DABUS (Japanese Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "DABUS" in Japanese language version.

refsWebsite

Global rank Japanese rank

6wikipedia.org

low place

4doi.org

2^nd place

6^th place

4taiyo-nk.co.jp

low place

4austlii.edu.au

1,812^th place

low place

3jetro.go.jp

6,006^th place

414^th place

2jpaa-patent.info

low place

2bailii.org

3,544^th place

low place

2ssrn.com

703^rd place

5,411^th place

1patents.google.com

1,182^nd place

1,387^th place

1researchgate.net

120^th place

616^th place

1nature.com

234^th place

363^rd place

1harvard.edu

18^th place

107^th place

1nih.gov

4^th place

24^th place

1economist.com

254^th place

1,177^th place

1businessinsider.com

140^th place

599^th place

1patentepi.org

low place

1ipaustralia.gov.au

low place

1abc.net.au

139^th place

1,039^th place

1epo.org

low place

1juve-patent.com

low place

1ipo.gov.uk

low place

1theverge.com

114^th place

625^th place

1cnn.com

28^th place

188^th place

1yale.edu

565^th place

1,647^th place

1nzlii.org

low place

1jpo.go.jp

9,287^th place

607^th place

abc.net.au

“Artificial intelligence can now be recognised as an inventor after historic Australian court decision”. ABC News. (1 August 2021) 26 September 2021閲覧。

austlii.edu.au

Stephen L. Thaler [2021] APO 5, Australian Patent Office (Australia).
Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879, Federal Court (Australia).
Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] FCAFC 62, Federal Court (Full Court) (Australia).
Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] HCATrans 199, High Court (Australia).

bailii.org

Thaler v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs And Trade Marks [2020] EWHC 2412 (Patents) (2020-09-21).
Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents Trade Marks And Designs [2021] EWCA Civ 1374 (2021-09-21).

businessinsider.com

“No, an artificial intelligence can't legally invent something — only 'natural persons' can, says US patent office”. Business Insider. 26 August 2020閲覧。

cnn.com

amp.cnn.com

“Artificial Intelligence can't technically invent things, says patent office”. 2023年9月24日閲覧。

doi.org

Thaler, Stephen (2021). “Vast Topological Learning and Sentient AGI”. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness 8: 81–111. doi:10.1142/S2705078521500053 4 May 2023閲覧。.
“Artificial intelligence is breaking patent law”. Nature 605 (7911): 616–618. (26 May 2022). Bibcode: 2022Natur.605..616G. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-01391-x. PMID 35610374 25 January 2023閲覧。.
von Falck, Andreas; Dorn, Stephan (2018-07-20), “Rule 64: Language of the Statement for a declaration of non-infringement and fee for the declaration of non-infringement”, Unified Patent Protection in Europe: A Commentary (Oxford University Press), doi:10.1093/oso/9780198755463.003.0256, ISBN 978-0-19-875546-3
Oriakhogba, Desmond (2021). “Dabus Gains Territory in South Africa and Australia: Revisiting the AI-Inventorship Question”. South African Journal of Intellectual Property Law 9: 87–108. doi:10.47348/SAIPL/v9/a5. SSRN 3998162.

economist.com

Weber, Tomas (4 April 2023). “The inventor who fell in love with his AI”. The Economist 25 May 2023閲覧。

epo.org

European Patent Office (21 December 2021). “J 0008/20 (Designation of inventor/DABUS) of 21.12.2021”. 24 May 2023閲覧。

harvard.edu

ui.adsabs.harvard.edu

“Artificial intelligence is breaking patent law”. Nature 605 (7911): 616–618. (26 May 2022). Bibcode: 2022Natur.605..616G. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-01391-x. PMID 35610374 25 January 2023閲覧。.

ipaustralia.gov.au

pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au

“Food container and devices and methods for attracting enhanced attention (2019363177)”. IP Australia (17 September 2019). 25 January 2023閲覧。

ipo.gov.uk

“Whether the requirements of section 7 and 13 concerning the naming of inventor and the right to apply for a patent have been satisfied in respect of GB1816909.4 and GB1818161.0”. Intellectual Property Office (United Kingdom) (4 December 2019). 26 September 2021閲覧。

jetro.go.jp

JETRO NY 知的財産部石原、赤澤. “CAFC、AI を発明者とする特許出願の拒絶を支持”. JETRO. 2023年9月24日閲覧。
ジェトロ・ドバイ事務所 (2021年8月2日). “【アフリカ IP 情報】南アフリカで AI を発明者とする出願に世界初の特許付与”. JETRO. 2023年9月24日閲覧。
第一特許法人イ・ウラム弁理士 (2023年3月8日). “韓国特許庁、人工知能を発明者とした特許出願に対して無効処分”. JETRO. 2023年9月24日閲覧。

jpaa-patent.info

山本英子. “豪州における AI 関連発明について”. パテント2021. 2023年9月23日閲覧。
吉田哲. “米国における AI 関連発明について”. パテント2021. 2023年9月24日閲覧。

jpo.go.jp

“発明者等の表示について”. 日本国特許庁 (2023年7月30日). 2023年9月24日閲覧。

juve-patent.com

“EPO and UKIPO to review decisions in AI inventor debate”. Juve Patent (5 June 2020). 26 August 2020閲覧。

nature.com

“Artificial intelligence is breaking patent law”. Nature 605 (7911): 616–618. (26 May 2022). Bibcode: 2022Natur.605..616G. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-01391-x. PMID 35610374 25 January 2023閲覧。.

nih.gov

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

“Artificial intelligence is breaking patent law”. Nature 605 (7911): 616–618. (26 May 2022). Bibcode: 2022Natur.605..616G. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-01391-x. PMID 35610374 25 January 2023閲覧。.

nzlii.org

Luiten, Mark (31 January 2022). “[2022 NZIPOPAT 2]”. Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand. 7 April 2022閲覧。

patentepi.org

information.patentepi.org

epi (March 2021). “epi's technology subcommittee on ICT's comments on CA/PL 5/20”. epi Information (1/2021): 10 25 January 2023閲覧. "the purported DABUS cases where, however, the contribution of the machine has in no way been explained/reasoned about and appears spurious. It is not discussed in the DABUS specification, how the purported invention was devised. If it really was by the machine, there is no explanation to that extent in the patent specification nor has it been given throughout the procedure."

patents.google.com

US Patent 10423875B2, Stephen L. Thaler, "Electro-optical device and method for identifying and inducing topological states formed among interconnecting neural modules", published 2019-09-24, issued 2019-09-24, assigned to Stephen L. Thaler