I can still have my GPT4 minions writing 100 patents per hour and corresponding with USPTO on my behalf, then as a natural person, collect the proceeds netted from my robo-patent-trolls.
Or is the USPTO concerned about AGI doing the same and robbing us fleshlings of our I’ll-gotten gains?
Ideology and precedent. And proximate to both, personal vanity: someone responsible for an AI that was politically legitimized in a role usual reserved for "natural persons" will likely have made some lasting mark in history. Some people are very motivated by that kind of thing.
If I were the one arguing for sake of vanity, I’d go after the legal name policy vs AI. Maybe that was considered or trialed before.
AI can generate text, it can also review and conduct tasks such as prior art search or support analytics relative to exploitation discovery.
Less if a cat-and-mouse if patent troll investments falter when their mass-generated suite of applications are all rejected.