T17:55:09","modified_gmt":"2019-12-09T12:25:09","slug":"uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/","title":{"rendered":"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court of United Kingdom:<\/strong> Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Hodge, Lady Black and Lord Kitchin, JJ., examined the considerations to be taken into account when deciding whether it is appropriate to award compensation to an employee for an invention made during employment. The instant appeal was filed by Professor Ian Shank (appellant) for compensation under Section 40 of Patents Act, 1977 for an invention made by him in 1982 that was granted patent and which provided benefit to his employer Unilever UK Central Resource Ltd. (3<sup>rd<\/sup> respondent\/ CRL).<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Appellant was the inventor of technology used in glucose testing for diabetics while he was employed at CRL, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Unilever Plc. In October 1982, Shank built the first prototype and was known as ECFD. Appellant accepted that right of his invention belonged to CRL from Section 39(1) of Patents Act, 1977 later these rights were given to Universal Plc. Universal Plc filed for the patents application for both ECFD and FCFD technologies. Since Universal was not interested in developing business so they did little to develop ECFD. Appellant left Unilever in October 1986.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The appellant represented by Patrick Green submitted that court didn\u2019t consider that CRL was appellant employer and the entire Unilever Group can\u2019t be considered as CRL undertaking. The argument was made it is impossible for an employee to establish benefits from the patent of a business and it will also be unjust to employ employee inventors.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The respondent represented by Daniel Alexander submitted that CRL should not be considered as undertaking because it never generated any material revenue and was neither the beneficiary of royalties in question. It was merely a service company for Unilever Group.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The exact amount of the compensation is to be determined in accordance with Section 41 of the Patents Act, which requires that the employee is awarded a \u201cfair share\u201d of the benefit which the employer has derived (or may reasonably be expected to derive) from the invention and\/or the patent. To determine what constitutes a \u201cfair share\u201d, Section 41(4) of the Act provides a number of matters that must be taken into account, including the nature of the employee\u2019s duties and remuneration, the effort and skill which the employee has devoted to making the invention, the contribution of other employees (be they joint inventors or not) and the contribution of the employer to the making, developing and working of the invention by the provision of advice, facilities and other assistance, opportunities, and managerial and commercial skill.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court analysed overall profit and turnover of Unilever Group and found there was an extreme disparity in numerical terms between the amount that Unilever received and the salary that the appellant was paid. It opined that the correct approach is to determine the part played by the size and success of the employer\u2019s business as a whole in securing the benefit from the invention. Shank patent had produced a very high rate of return and Unilever made a small effort to commercialise it. Unilever had generated benefits from Shank\u2019s patent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The appeal of Professor Shank was allowed and it was held that Universal and CRL had an outstanding benefit from the patents of Shank and fair share was not given to appellant. Professor Shanks was awarded \u00a32m compensation, roughly a 5 per cent share of the \u00a324m benefit derived by Unilever from the invention, uplifted from 1999 at an average inflation rate of 2.8 per cent. [Shanks v. Unilever Plc, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/m9GXrDyo\">[2019] 1 WLR 5997<\/a>, decided on 23-10-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of United Kingdom: Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Hodge, Lady Black and Lord Kitchin, <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":56741,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[2728,28744,38657,3554,28954],"class_list":["post-222814","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-compensation","tag-employment","tag-fair-share","tag-patent","tag-salary"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court of United Kingdom: Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Hodge, Lady Black and Lord Kitchin,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-12-04T06:00:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-12-09T12:25:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1260\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"827\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/\",\"name\":\"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-12-04T06:00:41+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-12-09T12:25:09+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\",\"width\":1260,\"height\":827},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer","og_description":"Supreme Court of United Kingdom: Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Hodge, Lady Black and Lord Kitchin,","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-12-04T06:00:41+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-12-09T12:25:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1260,"height":827,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/","name":"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","datePublished":"2019-12-04T06:00:41+00:00","dateModified":"2019-12-09T12:25:09+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","width":1260,"height":827},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/04\/uk-sc-compensation-of-2-million-awarded-to-inventor-of-glucose-testing-kit-holding-that-patent-covering-technology-was-of-outstanding-benefit-to-his-employer\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"UK SC | Compensation of \u00a32 million awarded to inventor of glucose testing kit, holding that patent covering technology was of \u201coutstanding benefit\u201d to his employer"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":281706,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/16\/the-employees-inventions-conundrum\/","url_meta":{"origin":222814,"position":0},"title":"The Employee&#8217;s Inventions Conundrum","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by L. Badri Narayanan\u2020 and Gopal Machiraju\u2020\u2020 Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 4","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Experts Corner&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Employee's Inventions","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-92.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":231482,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/06\/27\/uk-sc-application-of-sufficiency-requirement-is-the-bedrock-of-patent-law-hence-its-diluted-interpretation-would-tilt-the-balance-in-favour-of-patentees-and-against-the-public\/","url_meta":{"origin":222814,"position":1},"title":"UK SC | Application of \u2018sufficiency requirement\u2019 is the bedrock of Patent Law; hence its diluted interpretation would tilt the balance in favour of patentees and against the public","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 27, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of United Kingdom: While deciding the instant appeal which challenged the validity of two patents seeking monopoly over the creation of a range of different types of transgenic mouse, the 5 Judge Bench of Lord Reed (President), Lord Hodge, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Sales, with a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254128,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/13\/dabus-an-artificial-intelligence-system\/","url_meta":{"origin":222814,"position":2},"title":"Here\u2019s how DABUS an Artificial Intelligence System was given status of an \u201cInventor\u201d | Federal Court of Australia\u2019s exhaustive decision on whether a non-human can be named as an inventor","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 13, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Federal Court of Australia: While addressing the question of whether Artificial Intelligence Systems can be an inventor for the purposes of the Patent Act 1990 (Cth), Beach J, expressed that: If the output of an artificial intelligence system is said to be the invention, who is the inventor? And if\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Federal-Court-of-Australia.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Federal-Court-of-Australia.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Federal-Court-of-Australia.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Federal-Court-of-Australia.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/Federal-Court-of-Australia.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254193,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/15\/artificial-intelligence-machine\/","url_meta":{"origin":222814,"position":3},"title":"Everything you need to know on why AI Machine can&#8217;t be &#8220;Inventor&#8221;: US District Court rules AI still to reach sophistication to satisfy meaning of inventorship","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 15, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia: Leonie M Brinkema, J., observed that, Congress's use of the term \"individual\" in the Patent Act strengthens the conclusion that an \"inventor\" must be a natural person. \u201cAs technology evolves, there may come a time when artificial intelligence reaches a level of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-122.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-122.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-122.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-122.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-122.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253878,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/09\/ai-machines-cannot-be-inventors\/","url_meta":{"origin":222814,"position":4},"title":"Artificial Intelligence Machine, can it be granted a patent for its own invention?Demystifying grant of patent to Artificial Intelligence Machine","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"England and Wales High Court (Patents Court): Marcus Smith, J. explained exhaustively whether an \u2018Artificial Intelligence Machine\u2019 DABUS can be categorized as an inventor and granted patent or not. \u201cmerely inventing something does not result in a patent being granted to the inventor.\u201d Appellant had filed two applications in his\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/High-Court-UK.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/High-Court-UK.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/High-Court-UK.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/High-Court-UK.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/High-Court-UK.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":309922,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/22\/inventor-artifical-intelligence-patents-act-1977-dabus-nautral-person-uk-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":222814,"position":5},"title":"&#8220;Inventor within the meaning of Patents Act, 1977 must be a natural person&#8221;; UK SC upholds Comptroller&#8217;s refusal to regard DABUS the AI Machine as &#8216;inventor&#8217;","author":"Sucheta","date":"December 22, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court unanimously stated that the Comptroller was right in determining that the appellant was not entitled to apply for the patents simply by his ownership of DABUS.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"AI DABUS inventor","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/AI-DABUS-inventor.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/AI-DABUS-inventor.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/AI-DABUS-inventor.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/AI-DABUS-inventor.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222814","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=222814"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222814\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/56741"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=222814"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=222814"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=222814"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}