Who owns the rights to AI innovation?

I don’t see why not. Should we give the rights instead to the computer?

It could be open, since noone made it. Freeware.

If your program figured out something absurdly important it could make you richer and more powerful than anyone. Which I am ok with.

My bee my honey.

Once we determine that AIs are self-aware they should absolutely own their own intellectual property. To do otherwise would be slavery.

When I was working with the New Zealand fire service my contract and most contracts do, state that any innovation I come up with while working for them is their property and not mine. Companies do this all the time with development of new things. They certainly would do it with AI s.

You want to steal money from a self aware AI?

Have you not seen every sci-fi film about AI’s ever?!

Why are we worried about a machine’s rights when we don’t care about a person’s rights? Why do we think a person should own a thought when nobody has an original thought? Do you have any idea how many times the steam engine has been invented? Do you have any idea how many people invented the atomic bomb at the same time? Did you know that comedians, fashion designers, and magicians NEVER patent their inventions? Did you know that most professional inventors say they make more money by selling pamphlets on how to reproduce their results than they would by selling patent licenses?

If the A.I. was engineered by engineers who work for a Corporation, then the ownership belongs to the Corporation. That is how most contracts work. Some Corporations, if you read the fine print of the contract, can even make the engineers liable for any damages caused by their own innovation even though they do not own the patent and can’t receive royalties. It is a legal loophole which stipulates that in the instance an innovation causes mass damage and the lawsuits start flooding in, then the engineer is considered at that point an independent contractor.

If the A.I. was engineered by engineers who are self-employed, then the ownership belongs to them.

If the A.I. innovated on its own, then the question is if the A.I. is considered the property of the Corp or the property of self-employed engineers, or is it considered independent. I would say that until the law changes, the A.I. would be considered a property of the Corp.

Animals, for example are considered property by law. If any animal were to evolve into something that can innovate, until the law states otherwise, the animal is still the property of its owner, thus the owner owns the innovation.

Creator of the AI will own the IP because the AI was designed to produce IP for the creator.

A shovel doesn’t own the hill it builds from the dirt it moves.

Presumably the AI has invented whatever while working for the company that owns it. Thus the company owns the rights. That’s generally how it goes – whatever work you do whole in the employ of a company belongs to the company. There may be some contractual exceptions, but those are rare.

It’s like Percy Spencer, the guy who developed the microwave oven. He was working at Raytheon working on microwave technology for radars used by the US military. One day he noticed the Hershey bar he brought for a snack was completely melted, despite the fact that it had not been near any significant source of heat. After experimenting with other foods the microwave over was invented. Raytheon, though, are pretty much the definition of “military-industrial complex”, and aren’t really in the business of marketing home appliances. The company made millions licensing its microwave oven tech to other companies while Spencer got a $2.00 award from the company for his efforts.

Define the sort of AI you are talking about. If it’s still “just a machine,” then it’s not actually inventing and innovating. If it has crossed the threshold of personhood, then it falls under the same rules as human beings in similar circumstances.