從國際人工智慧專利政策探討我國專利保護

A Reflection on Taiwan's AI Patent Policy from a Global Perspective

各國公私部門競相投資人工智慧，顯示人工智慧對於全球投資、科技之影響不容小覷，同時衍生出人工智慧專利的相關問題。按世界智慧財產權組織（World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO）的分類，人工智慧專利依人工智慧於發明中所扮演的角色可粗略分為兩種：第一種，人工智慧在發明程序中協助發明人，或者是發明的其中一項特徵，以「電腦軟體應用發明」（Computer-Implemented Inventions, CII）處理。第二種，是由人工智慧自行創造的「人工智慧創造之發明」（AI-Generated Inventions），也是各國面對人工智慧時代最棘手的專利問題。前者，「電腦軟體應用發明專利」歷經多年的發展，其概念逐漸成熟。歐洲、美國、日本、WIPO相繼對於電腦軟體應用發明之專利發表研究或政策文件，進而修法。後者，「人工智慧創造之發明」則為前所未有的命題：因為目前的專利制度下，發明人一定得是人類，衍生出各類待解的問題，歐洲專利局和美國專利與商標局均以「發明人一定得是人類」為由，駁回兩項以人工智慧為發明人的專利申請，但各國討論熱度不減。本研究期待可以透過分析五大智慧財產局和WIPO的動向，掌握人工智慧專利國際趨勢脈動。

According to WIPO, Artificial Intelligence (hereinafter referred to as ＂AI＂) invention referred to those with AI constitutes a feature of an invention or those as a tool that assists inventors in the invention process. So far, all intellectual property authorities concerned consider those inventions featuring AI as computer-implemented inventions (hereinafter referred to as ＂CII＂). In the past few decades, the growth of computer-implemented inventions (hereinafter ＂CII＂) has been speedy and accelerating; nevertheless, the development of CII patent is comparably slow-paced. The boom of emerging technology, such as AI, has urged the discussion and deliberation of CII patents worldwide. There is ambiguity remained, but the core concept is getting mature. As to those assist inventors in the invention, some of the inventions can also be autonomously generated or invented by AI as the technology advances. The patentability of AI-invented inventions has remained controversial. Recently, both EPO and USPTO refused applications with an AI machine as an inventor and explained that only natural persons may be named as an inventor under current law. The position of other authorities concerned is tentatively unsure, but they open up to professional inputs of all kinds. For instance, USPTO released Request for Comments on Patenting AI Inventions, and WIPO published Impact of AI on IP Policy: Call for Comments. At present, the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office released analyses on AI patent, a report on frequent questions of AI patent application, and underwent multiple discussions. However, Taiwan has not undergone corresponding legal change for now. European Union, the United States, Japan, and China released the updated policy documents concerning CII. This essay provides an overview of the AI, outlines the key legal trends of CII patents and analyzes the discussions from different perspectives.