Top stories





Marketing & MediaIWISA No 1’s Fills Bold Designer Search celebrates culture, creativity and confidence
3 hours

More news















ESG & Sustainability
Tiny technology that can find pollution in South Africa’s water and trap it




As AI applications are developed, there are at least six important legal aspects mining companies should consider in order to avoid future embarrassing and costly disputes.
If the AI project is being undertaken in collaboration with another party, mines should establish who will “own” the outcome, taking into account issues such as the value that each party brings, the elements that the mining company is most interested in (algorithm, data, output of algorithm) and the commercial aims for each element. The appropriate intellectual property (IP) agreements should be in place, as well as other contractual protections, such as rights to use, exclusivity and confidentiality.
AI raises various challenges for patent law, particularly whether the existing legal framework can accommodate the intelligent machine.
The first barrier relates to patenting the original algorithm. In most countries (including South Africa) abstract mathematical methods are not per se patentable. The second barrier is whether the outputs of AI systems can be patented, particularly where the AI system is independently inventive without human involvement. The key unresolved issue here is whether a human inventor is required for an invention to be patentable.
We expect the view of patent offices globally will be that a human inventor is required. If so, then inventions by AI systems may not be patentable under the existing legal framework. Protecting AI outputs is currently challenging the IP legal framework.