Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Patentability Implications of the EU AI Act

By Daniel Lass on February 12, 2026
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Novelty is a core requirement for any invention to be patentable. Put simply, your invention generally cannot have been publicly disclosed before the patent application’s effective filing date. In the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 102 includes a one-year grace period for certain public disclosures made before you file—many other jurisdictions do not have this grace period. Europe, for example, generally applies an absolute novelty standard, where your invention can bar patentability if you publicly disclose first and file later.

This is where the EU AI Act can create an unexpected patentability issue. The Act sets out a comprehensive framework for regulating AI and includes a mandatory registration requirement for AI systems considered “high-risk.” An AI system is considered high-risk when it relates to areas such as safety components, critical infrastructure, education, border control, and law enforcement.

Before a high-risk AI system can be placed on the market, the provider must register the system with the EU Commission and submit information about the system in a searchable and publicly accessible EU database. If the information submitted includes enabling technical details, that registration can function as a public disclosure and can block patentability in absolute novelty jurisdictions, like Europe and China.

Bottom line: if EU AI Act registration is on your roadmap, build IP planning into the timeline. Companies should consider preparing and filing patent applications at or before submitting information to the EU Commission, so their own disclosures do not become prior art against later-filed patent applications.

Tags: AI
Photo of Daniel Lass Daniel Lass

Daniel J. Lass is a member of the Data Privacy + Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Teams, advising clients on compliance with state and federal privacy laws. He is also a member of the Intellectual Property + Technology group with a concentration on the…

Daniel J. Lass is a member of the Data Privacy + Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Teams, advising clients on compliance with state and federal privacy laws. He is also a member of the Intellectual Property + Technology group with a concentration on the preparation and prosecution of patent applications in electro-mechanical and mechanical-related areas and other disciplines.  Read his full rc.com bio here.

Read more about Daniel LassEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Technology and AI
  • Blog:
    Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider
  • Organization:
    Robinson & Cole LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo