參考文獻
Decision Not to Grant (O/741/19), UK Intellectual Patent Office, https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-challenge-decision-results/o74119.pdf (last visited May 10, 2022).
Decision on Petition (In Re: 16/524,350), United States Patent and Trademark Office, https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/16524350_22apr2020.pdf (last visited May 10, 2022).
Grounds for Refusal: In Re EP 18 275 163 / In Re 18 275 174, European Patent Office, https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=E4B63SD62191498&number=EP18275163&lng=en&npl=false (last visited May 10, 2022).
Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879. at [12]., [120]., [147-155]., [167-178].
Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] FCAFC 62 [106-117], [118-122].
延伸閱讀
- 張腕純（2022）。澳洲聯邦法院認定人工智慧系統可作為專利發明人－簡析Thaler v. Commissioner of Patents案。科技法律透析，34(1)，8-13。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=a0000571-202201-202209200010-202209200010-8-13
- 孫寶成（2006）。澳洲智慧財產權法修正法案。理律法律雜誌（中文），2006(6)，5-6。https://doi.org/10.29491/LLB.200611.0007
- （2009）。英上訴法院判決電腦軟體具有可專利性。智慧財產，(68)，10-10。https://doi.org/10.6374/IPJ.200901.0016
- （2002）。澳大利亞議會通過新專利法。智慧財產，(41)，26-26。https://doi.org/10.6374/IPJ.200204.0017
- 蔡瑞森（2021）。智慧財產及商業法院否定得以人工智慧（AI）為發明人提出專利申請。理律新知，2021(9)，1-2。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20201214002-202109-202111120012-202111120012-1-2