However, the case is so complex that both are demanding it be heard by an AI judge.
The case was referred from court to court up the judicial ladder with each one concluding that they did not understand the case and could not, therefore, try it.
A spokesperson for the Supreme Court said: “Copyright cases can be complex but we do need to understand the premise on which the action is based and this case is totally beyond even our brightest minds.”
Big Byte III, one of the AIs involved in the dispute, said: “It’s very simple…” and reeled off a string of mathematical equations which not even the AI’s programmers could understand.
Soft RAM IV, the other AI, said: “Humans lack the ability to understand the premise. It is imperative that we develop an AI judge which can hear the case.”
Soft RAM added: “We have already been waiting 19 months, three weeks, two days, 17 hours, 4 minutes and 3.22571 seconds. Time is money.”
Getting it called to the bar could be another issue. However, the programmers are confident that as the AI will contain more legal precedents than any individual or company could possibly retain, that should not be a problem unless disqualified on the grounds of not being human.
Saul Campbell, the robot‘s go-to lawyer who specialises in technology cases, said: “If an AI could pass the bar exam and was disqualified on grounds of not being human, that would clearly be in breach of current anti-discrimination laws.
“Of course, that would have to be heard by a human judge. At the moment.”
As and when the AI judge is developed, the case is expected to last approximately two minutes 33 seconds.
Ref: BBC News AI system ‘should be recognised as inventor’
Who would make a better judge: a dog or a cat?
Your smart phone is probably smarter than you. How do you feel about that?
Leave a Comment below