رهیافت‌های تنظیم‌گری اختراعات هوش مصنوعی مولد: تحلیل تطبیقی و آموزه‌ها برای نظام حقوقی ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه حقوق تجارت بین‌الملل و حقوق مالکیت فکری و فضای مجازی، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق تجارت و سرمایه‌گذاری بین‌المللی، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

10.22034/jstp.2026.12199.1998

چکیده

با گسترش شتابان نوآوری‌ها و اختراعات هوش مصنوعی، به‌ویژه سامانه‌های مولد، نظام‌های سنتی حق اختراع با چالش‌های بنیادینی در زمینه انطباق مفاهیم کلاسیک خود مواجه شده‌اند؛ چالش‌هایی از جمله تبیین نقش مخترع انسانی، احراز جدیدبودن و گام ابتکاری، نحوه افشای فرآیند فنی و ایجاد قطعیت حقوقی برای ثبت و حمایت از این اختراعات. در این بستر، اتکای صرف به چهارچوب‌های سنتی حقوق مالکیت فکری، پاسخگوی ماهیت پویای ابداعات هوش مصنوعی نیست. پژوهش حاضر با استفاده از روش تحلیلی- تطبیقی، رهیافت‌های مختلف تنظیم‌گری در حوزه اختراعات هوش مصنوعی را بررسی کرده و وضعیت نظام حقوقی ایران را آسیب‌شناسی می‌کند. مطالعه شامل مرور ادبیات، اسناد سیاستی بین‌المللی مانند گزارش سازمان همکاری و توسعه اقتصادی (OECD) ۲۰۲۳ و بررسی قوانین و الگوهای تنظیم‌گری در اتحادیه اروپا و کشور‌های پیشرو است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که هیچ‌یک از الگوهای تنظیم‌گری نرم یا سخت، به‌تنهایی قادر به پاسخگویی کامل به چالش‌های حقوقی اختراعات هوش مصنوعی نیستند؛ در حالی که رویکردهای ترکیبی، به‌ویژه با بهره‌گیری از ابزار سیاستی-نهادی سندباکس تنظیم‌گری در دل رهیافت ترکیبی-بخشی، امکان ایجاد توازن میان حمایت از نوآوری، حفظ امنیت حقوقی و مدیریت ریسک‌های فناورانه را فراهم می‌آورند؛ بر این اساس، مقاله پیشنهاد می‌کند که نظام حقوقی ایران با اتخاذ یک مدل ترکیبی- بخشی با استفاده از ابزار سندباکس تنظیم‌گری، ضمن پرهیز از تقنین شتاب‌زده، زمینه آزمون و اصلاح تدریجی سیاست‌های نظام حق اختراع در حوزه هوش مصنوعی را فراهم سازد و پاسخگویی نظام حقوقی به تحولات فناورانه را ارتقا دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Regulatory Approaches to Generative Artificial Intelligence Inventions: A Comparative Analysis and Lessons for Iran’s Legal System

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ebrahim Rahbari 1
  • Seyed Mustafa Meshkat 2
1 Assistant Professor of International Trade Law & Intellectual Property and Cyberspace Law Department, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2 Student in International Trade and Investment Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

With the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) innovations and inventions — particularly generative systems — traditional patent regimes have been confronted with fundamental challenges in adapting their classical concepts, including clarifying the role of the human inventor, assessing novelty and inventive step, determining appropriate standards for technical disclosure, and ensuring legal certainty in the registration and protection of AI-based inventions. In this context, exclusive reliance on traditional intellectual property frameworks proves insufficient to address the dynamic nature of AI-driven innovation. This study employs an analytical-comparative methodology to examine various regulatory approaches to AI-related inventions and to assess the current state of Iran's legal system. The research encompasses a review of relevant literature, international policy instruments — including the 2023 OECD report — and an examination of laws and regulatory models in the European Union and other leading jurisdictions. The findings indicate that neither soft law nor hard law regulatory models, taken in isolation, are capable of fully addressing the legal challenges posed by AI-based inventions. By contrast, hybrid approaches — particularly those incorporating the regulatory sandbox as a policy-institutional tool within a hybrid-sectoral framework — offer a viable means of balancing innovation promotion, legal certainty, and technological risk management. Accordingly, this article proposes that Iran's legal system adopt a hybrid-sectoral model incorporating regulatory sandboxes, which — while avoiding hasty legislation — would enable the gradual testing and refinement of patent policies in the field of AI and enhance the legal system's responsiveness to technological developments.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Generative Artificial Intelligence
  • Patent
  • Soft Regulation
  • Hard Regulation
  • Hybrid Regulation
  • Regulatory Sandbox

مراجع

[1[ Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2021, p 100.
[2[ Cornell University Center for Teaching Innovation. (2026). Generative artificial intelligence. https://teaching.cornell.edu/generative-artificial-intelligence (accessed: May 3, 2026)
[3[ Nietering, P. (2022). Why Artificial Intelligence Shouldn’t Be a Patent Inventor. 5 (1). https://doi.org/10.2458/azlawjet.5510
]4[Fessenko, D. (2022). Can Artificial Intelligence (Re)Define Creativity? Philosophical, Ethical and Legal Aspects. In EthicAI=LABS Project Publication (pp. 34–48). DA LAB Foundation & Goethe-Institut Sofia. https://philpapers.org/archive/FESCAI.pdf
]5[ Ding, W., & Deng, S. (2025). The Patentability of AI-Generated Technical Solutions and Institutional Responses: Chinese Perspective vs. Other Countries. Information, 16(8), 629. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16080629
[6] Pundir, D. S., Jindal, B., Ranga, P., Saini, V., Mahajan, N., Kusha, & Pandey, K. (2025). The Rise of Artificial Intelligence in Intellectual Property Law: Patentability and Copyright Issues. Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, 31(4), 40–43. https://doi.org/10.63278/1394
[7] Ebrahim, T. Y. (2020). Artificial Intelligence Inventions & Patent Disclosure. Penn St. L. Rev., 125, 147. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3722720
[8[ Sadeghi, S. H. (2025). An Introduction to Artificial Intelligence. First Edition. Tehran, Iran: Samt Organization. {In Persian}.
[9]  OECD (2023), The State of Implementation of the OECD AI Principles Four Years on, OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers, No. 3, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/835641c9-en.
[10] Walter, Y. (2024). Managing the Race to the Moon: Global Policy and Governance in Artificial Intelligence Regulation—A Contemporary Overview and an Analysis of Socioeconomic Consequences. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-024-00109-4
[11] Filipova, I. A. (2024). Legal Regulation of Artificial Intelligence: Experience of China. Journal of Digital Technologies and Law, 2(1), 46–73. https://doi.org/10.21202/ jdtl.2024.4
[12]  Cheng, J., & Ma, L. (2023). China’s Pilot Free Trade Zones and Company’s Sustainability Performance. Sustainability, 15(19), 14632. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914632
[13]Aboy, M., Liddell, K., & Lath, A. (2025). Inventorship in the age of AI: examining the USPTO Guidance on AI-assisted inventions. Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, jpaf019. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpaf019
[14[ Odeh, Morris K. (2020). Patenting Inventions Generated by Artificial Intelligence: The Way Forward. The Gravitas Review of Business & Property Law 11 (2). 1-13. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3910124 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3910124
[15]Ojaghi,H. , Soleymani Roozbahani,F. and Zohoorian Nadali,I. (2024). The Doctrine of Normativisation and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence. Quarterly Journal of "Government and Law" (QGL), 5(1), 123-150. {In Persian}.
[16]Zekos, G. I. (2022). Advanced Artificial Intelligence and Robo-Justice. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
[17[ Yamamoto, K., & Tabei, Y. (2025). Japanese AI Regulation and Competitive Law. Network L. Rev., p 142.
[18] EU AI Act. See: https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/ (accessed: October 27, 2025)
https://oecd.ai/en/wonk/national-policies )accessed 25 October 2025(.
[19] Research Handbook on Soft Law. (2023). United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
[20] USPTO. (2024). Inventorship Guidance for AI-Assisted Inventions. United States Patent and Trademark Office. https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/inventorship-guidance-for-ai-assisted-inventions.pdf
[21] Villegas Tovar, R., & Pinto Avendaño, D. (2025). Reconceptualizing Inventorship: Addressing the Challenge of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Inventions. AI and Ethics, 4475-4479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00709-5
[22[ Revolusi, P., & Febriandy, R. K. (2025). Developing AI Regulations in Indonesia: Policy Recommendations Based on Comparative Policy Analysis from the European Union, the United States, and Singapore. Jurnal Indonesia: Manajemen Informatika Dan Komunikasi, 6(2), 1035-1049. https://doi.org/10.63447/jimik.v6i2.1380
[23] Research Handbook on Warfare and Artificial Intelligence. (2024). United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[24] Zaidan, E., & Ibrahim, I. A. (2024). AI Governance in a Complex and Rapidly Changing Regulatory Landscape: A Global Perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-18. | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03560-x
[25] Arbel, Y., Tokson, M., & Lin, A. (2024). Systemic Regulation of Artificial Intelligence. Ariz. St. LJ, 56, 545. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4666854
[26] Hagemann, R., Huddleston Skees, J., & Thierer, A. (2018). Soft Law for Hard Problems: The Governance of Emerging Technologies in an Uncertain Future. Colo. Tech. LJ, 17, 37. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3118539
[27] Kauffman, M. (2025). Navigating the EU AI Act: A Practical Guide for Global Manufacturing and Engineering Leaders. (n.p.): Springer Nature Switzerland.
[28] Elgar Companion to Regulating AI and Big Data in Emerging Economies. (2023). United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[29] J. Gavin, D. (2025). Generative AI and the Future of the Humanities: Reading, Writing, Teaching, Labor. (n.p.): Springer Nature Switzerland.
[30] International Handbook of AI Law: A Guide to Understanding and Resolving the Legal Challenges of Artificial Intelligence. (2024). Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer.
[31] American Bar Association. (2024, July). Colorado Enacts Law Regulating High-Risk Artificial Intelligence systems. Business Law Today. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/resources/business-law-today/2024-july/colorado-enacts-law-regulating-high-risk-artificial-intelligence-systems/(accessed: November 28, 2025)
[32]Sayles, J. (2024). Principles of AI Governance and Model Risk Management: Master the Techniques for Ethical and Transparent AI Systems. Springer Nature.
[33] Council of Europe  (2024). The Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence. https://www.coe.int/en/web/artificial-intelligence/the-framework-convention-on-artificial-intelligence
[34] The Challenges of Artificial Intelligence for Law in Europe. (2025). Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland.
[35] Marchant, G. E., & Gutierrez, C. I. (2022). Soft Law 2.0: an Agile and Effective Governance Approach for Artificial Intelligence. Minn. JL Sci. & Tech., 24, 375. https://doi.org/10.24926/15529541.3875
[36[ Warraich, H. J., Tazbaz, T., & Califf, R. M. (2025). FDA Perspective on the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care and Biomedicine. JAMA, 333(3), 241–247. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.21451
[37] Ziccardi, Giovanni (2025). Legal Informatics, Principles of Information Law Series. Edward Elgar Publishing.
[38]  Allen, H. J. (2019). Regulatory Sandboxes. The George Washington Law Review, 87(3), 579–645. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3056993
[39]  AI Regulatory Sandbox Approaches: EU Member State Overview. (2025, May 2). Retrieved October 29, 2025, from https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/ai-regulatory-sandbox-approaches-eu-member-state-overview/  (accessed: October 29, 2025)
[40]  Islam, M. R. (2024). Generative AI, Cybersecurity, and Ethics. United Kingdom: Wiley.
 
 

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار