Disputes

Proactive Protection

Insights

About

Contact

Disputes

Case Validation
AI intelligence to assess case strength and likely outcome.

Damages prediction
Quantify potential damages with evidence backed estimates.

Litigation Funding
Non recourse capital to pursue strong trade secret claims.

Enforce your rights
When theft occurs, Tangibly delivers the proof, funding, and expertise to recover what is yours.

Insights

Reasonable Measures Podcast
Expert conversations on trade secrets, IP strategy, and the disputes shaping modern innovation.

Customer Stories
How companies use Tangibly to protect critical know how and pursue enforcement.

Sign up for The Tangibly Brief
Expert insights on trade secret protection and enforcement, delivered to your inbox.

About

Company
About Tangibly, our leadership, and career opportunities.

Newsroom
Press, announcements, and company updates.

Sim IP x Tangibly Litigation Financing Partnership
Learn more about how Tangibly and SIM IP are making trade secret enforcement more accessible for innovators.

Does a patent need a human inventor?

by Chris Buntel | Jun 7, 2023 | Blog, Intellectual Property & Patent Insights, Intro to Trade Secrets

Everyone has been excited about AI lately (including Tangibly with its impressive “Patent X-Ray” analysis tool).

As usual, the legal system struggles to keep up with technology. AI is no different – many interesting and difficult questions are emerging at breakneck speed this year.

The US Supreme Court recently refused to review a CAFC holding that ruled that patents must have a human inventor, and cannot be awarded to inventions created by AI. A neural network AI created new prototypes for a beverage holder and emergency beacon light on its own without a human “co-inventor”.

Similarly on the copyright front, the US copyright office recently rejected an AI-created image as lacking “human authorship”. This is actually similar to the famous “monkey selfie” litigation from a few years ago, that said that animals cannot copyright and litigate.

So where do these cases leave us regarding creative outputs and inventions made by AI? This should be an active and interesting field to watch over the next few years.


Sources:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-919.html

https://www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/docs/a-recent-entrance-to-paradise.pdf

Last Updated:June, 2026

Table Of Content

Sign up for The Tangibly Brief

Expert insights on trade secret protection and enforcement, delivered to your inbox.