MC
Marks & Clerk
More
Marks & Clerk is one of the UK’s foremost firms of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. Our attorneys and solicitors are wired directly into the UK’s leading business and innovation economies. Alongside this we have offices in 9 international locations covering the EU, Canada and Asia, meaning we offer clients the best possible service locally, nationally and internationally.
The newest revision of the EPC Guidelines introduces a section entitled “The use of artificial intelligence.” The latest body of changes echoes not only the increased prevalence of AI inventions…
United Kingdom
Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Article Insights
Gareth Williams’s articles from Marks & Clerk are most popular:
with readers working within the Business & Consumer Services, Healthcare and Media & Information industries
The newest revision of the EPC Guidelines introduces a section entitled “The use of artificial intelligence.” The latest body of changes echoes not only the increased prevalence of AI inventions, but also the rising profile of AI tools in the patent profession as a whole.
GL 2026, General Part, 5 – “The use of artificial intelligence”
Alongside the statement on the ongoing responsibility of parties for complying with the EPC, a new paragraph is added recognising the support and improvements that artificial intelligence can provide, namely to the EPO itself.
A link to the EPO’s AI policy gains publicity by being included in this new dedicated section of the Guidelines, a notable strand of which policy appears to be the sentiment that “The EPO is AI-friendly.”
The EPO expand on their already-acknowledged use of AI in drawing up minutes from oral proceedings. It is now confirmed, following the official journal publication from April last year, that copies of sound recordings made to facilitate AI-assisted minute preparation will not be made available to parties.
More explanation is given on the topic of insufficient disclosure in relation to the technical field of artificial intelligence.
This update acts as a reminder to applicants and their representatives to ensure that mathematical methods and training datasets are disclosed in sufficient detail in patent application filings, so that the notional skilled person can reproduce the invention without undue burden using common general knowledge over the scope of the claims. In particular, the skilled person, when following the application’s teachings for carrying out the AI invention, must find that the stated results of the invention are repeatable.
To illustrate this core concept, an example has been added – the application must make it “credible” that a purpose or technical effect stated in the claim can be achieved.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.