06.14.20

Using ‘Hey Hi’ (AI) and Mindless Buzzwords to Spread Confusion and Blur the Gap Between Computer-Generated Patents and Patents on Algorithms

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 9:22 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

It’s… just… “MAGIC!”

Forgotten Magic

Summary: The patent ‘industry’ (people who sue for a living, or instead shake down people/firms with expensive lawsuits as deterrents) is intentionally lying to us all; nowadays it loves leveraging the media’s ‘darling’ buzzword, ‘Hey Hi’ (AI), describing it as some sort of magic that merits lots of worthless patents

THE European Patent Office (EPO) has long sought to violate the EPC, e.g. by misinterpreting it, then grant loads of fake patents on abstract things. António Campinos is even more shameless about it than Benoît Battistelli. Campinos is one heck of a snake and since he never coded anything he can use his ignorance as an excuse for granting software patents in Europe. Nowadays they like to misuse words like “digitalisation” and “Hey Hi”, which is what we call their clueless slant on machine learning and the like…

“Nowadays they like to misuse words like “digitalisation” and “Hey Hi”, which is what we call their clueless slant on machine learning and the like…”I’ve done machine learning for a very long time (in 2003 I already wrote papers about it) and the term is actually a lot more meaningful than “Hey Hi”, which is nonsensical fluff that goes back to the dawn of computing. It’s the basic idea that computers can emulate some process humans otherwise do, e.g. playing chess (I wrote some computer programs that do this as far back as 2001 when I was a teenager). What’s inexcusable is this bizarre resurgence in shallow media (bogus ‘journalism’) in recent years. A couple of years ago they started calling just about everything “Hey Hi”, just as a decade or so earlier they began rebranding almost everything “cloud” and software became “apps”…

“The debate is, as usual, being hijacked by the patent (litigation) ‘industry’…”This superficial transition from meaningful (relatively technical) terms to buzzwords and pure hype isn’t an accident; it’s a deliberate marketing strategy and a lot of it is geared towards surveillance as a business model. Patent lawyers too were fast to take advantage of these rebranding campaigns, calling it or hailing it all as some kind of “industrial revolution” (leading to fluff like “Industry 4.0″ and “4IR”). This may seem funny, but there’s a very nefarious and sinister angle to it all. So it isn’t down to mere amusement…

The debate is, as usual, being hijacked by the patent (litigation) ‘industry’…

As recently as yesterday we saw Anastasiia Kyrylenko at IP Kat as CIPA (Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys) megaphone, noting yesterday that:

On June 24th, the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and Dr. Rhiannon Turner will be holding an online event to discuss the recent EPO EBA decision in G3/19…

Separately, another site advertised a “webinar” (basically “dude with a webcam”) about “EPO Case Law on Priority” by:

Christopher Rennie-Smith, European Patent Consultant, former Chairman and legal member of a Technical Board of Appeal of the EPO; former member of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO

Well, the Technical Board of Appeal of the EPO can no longer think for itself. The Office dictator pressures all the boards and his successor — to whom he’s an obedient heir — already sent all board members to exile in Haar (at the very least as a collective warning). It’s likely that later this year — weeks or months from now — these boards will issue a ruling and determination on the subject of software patents pertaining to simulation. We already know in which direction the Office dictator pushed them…

“Well, the Technical Board of Appeal of the EPO can no longer think for itself. The Office dictator pressures all the boards and his successor — to whom he’s an obedient heir — already sent all board members to exile in Haar (at the very least as a collective warning).”Yesterday we reviewed the news only to find this nonsense pushed through Lexology under the headline “Algo IP: Intellectual Property in Algorithms, Computer Generated Works and Computer Implemented Inventions” (notice how they’re using misnomers and conflating different things). The author is clearly not a coder and he jumps from one topic to another seamlessly; for instance, notice how he speaks of “computer implemented inventions” and then immediately leaps to joint inventions and computers as inventors (totally unrelated aspect). Have a look at the gobbledegook, with our comments below:

“It’s only AI when you don’t know what it does, then it’s just software and data” remains a useful heuristic to get to grips with AI algorithms. In legal terms, AI is a combination of software and data. An algorithm is a set of rules to solve a problem. The implementation in code of the algorithm is the software that gives instructions to the computer’s processor. What distinguishes an AI algorithm from traditional software is first, that the algorithm’s rules and software implementation are themselves dynamic and change as the machine learns; and second, the very large datasets (‘big data’) that the AI algorithm processes. The data is (i) the input training, testing and operational datasets; (ii) that input data as processed by the computer; (iii) the output data from those processing operations; and (iv) insights and data derived from the output data.

[...]

Use of algorithms may result in new inventions and the question arises whether computer implemented inventions are capable of patent protection. S.1(2)(c) Patents Act 1977 (‘PA’) excludes “a program for a computer” from patent protection to the extent that the patent application “relates to that thing as such”.[v] This has led to a line of cases in the UK since 2006 which has sought to establish and clarify a test for determining the contribution that the invention makes to the technical field of knowledge (potentially patentable) beyond the computer program “as such” (not patentable).[vi] If the invention is potentially patentable on this basis, s.7(3) PA provides that:

“[i]n this Act “inventor” in relation to an invention means the actual deviser of the invention and “joint inventor” shall be construed accordingly”

and s.7(2)(a) PA provides that a patent for invention may be granted “primarily to the inventor or joint inventors”. US law is more specific in defining (at 35 USC §100(f) and (g)) “inventor” as “the individual or, if a joint invention, the individuals collectively who invented the subject matter of the invention”. The context of s.7(3) PA means that the “actual deviser of the invention” should be a “person” and there is no regime similar to that for copyright for computer-generated works.

Again, the takeaway from the patent law perspective is also that it is worth considering expressly covering in AI contracts the ownership, assignment and licensing aspects of AI-generated inventions and patent rights as well as copyright works.

Kemp IT Law’s Richard Kemp does the typical thing by conflating computer-generated junk patents and patents on algorithms (that are illegal). First he alludes to “computer program “as such” (not patentable).”

He then says “the takeaway from the patent law perspective is also that it is worth considering expressly covering in AI contracts the ownership, assignment and licensing aspects of AI-generated inventions and patent rights as well as copyright works.”

“Kemp IT Law’s Richard Kemp does the typical thing by conflating computer-generated junk patents and patents on algorithms (that are illegal).”How did he jump from the question of patents on algorithms to whether or not the patents are generated by a computer (as opposed to covering work done on a computer)? We’ve seen similar conflation put forth by the EPO’s clueless managers, some of whom have zero experience in technology and just training in the British Army. Who needs managers with a clue anyway… right? Understanding restricts “useful” misunderstandings… and it can harm so-called EPO ‘production’…

An article (promotion, sales, marketing) entitled “Protecting AI inventions” was pushed through IAM and then pushed through Lexology. It’s not an objective analysis and this was all along just a self-promotional piece from Effectual Knowledge Services Pvt Ltd which says the following:

From tools and services to products and consultancies, AI has created a number of revenue-generating opportunities. It has already simplified a number of tasks and now, with the help of neural networks, it is inventing new ways to solve problems. Further, certain privileges have been granted to corporate entities (eg, Facebook and Google) so that they can defend themselves in court. It therefore follows that AI should be able to own its patents. However, debate is ongoing and requires considering where the line between creation by human and machine should be drawn and how much (or little) human input or guidance is required.

Recently, there was a case where the EPO refused European patent applications EP18275163 and EP18275174, which designated DABUS – a machine described as “a type of connectionist artificial intelligence” – as an inventor. One application was for a new type of beverage container based on fractal geometry and the other was for a device for attracting enhanced attention signals, which could be helpful in search and rescue operations. Similarly, the USPTO and UKIPO have disqualified patent applications on the grounds that a non-human cannot hold inventorship as per these countries’ laws.

So it speaks of “neural networks” and stuff, then argues “AI should be able to own [sic] its patents,” so here again we enter the laughable world where “Hey Hi” gets personified and framed as some sort of magic. This would typically be just funny, but in this case it is dangerous because patent maximalists who profit from more and more and more patents exploit misconceptions and lies to turn the whole patent system into a laughing stock. This, in turn, can make the whole thing collapse. It makes the system obsolete.

“The real enemies of the patent system are those lunatics who latch onto buzzwords, speaking about things they clearly do not understand, all in the name of creating more lawsuits over more bogus patents.”The patent system wasn’t conceived as a framework for giving monopolies on mere thoughts or nature or maths and it wasn’t made to reward some abstract concept of an algorithm (mis-framed as “Hey Hi”).

The real enemies of the patent system are those lunatics who latch onto buzzwords, speaking about things they clearly do not understand, all in the name of creating more lawsuits over more bogus patents.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

This post is also available in Gemini over at:

gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2020/06/14/hey-hi-magic/

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. GNU/Linux Turns 38 This Year, But the (Partly) Microsoft-Led Linux Foundation Wants You to Think It's Only 30 and a Good Friend of Microsoft

    What the Linux Foundation calls “Linux” (as its PR staff members refer to it in their new press release) is 38 years old, not 30. “Open Source” as a term did not formally exist yet, so this latest waffle makes no sense at all (the press release keeps mentioning a term that’s designed to attack and replace the original). But it’s part of a broader pattern of deception, attacking software freedom and pretending GNU never existed. Did money corrupt everything and is it too late to salvage truth, let alone freedom?



  2. Richard Stallman on Paid Smear Campaigns

    Dr. Richard Stallman on people who lie about him online (4 years after the older campaign of hate and distortion and half a decade before the current one, coordinated by groups funded by monopolies that dislike GPL)



  3. Links 22/4/2021: Grafana Goes for AGPLv3, Godot 3.3 Released, Mesa 21.0.3 Available

    Links for the day



  4. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 21, 2021

    IRC logs for Wednesday, April 21, 2021



  5. Behind the Curtains of Cheap and Cheesy PR the EPO is a Machine of Oppression (Against Its Very Own Staff), Tribunal to Rule on Strike Busting

    The laughable regime of Campinos is a naked emperor with nothing but diplomatic immunity (almost not a single member of staff trusts the President) and the PR strategic front is becoming worse than pathetic; it's like the place is run by infantile career-climbing sociopaths with no qualifications, trying to weaponise a sea of money against staff, inquisitive media, and states (by bribing them or hiring lawyers to intimidate/bankrupt them); while the EPO still swims in money its reputation drowns too quickly to ever resurface, recover



  6. Links 21/4/2021: University of Minnesota Blacklisted Over Defects, Red Hat Satellite 6.9 is Out

    Links for the day



  7. Links 21/4/2021: VirtualBox 6.1.20, GCC 11.1 Release Candidate, Nginx 1.20.0

    Links for the day



  8. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, April 20, 2021

    IRC logs for Tuesday, April 20, 2021



  9. Some People Who Asked to Be Removed From the Slanderous Hate Letter Against the FSF Are Still Being Denied Removal (But Not All)

    I am aware of some people (evidence is in the public domain for all to see) who asked to be removed from the hate list; their requests have not yet been processed, or simply denied. Maybe they should ask again. There are silent and selective changes.



  10. Overt Abuse and Mischaracterisations by Bully de Blanc

    The campaign to ruin the FSF and silence its founder, Richard M. Stallman (RMS), goes months prior to the hate letter set up by Bully de Blanc, her boss, and the Microsoft-sponsored OSI; they just attack the licence (GPL/copyleft) and they try to redefine things for the corporations which fund them



  11. According to StatCounter, This Month GNU/Linux Market Share on Desktops/Laptops Exceeded 2% (Based on Sites They Monitor)

    StatCounter does not monitor everything and not every machine connects to the Web, but in relative terms, based on the chart above, no doubt GNU/Linux continues growing relative to other operating systems (chart plotted based on the latest raw data, rendered in LibreOffice Calc)



  12. At the EPO, Lawlessness Has Become “a New Normal”

    Without as much as a real consultation with those who are impacted (by the EPO's gross infringements) the management of the EPO rushes ahead again, enjoying zero oversight, no legal review, and no accountability or scrutiny of any kind



  13. Links 20/4/2021: Tails 4.18 and Mark Surman in Mozilla's Board of Directors

    Links for the day



  14. Microsoft as a Censorship Machine Working to Undermine Free Software and Code Sharing (Also Sharing in General)

    Microsoft is, as usual, a tool of destruction rather than creation; it seems to be better at ruining things and censoring things, notably things that compete against Microsoft or pose a threat to Microsoft's business model (and close partners, such as RIAA)



  15. Phoronix Needs to Exercise Caution and Stay Vigilant/Careful of Microsoft

    Taking note or lessons from the blunder of Raspberry Pi (back in February), Phoronix should be careful of Microsoft 'freebies' as they're never free and there are strings attached, destined to alienate longtime supporters



  16. IRC Proceedings: Monday, April 19, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, April 19, 2021



  17. Links 20/4/2021: EasyOS Dunfell 2.7.1, Phoronix Takes Microsoft 'Freebies', Microsoft Trying to Steal Credit for Linux on Mars

    Links for the day



  18. Richard Stallman on How UPC is a Trojan Horse for Software Patents in Europe

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, offers his analysis of the Unitary Patent (or UPC) and what it means for software patents in Europe now that the EPO increases its influence over continental law



  19. Technology Can Make Life Worse, Even in the Public Sector, Not Just the Private Sector

    There are growing concerns — increasingly justified concerns as a matter of fact — that customer service is universally going away and “COVID” has become the impenetrable shield or a cover in the face of facts, laws, and basic rights



  20. Links 19/4/2021: LibreSSL 3.3.2, OpenSSH 8.6, Firefox 88

    Links for the day



  21. Time to Move to Gemini, Wherever/Whenever Possible, as the World Wide Web is a Burden on Everybody

    A 30-minute rant about what the Web has become and the promise of gemini:// (designed to simplify everything, enable self-hosting, preserve privacy, and empower communities rather than military-connected monopolies)



  22. The Number of Signatures in the Anti-FSF Petition is Decreasing, Not Increasing

    A reader has notified Techrights that belatedly, perhaps where people’s job is at risk (we’ve heard of stories and situations wherein the employer’s view and a worker’s view diverge), the GNOME Foundation/OSI did in fact remove some people from the hate letter they had set up for their monopolistic sponsors. We do, however, still see some names in there of people who asked to be removed, so it must be a very selective process. They don’t want to lose face, so they must have made it very difficult to revoke one’s name. Exceptional circumstances? We have checked to confirm, based on the available archives, and indeed that number decreased since 10 days ago, whereas 6,415 people have thus far signed the support letter (it's still growing), so we’ve just re-plotted the chart.



  23. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, April 18, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, April 18, 2021



  24. How Many People Developed GNU (Maybe Hundreds) in the 1980s

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, explains how code was managed and contributed in the early days of GNU



  25. Links 19/4/2021: Linux 5.12 RC8, GNU Poke 1.2, EndeavourOS 2021.04

    Links for the day



  26. Proprietary Software (BT Hub) Has Ruined My Whole Day

    While we did have some plans to publish long articles, those plans were curtailed or at least delayed due to the fact our sole device at home not to be controlled by us (a so-called 'Smart' Hub from BT) decided to break itself and by doing so bring productivity to a standstill (that firmware update, silently installed without notice or any form of consent, managed to screw with the local network)



  27. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, April 17, 2021

    IRC logs for Saturday, April 17, 2021



  28. Tolerating the Intolerant and Lacking Tolerance for Opposing Views

    The person who shouted...



  29. Letter of Support for Richard Stallman - Doing Better in Community

    "How do you support someone you’ve known for years who is unfairly attacked and publicly maligned?"



  30. Richard Stallman on Rejecting Workplace Bureaucracy in the 1970s

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, explains what inspired him to get involved in non-software matters


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts