AI vs Provider vs TMs, And Dilemmas About Identities!

 

In the EU AI Act of 2024, in the definition of the Provider, it includes two specific terms: first is ‘…..legal person…..’ and another is ‘……puts the AI system into service under its own NAME or TRADEMARK….’. I would be restricting to the Trademark definition that further involves ‘legal person’ and as in my book also, I discussed the famous case of DABUS when deriving an analogy between AI as a Natural Person and the Machine itself.

Now, we are all familiar with the AI machines run by several companies, have their own names. Whether there’s DABUS, GEMINI, CoPilot, Optimus the Tesla Bot, OpenAI, and the list goes on and on.

Now consider this hypothesis. When South Africa (part of BRICS) considered DABUS as a Natural Person to grant Patent to it, or whether, when KSA gave citizenship to the first ROBOT named SOPHIA either considering it as a Natural Person or a separate legal entity under their own jurisprudence (I’m unaware what was the reason), and as there’re several such examples available; then that means there’s possibility that an AI or Robot at any particular time, can be considered as a Separate Legal Person / Entity, in accordance with the jurisprudence citing of the other nations (and this has been done in many courts wherein people distinguish their own jurisprudence with that of other nations); then what if, under the ambit of ‘legal person’, AI too is considered as a separate entity, and eventually as a Natural Legal Person? And once it has been considered, and in accordance with the definition, it creates another AI Systems’, brings into the service, as a Provider, under its own TRADEMARK, let’s say, Gemini, Optimus, CoPilot etc; then just as in the case of DABUS, wherein DABUS was contended to be both an Applicant and Inventor, and as Sophia was granted Citizenship and considered as a Citizen under the above circumstances; then can there be a situation when these AI Systems / Robots working under the ambit of their own Trademarks, building their AI Systems and further deploying them, be considered as a separate legal person, just alike in case of we do under the ambit of Companies?

And if we can act directly against AI Systems under their own Trademark names; then that makes AI Systems -> a Legal Entity; making them the Inventor, Applicant, Provider? Could that become possible? No Far Away!

Because, if the Natural Person is defined as one who has consciousness, and even today so far, neither the Courts, nor the Scientific community can prove or define, what exactly consciousness is, then it is possible!

Thus, are we silently moving towards the era, wherein, the Trademarks like above, would end up being defined under the scope of separate legal entities or a natural legal person?

A Dilemma worth noticing! 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi