Rajvinder Jagdev, of specialist intellectual property litigation firm Powell Gilbert, said: "The judgement does not preclude a person using an AI to devise an invention - in such a scenario, it would be possible to apply for a patent, provided that person is identified as the inventor. The judgement alludes that had this been the scenario it had been asked to consider, the outcome may have been different."

Many experts doubted AI was currently able to invent without human assistance, a consultation found.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office recently ruled that only flesh and blood humans can be granted patents, not artificial intelligence beings, thus ensuring that a Skynet scenario will play out (you didn't think I'd talk about AI without a Skynet reference, did you? Not it faces a lawsuit over its decision. What set this in motion is the filing of two patent applications in July of last year by Stephen Thaler, a physicist and AI researcher, on behalf of an AI "creative engine" called DABUS. One of the patents relates to an adjustable food container and the other one has to do with an emergency flashlight. On both applications, Thaler listed DABUS as the inventor.