AI Can Discover a Drug but Cannot Own the Patent for It

👁 118 reads

Insilico Medicine credited its generative AI platform with discovering a pulmonary fibrosis drug candidate in a press release, then filed a patent listing five humans - including CEO Alex Zhavoronkov - as the sole inventors, with no mention of AI at all.

The contradiction is not unique to Insilico. It reflects a settled point of US law: machines cannot be inventors. In 2022, a Washington DC appeals court dismissed a test case brought by Ryan Abbott, a partner at the LA law firm Brown, Neri, Smith & Khan, who had argued that an AI called DABUS should be named inventor of a food container whose geometric surface aids heat transfer and stacking. Because no human contributed to the design, Abbott contended the AI deserved the credit. The court called such “metaphysical matters” beside the point and ruled that US statutes define an inventor as an “individual” - plain meaning: a human being.

The MIT Technology Review report notes that even the US Patent and Trademark Office has acknowledged that “an AI system - like other tools - may perform acts that, if performed by a human, could constitute inventorship under our laws.” The office nonetheless operates on a don’t-ask-don’t-tell basis for now.

Sarah Korman, chief business officer and legal officer of Isomorphic Labs - an Alphabet spinout focused on AI drug discovery - told MIT Technology Review’s EmTech event that there is “no doubt” the law will need to evolve, but is clear on the present state: “There needs to be a human inventor or there’s no invention and no patent.” Abbott adds a practical risk: one way to invalidate a patent is to show it lists the wrong inventors, meaning AI-generated drug patents could face legal challenges down the line.

Practitioner takeaway: If you use AI tools to generate novel designs, molecules, or creative outputs, your intellectual-property position depends entirely on demonstrating meaningful human contribution to the invention. Listing an AI as a co-inventor is not an option under current US law, but overclaiming AI’s role in marketing materials while understating it in filings creates a documented inconsistency that competitors or challengers could exploit to attack a patent’s validity.

// read moreAI Designed a Drug, but Patent Law Says Only Humans Can Be InventorsNewsGoogle Discover Feed Gets AI Chatbot Customisation in Coming DaysAI ToolsCineMR: AI Model for Cardiac MRI That Calls Its Own ToolsState of AI

Kinetyra