New U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Guidelines on Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Inventions Leave Many Questions Unanswered

[...]the USPTO warns that its "guidance does not constitute substantive rulemaking and does not have the force and effect of law. Reducing an invention to practice alone is not a significant contribution that rises to the level of inventorship.Therefore, a natural person who merely recognizes and appreciates the output of an AI system as an invention, particularly when the properties and utility of the output are appar-ent to those of ordinary skill, is not necessarily an inventor. Maintaining "intellectual domination" over an AI system does not, on its own, make a person an inventor of any inventions created through the use of the AI system. [...]a person simply owning or overseeing an AI system that is used in the creation of an invention, without providing a significant contribution to the conception of the invention, does not make that person an inventor.