Google Dominates AI Patent Applications (axios.com) 8
Google has overtaken IBM to become the leader in generative AI-related patents and also leads in the emerging area of agentic AI, according to data from IFI Claims. Axios: In the patents-for-agents U.S. rankings, Google and Nvidia top the list, followed by IBM, Intel and Microsoft, according to an analysis released Thursday.
Globally, Google and Nvidia also led the agentic patents list, but three Chinese universities also make the top 10, highlighting China's place as the chief U.S. rival in the field. In global rankings for generative AI, Google was also the leader -- but six of the top 10 global spots were held by Chinese companies or universities. Microsoft was No. 3, with Nvidia and IBM also in the top 10.
Globally, Google and Nvidia also led the agentic patents list, but three Chinese universities also make the top 10, highlighting China's place as the chief U.S. rival in the field. In global rankings for generative AI, Google was also the leader -- but six of the top 10 global spots were held by Chinese companies or universities. Microsoft was No. 3, with Nvidia and IBM also in the top 10.
Using AI to generate those patents? (Score:1)
That's my guess anyway :)
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of a feeble opening, even a misleading thought. It wouldn't be the AI filing the patents or AI deciding to pursue problems that might lead to patents or AI pocketing any profits. AI would still be in the role of tool, though a high-level patent-generating tool.
But this story is actually a kind of a meta-story about the tools that make the tools in the AI category. Ditto the "agentic" category. But it would take some time to figure it out and no one is paying for my time these days, so I'm going to try
Software patents (Score:2)
The rest of the world doesn't give a shit, because the software itself is the documentation of how to reproduce it.
By getting a copy of the software you're no better off than getting a patent for the same written in some foreign language. (I.e. You can either get someone / something to interpret for you, or learn the language yourself. Then use the instructions given.)
Hell, it could be argued that because t
Re: Software patents (Score:2)
"patenting AI at this point means patenting statistics or some random collection of data points. "
This is nonsense. They're parenting AI technologies, not "AIs". Models and software are both protected by copyright. Techniques are protected with patents.
Love it (Score:1)
How important are patent counts? (Score:2)
How important are patent counts? The article yields several hints:
(1) IBM used to be the leader in AI patent [application] counts just one year ago [axios.com]. Who considered IBM to be the leader or even anywhere near being the leader or even being relevant?
(2) Only one patent related to DeepSeek was found. Why? How about the idea that companies use patent counts as PR and that the companies that have innovative, disruptive ideas would rather keep those ideas as trade secrets?
(3) Meta and OpenAI don't make the top
The patent system is broken (Score:2)
It allows for companies using their portfolio of thousands of them as a stick to beat a smaller opponent into submission or kick them out of the field altogether.
When small companies get into a patent fight with another - usually bigger - company, the bigger company without fail wins because patent suits are expensive and the bigger company simply has deeper pockets.
So, the patent system ought to be abolished. The only thing it does is stifle innovation and solidify the power of the big guys.