Artificial intelligence tools that assist with design are reshaping engineering work, but they also raise complex intellectual property (IP) questions that professionals and companies must address. Grant Steyer, an attorney with Renner Otto, explains that generative design systems, that is, software that can propose, morph, or optimize design options using algorithms, do not create IP on their own. Under current law, human input remains central to patent and copyright ownership, meaning that designers and engineers using AI must document and demonstrate their own creative contributions to secure protection, tells Digital Engineering 24/7.
One major issue is inventorship. Patent systems around the world generally require named inventors to be natural persons, not machines. Even if an AI system suggests a novel feature or structure, the legal framework still hinges on human decisions about what to pursue, select, and file. Engineers and design teams should be careful about how they attribute contributions, recognizing that the AI model itself cannot be listed as an inventor.
Second, using AI can unintentionally expose organizations to infringement risk. Because generative design tools are trained on large datasets, often drawn from prior designs, code, or engineering literature, outputs may unwittingly resemble existing patented subject matter or proprietary work. Without careful oversight, choosing an AI-suggested design could mirror elements of protected IP. The risk is that engineers and companies could later face legal disputes despite not having direct access to the underlying training data.
Steyer’s perspective underscores a practical point: AI should be treated as an advanced tool or assistant. Engineers and innovators must maintain clear records of how they directed the AI, what prompts they used, and why they selected specific designs. This documentation supports IP filings and helps defend against claims that human contribution was insufficient under legal standards.
As AI tools grow more capable, firms will need to balance innovation advantages with careful legal planning. Engineers should engage IP counsel early when deploying AI in design workflows to align emerging technology use with established legal frameworks.