{"id":9221,"date":"2024-04-12T18:34:21","date_gmt":"2024-04-12T18:34:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ncjolt.org\/?p=9221"},"modified":"2024-04-12T18:34:21","modified_gmt":"2024-04-12T18:34:21","slug":"the-non-obvious-razor-generative-ai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/the-non-obvious-razor-generative-ai\/","title":{"rendered":"THE NON-OBVIOUS RAZOR &amp; GENERATIVE AI"},"content":{"rendered":"<a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2024\/04\/Haque-Final.pdf\" class=\"pdfemb-viewer\" style=\"\" data-width=\"max\" data-height=\"max\" data-mobile-width=\"500\"  data-scrollbar=\"none\" data-download=\"off\" data-tracking=\"on\" data-newwindow=\"on\" data-pagetextbox=\"off\" data-scrolltotop=\"off\" data-startzoom=\"100\" data-startfpzoom=\"100\" data-toolbar=\"bottom\" data-toolbar-fixed=\"off\">Haque-Final<br\/><\/a>\n<p class=\"wp-block-pdfemb-pdf-embedder-viewer\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>This Article examines the challenges and prospects of crowd\u2011sourcing generative artificial intelligence (\u201cGenAI\u201d) systems in patent law as human and machine creativity become seamless. As GenAI technologies like GPT-4 become ubiquitous, AI-generated solutions will be less innovative and will complicate tenets about patentability. An evolution of patent law\u2019s non-obviousness standard provides an elegant solution\u2013\u2013borrowing from philosophy, a \u201crazor\u201d\u2013\u2013to address the impact of advanced artificial intelligence (\u201cAI\u201d) on the innovation process. This Article\u2019s thesis is distinct from the United States Patent and Trademark Office\u2019s (\u201cUSPTO\u201d) emphasis on whether or not AI systems can be inventors, because it assumes that human and artificial creativity will become indistinguishable. This Article focuses on a reevaluation of utility patent law\u2019s non-obviousness standard in light of the steady societal shift toward broad information and technological empowerment. By exploring GenAI\u2019s role in augmenting creativity and its implications for the standard of \u201cordinary creativity,\u201d this Article suggests factors for a revised patentability examination methodology.&nbsp;<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>This reevaluation seeks to balance AI\u2019s rapid advances with patent law\u2019s goals to promote progress. There is precedent for the non-obviousness standard to absorb advancements in artificial intelligence that rely on crowd-sourced information. GenAI challenges traditional notions of invention and creativity. The legal&nbsp;construct against which \u201cnon-obviousness\u201d is determined\u2013\u2013the ordinary creativity of the \u201cperson of ordinary skill in the art\u201d (\u201cPHOSITA\u201d)\u2013\u2013should be recalibrated to account for GenAI and to encourage innovation while protecting public access to tools of creativity.&nbsp;<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Authors: &nbsp;Raina Haque, Simone Rose &amp; Nick DeSetto<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>PDF:<\/strong>&nbsp;http:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\\\/ncjolt\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2024\/04\/Haque-Final.pdf<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Volume 25, Issue 3<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This Article examines the challenges and prospects of crowd\u2011sourcing generative artificial intelligence (\u201cGenAI\u201d) systems in patent law as human and machine creativity become seamless. As GenAI technologies like GPT-4 become ubiquitous, AI-generated solutions will be less innovative and will complicate tenets about patentability. An evolution of patent law\u2019s non-obviousness standard provides an elegant solution\u2013\u2013borrowing from <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/the-non-obvious-razor-generative-ai\/\" class=\"more-link\">&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5,515,557],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9221"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9221"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9221\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9233,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9221\/revisions\/9233"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9221"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9221"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9221"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}