header-logo header-logo

29 November 2023
Issue: 8051 / Categories: Legal News , Artificial intelligence , Patents
printer mail-detail

AI patent allowed for the first time

The High Court has handed down a landmark ruling on artificial intelligence (AI), which will allow key aspects of AI to be patented in the UK for the first time

The court held both artificial neural networks (ANNs), which create sentient-like user experiences through technology, and the training of ANNs are patentable in the UK.

The intellectual property belongs to London-based creative studio AI Venture Studio Time Machine Capital Squared (TMC2) and its subsidiary company Emotional Perception AI Ltd (EPAI). EPAI filed a patent application in 2019 for a novel technique that permits the trained ANN to align its output closer towards how a human semantically perceives content. The application was rejected on the basis the Patents Act 1977, s 1(2)(c) excludes ‘a program for a computer… as such’ from protection.

Granting the appeal in EPAI v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2023] EWHC 2948 (Ch) this week, Sir Anthony Mann said: ‘The courts have had to grapple from time to time with the difficulties of this concept in relation to what I can call traditional computers and software. This appeal raises new questions… I am told that this issue has not yet arisen in any of the authorities.’

Sir Anthony concluded that he considered ‘insofar as necessary, the trained hardware ANN is capable of being an external technical effect which prevents the exclusion applying to any prior computer program’.

TMC2 said the ruling would be important for the markets and banking sectors where emotional perception is being developed for natural language processing economic and financial crime detection and sentiment analysis.  

Bruce Dearling, TMC2 patent attorney, said: ‘This ruling opens the door for UK AI to now accelerate and puts the UK on a better global footing to reward technical innovation. The impact of this decision and any related patent cannot be understated.’ 

Issue: 8051 / Categories: Legal News , Artificial intelligence , Patents
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll