Is AI capable of becoming an inventor? Understanding India’s Patent Law in the era of the Machines

Imagine the AI-induced future, where sustainable energy systems, life-saving medical devices, and even award-winning music are developed by robots all by themselves, independently of humans. This has become a thing of the past in 2025. It is now a reality. India is now leading the global race for AI innovations with 1,000 AI startups, the country has set a record.. But having AI technology standing on the border between tools and creators, an important question arises. Can an Indian patent be claimed by a machine? The Patents Act, 1970,  falls behind the mark when compared to human-centric legislation, which fails to counter effectively. This article explains the challenges of patenting God inventions AI technology in India, reviews the global case studies and offers practical recommendations for businesses operating in this paradigm. With AI remaking innovation, India’s IP framework will have to play catch up or fall behind.

The Emergence of AI Innovation: A Revolution for India

It is impossible to deny Artificial Intelligence’s rise as an inventor. Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are self-brewing solutions that compare human ingenuity in halving drug discovery timelines to fine-tuning the renewable energy grids. India is experiencing the impact of this change. Innovations propelled by machines are pushing the nation’s thriving tech sector into a $10 billion AI market by 2025. Picture an AI revolution in agriculture in a start-up in Bengaluru, or an AI generating a new algorithm. The possibilities are endless.

However, this development points out a weakness in India’s legal system. The problem has already sparked a debate on a global scale. The patent systems of the world have been tested in the case of DABUS, where an AI called DABUS was named an inventor. Even though South Africa gave a patent for a while, which caused controversy, the United States and the United Kingdom declined the applications and insisted on human inventorship.

India’s Patent Law: For Humans, Met By Machines

The ideas behind human creativity form the heart of India’s 1970 Patents act. Two provisions stand out:

Section 2(1)(p): States that the “inventor” is a person who originates the idea of the invention.

Section 6: Requires that patent applications be lodged by a person, with the common candidate being the inventor or his assignee.

The law’s definitions rest on a human being as the creator of every invention. What happens to a patent if instead of a person the origin of an invention is an artificial intelligence? The law falters. Since machines are not legal persons, patents for inventions from AI are not eligible today under present interpretations. This creates a lot of challenges:

• The Inventorship Puzzle: Since AI cannot be an inventor, who gets the patent is the question, the programmer, the user or the company that owns the AI and so forth.
• Eligibility Risks: Rejections may arise where there is no known inventor stated on the name of the inventor.
• Business Implications: Indefinite inventorship lures the door to the fight, threatening investments in AI-made technologies.

A Hypothetical Case: The AI Conundrum in Action

Consider NeuraHealth, an Indian startup. The company’s AI produces a very innovative diagnostic tool that involves minimal human hands-on work. As NeuraHealth tries to file for a patent, it faces a complicated problem: The assignment of a human inventor might be misleading, and if the AI were identified as such, there might be patent denial. Already a nationwide problem, this is a reminder of how startups and giants are impacted.

Global Lessons: What India Can Learn

The world provides a road map. The DABUS storyline exposed glaring differences:

• S. and U.K.: Human creators won claims, with AI not given the status of an inventor by patent executives.
• South Africa: Granted a patent to DABUS but faced legal opposition.
• EU Trends: Others are testing “human-AI collaboration” frameworks, rewarding those who manage AI development.

These situations reflect the need for a global debate on the recognition of AI in intellectual property rights. What India can learn from these examples is crystal clear:

Act Now: Reactive litigation is costly. Being proactive in its AI innovation game, India may find itself leading the AI race.

Adapt Globally: Adoption of a collaborative model may enable India to narrow its legal divide without abandoning its existing ones.

Practical Solutions: Protecting AI Innovations Today

Companies have to maneuver this environment purposefully during the transitional period. Here’s how:

Highlight Human Roles: Identify who has worked in important AI areas such as problem definition, data sourcing, or oversight, so that it is easier to meet the current patent criteria. For NeuraHealth, this might mean crediting engineers who built and led the AI through training.

Pivot to Trade Secrets: Whereas in cases where patents do not apply, protecting through trade secrets become necessary. Such strategy prevents arguing over inventorship, but requires careful confidentiality protection.

Secure Ownership: Develop a clear understanding on issues of IP ownership between developers, users and investors in order to avoid conflicts in future.

By doing so, Indian innovators can safeguard their works when legal changes proceed.

A Vision for Reform: India’s Path Forward

It is extremely necessary for India to adapt its IP framework in order to compete in the AI revolution. We propose:

Legislative Update: Amend the Patents Act so that it could signal out the AI-generated inventions that can be patented and also set the criteria for the inventorship in the cases where AI and people cooperate.

Advice in Patent Law: In 2024, the Patent Office should publish a handbook of AI-specific patent examination that implements the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s guidelines. This will make the process of application shorter and simpler.

Expert Committee: Constitutes a group of intellectual property lawyers, political and technology experts that will be capable of producing a policy that will ensure IP is adaptable in the future.

Shaping the Future of Innovation

Artificial intelligence is no longer a mere tool – it’s a creator redefining innovation. As machines generate groundbreaking inventions, India stands at a crossroads: adapt its patent laws to embrace this future or risk stifling progress. By addressing the legal ambiguities of AI-generated inventions, India can empower its innovators, strengthen its position as a global tech leader, and set a precedent for the world.

Author: Peri Suryanarayana, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to [email protected] or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.