AI-Related Inventions and Trademark Evidence in China: The September 2026 Examination Standards
- China’s new Patent Examination Guidelines, in force since 1 January 2026, require that the inventor be a natural person and that an artificial-intelligence system may not be named as an inventor; the guidelines also establish a “holistic determination” approach to assessing patentable subject matter.
自2026年1月1日施行的新版《专利审查指南》要求发明人必须是自然人，请求书中不得填写人工智能名称，并确立了判断专利保护客体的”整体判断”原则。
- The Supreme People’s Court’s Opinion on adjudicating artificial-intelligence-related disputes, issued on 7 September 2026, provides in Article 14 that an AI-related invention which “adopts technical means that follow the laws of nature, solves a technical problem and achieves a technical effect consistent with the laws of nature” is protected as a patent-eligible subject matter; the protection is for human creativity, not machine output.
最高人民法院于2026年9月7日发布的《关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见》第14条明确：涉人工智能发明创造”采用遵循自然规律的技术手段，解决了技术问题，实现了符合自然规律的技术效果的”，依法认定为专利法所保护的客体；专利保护的是人的创造性，而非机器的产出。
- The administrative rules and the judicial rules now converge for the first time on the question of AI inventions: both insist that patent protection attaches to human inventiveness, while leaving the door open for AI-assisted technical solutions that meet the three-element test of means, problem and effect.
行政审查规则与司法裁判规则在人工智能发明创造问题上首次形成呼应：二者均强调专利保护指向人的创造性，同时为满足”手段—问题—效果”三要素的人工智能辅助技术方案保留通道。
- The 15th Five-Year Plan for intellectual-property protection and utilisation calls for improving the protection rules for algorithms, artificial-intelligence-generated outputs and matters related to platform-economy development, signalling a forward-looking policy direction for AI-related IP.
《知识产权保护和运用”十五五”规划》提出”完善算法、人工智能生成物以及与平台经济发展相关的知识产权保护规则”，为人工智能相关知识产权指明了前瞻性政策方向。
- The revised Measures for the Prioritised Examination of Patents (Order No. 85) took effect on 1 September 2026, steering fast-track resources toward emerging industries, future industries and key-core-technology breakthroughs; a 26 August 2026 implementation notice clarifies the transition between the old and new regimes.
新修订《专利优先审查管理办法》（局令第85号）自2026年9月1日起施行，优先审查资源向新兴产业、未来产业和关键核心技术攻关倾斜；2026年8月26日的实施工作通知明确了新旧办法的衔接安排。
- In trademark practice, the “three-year non-use cancellation” procedure is placing greater weight on electronically admissible evidence that forms a traceable, mutually corroborating chain — contracts, orders, payments, logistics, platform pages and promotional records — narrowing the room for fabricated transaction invoices or formalistic orders to manufacture a veneer of use.
商标审查中的”连续三年不使用撤销”程序更加重视可采信的电子证据，强调形成可追溯、相互印证的完整链条（合同、订单、付款、物流、平台页面、宣传记录），压缩了以虚假交易发票或形式化订单制造”使用痕迹”的空间。
- Practical compliance for foreign innovators and brand owners means documenting the human contribution in AI-assisted filings, retaining R&D and data-source trail, preparing a use-evidence archive per mark, and building a defensible evidence chain before any cancellation challenge arises.
对境外创新主体与品牌权利人而言，实务合规意味着在人工智能辅助申请中记录人的贡献、留存研发与数据来源痕迹、为核心商标建立使用证据档案，并在面临撤销挑战前构建可抗辩的证据链。
AI-Related Inventions and Trademark Evidence in China: The September 2026 Examination Standards | 人工智能相关发明创造的专利确权边界与商标使用证据要求（2026年9月）/ AI-Related Inventions and Trademark Evidence in China
Overview
September 2026 is a notable moment for intellectual-property protection in China: within the same year, the administrative and judicial branches have both drawn the boundary around artificial-intelligence-related creations so as to protect human inventiveness while accommodating AI-assisted technical solutions. The revised Patent Examination Guidelines in force since 1 January 2026 set out who may be named as an inventor and how patentable subject matter is assessed. The Supreme People’s Court’s Opinion on adjudicating AI-related disputes, released on 7 September 2026, gives courts a dedicated rule — Article 14 — on when an AI-related invention is patent-eligible. Around this core, the 15th Five-Year Plan for IP protection (state document No. 30 of 2026) sets a forward-looking direction, the revised Measures for the Prioritised Examination of Patents (Order No. 85) took effect on 1 September 2026, and trademark use-evidence standards are tightening in practice. The combined message for foreign filers: protect and prove human creativity, and keep the documentary trail that demonstrates it.
Administrative examination: the inventor must be human
The revised Patent Examination Guidelines, effective from 1 January 2026, address artificial intelligence directly. First, the inventor must be a natural person; the request form may not list an AI system as an inventor. The legal status of “inventor” is reserved for human beings, and an AI tool is treated as an instrument of the human inventor. Second, the guidelines establish a “holistic determination” (整体判断) principle: the examiner weighs the invention as a whole against the statutory criteria rather than isolating a single feature. This matters for AI-related applications, where the contribution may lie in how a model, algorithm or data pipeline is applied to a concrete technical problem. Applicants should present the solution as an integrated technical whole, not as a bare claim to an abstract idea or to a machine’s output, and should ensure the named inventors are identifiable natural persons.
Judicial stance: the Supreme People’s Court Opinion of September 2026
On 7 September 2026, the Supreme People’s Court issued the Opinion on Adjudicating Cases Involving Disputes over Artificial Intelligence, the first judicial adjudication rule document on AI issued by the country’s highest judicial organ. Its Part Three (Articles 12–16) deals specifically with IP disputes, covering infringement liability, open-source software, patent grant and validity, technology-contract performance and data-use norms.
Article 14 is the provision most directly relevant to patents. It provides that an AI-related invention which “adopts technical means that follow the laws of nature, solves a technical problem and achieves a technical effect consistent with the laws of nature” is, pursuant to law, a subject matter protected by the patent law. The test is the familiar three-element inquiry — technical means, technical problem, technical effect — applied to AI-related subject matter, and the Opinion makes explicit that the patent system protects human creativity, not machine output. This aligns the judicial threshold with the administrative “holistic determination” principle, gives courts a stable published rule, and closes the gap that had existed between how examiners and judges might treat AI-assisted inventions.
Policy layer and prioritised examination
The 15th Five-Year Plan for the Protection and Utilisation of Intellectual Property (State Council document No. 30 of 2026, issued on 27 July 2026) calls for improving protection rules for algorithms, AI-generated outputs and platform-economy matters, and for continuously improving patent-related legal systems. It signals that AI-related IP rules are still being built, on a trajectory of clearer, more purposive protection rather than exclusion.
The revised Measures for the Prioritised Examination of Patents (Order No. 85), effective from 1 September 2026, replace the 2017 version and steer fast-track resources toward high-value applications — those involving emerging industries, future industries or key-core-technology breakthroughs, or industries encouraged by provincial or city-level governments, among other grounds — while imposing sanctions for conduct violating the principle of good faith. A 26 August 2026 implementation notice clarifies the transition: requests submitted from 1 September 2026 follow the new Measures, earlier ones follow the original; re-examination or invalidation prioritised-examination requests are filed online via the “patent事务服务” module of the patent business-processing system; and the new Prioritised Examination Request form applies from 1 September 2026.
Trademark side: use evidence and the three-year non-use cancellation
On the trademark front, the “three-year non-use cancellation” procedure (撤三) is where evidentiary discipline is tightening most visibly. A registered mark not genuinely used for three consecutive years without proper reason may be cancelled on petition, and examination now places greater weight on electronically admissible materials that form a traceable, mutually corroborating chain: a contract, its order, the payment record, the logistics proof, the platform listing and the promotional record should each corroborate the others. An isolated invoice is no longer enough; fabricated transaction invoices, formalistic orders lacking real performance, or defensive “affiliation” arrangements meant merely to manufacture a semblance of use are being squeezed out.
This direction is reinforced by the revised Trademark Law, adopted on 26 June 2026 and taking effect on 1 January 2027 — the first comprehensive amendment since 1983. It writes the principle of good faith into the statute, tightens the registration gate against hoarding and squatting, and strengthens supervision of trademark agencies. For foreign brand owners, stricter use-evidence expectations plus a good-faith statutory regime mean documented, genuine commercial use is the safest way both to keep a mark alive and to defeat a non-use cancellation petition.
Practical steps for applicants
For AI-related patent filings: (1) record the human contribution — ensure named inventors are natural persons and keep internal logs of who directed and performed the inventive work; (2) draft to the three-element test, articulating technical means, problem and effect as an integrated solution; (3) retain the R&D and data-source trail, documenting provenance and licences of any training data; (4) prepare office-action responses early, assembling search reports and prior-art material to show, holistically, why the solution is a lawful technical contribution.
For trademark protection: (1) build a use-evidence archive per core mark, keeping dated contracts, orders, payments, logistics, platform listings and promotional materials; (2) make the chain self-corroborating with independent sources such as platform pages or customs records; (3) tie defensive registrations to real commercial plans, since filings beyond normal business needs carry rejection and bad-faith risk; (4) prepare the cancellation-defence package in advance rather than waiting for a 撤三 petition.
Related reading
- The revised Patent Examination Guidelines (effective 1 January 2026) on inventor status and subject-matter assessment.
- The Supreme People’s Court Opinion on adjudicating AI-related disputes (7 September 2026), Part Three on IP disputes.
- The 15th Five-Year Plan for the Protection and Utilisation of Intellectual Property (State Council document No. 30 of 2026).
- The revised Measures for the Prioritised Examination of Patents (Order No. 85, effective 1 September 2026).
Sources
- 国家知识产权局（官网）: https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/
- 林州市人民政府（新版《专利优先审查管理办法》全文转载）: https://www.linzhou.gov.cn/2026/09-07/3658810.html
- 浙江省市场监督管理局（浙江省知识产权局）《关于做好〈专利优先审查管理办法〉有关实施工作的通知》转载: https://zjamr.zj.gov.cn/col/col1229094027/art/2026/art_c86f0eda26b8439d806be9a748519f47.html
- 最高人民法院（官网）: https://www.court.gov.cn/
- 最高人民法院知识产权法庭《以人为本 智能向善——聚焦〈最高人民法院关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见〉》: https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-6036.html
- 国家知识产权局《国务院关于印发〈知识产权保护和运用”十五五”规划〉的通知》（国发〔2026〕30号）: https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2026/7/31/art_3693_207456.html
人工智能相关发明创造的专利确权边界与商标使用证据要求（2026年9月）/ AI-Related Inventions and Trademark Evidence in China
概述
2026年9月对中国知识产权保护是一个值得关注的节点：行政与司法两个层面在同一年内就人工智能相关创造的边界作出呼应——既保护人的创造性，又为人工智能辅助的技术方案留出空间。自2026年1月1日施行的新版《专利审查指南》明确了谁可被列为发明人，以及如何判断专利保护客体。最高人民法院于2026年9月7日发布的《关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见》首次为法院提供专门规则——第14条，界定涉人工智能发明创造何时构成专利法所保护的客体。围绕这一核心，《知识产权保护和运用”十五五”规划》（国发〔2026〕30号）指明前瞻方向，新修订《专利优先审查管理办法》（局令第85号）自2026年9月1日起施行，商标使用证据标准在实践中持续收紧。对在华提交申请的外国申请人而言，综合信号很明确：保护并证明人的创造性，并保留能够证明这一点的文档痕迹。
行政审查：发明人必须是人
自2026年1月1日施行的新版《专利审查指南》正面回应人工智能问题。第一，发明人必须是自然人，请求书中不得填写人工智能系统作为发明人——”发明人”的法律地位专属于自然人，无论多先进的人工智能工具都只是人类发明人的器具。第二，指南确立”整体判断”原则：审查员将发明作为一个整体与法定要件衡量，而非孤立看待单一特征。这一点对人工智能相关申请尤为关键，其贡献可能体现在模型、算法或数据管线如何被应用于具体技术问题。申请人应将方案作为一体化技术整体呈现，而非对抽象思想或机器产出的简单主张，并确保列名发明人为可识别的自然人。
司法立场：最高人民法院2026年9月意见
2026年9月7日，最高人民法院发布《关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见》，是国家最高审判机关发布的首部涉人工智能司法裁判规则文件。其第三部分（第12至16条）专述知识产权纠纷，涵盖侵权责任认定、开源软件法律责任、专利授权确权、技术合同履行及数据使用规范。
第14条是与专利关系最直接的条款，明确：涉人工智能发明创造”采用遵循自然规律的技术手段，解决了技术问题，实现了符合自然规律的技术效果的”，依法认定为专利法所保护的客体。适用的仍是熟悉的三要素检验——技术手段、技术问题、技术效果——并应用于人工智能相关客体；意见同时明确，专利制度保护的是人的创造性，而非机器的产出。这使司法门槛与行政”整体判断”原则对齐，为法院提供稳定、公开的裁判规则，并弥合了审查员与法官在对待人工智能辅助发明上可能存在的分歧。
政策层与优先审查
《知识产权保护和运用”十五五”规划》（国发〔2026〕30号，2026年7月27日印发）提出”完善算法、人工智能生成物以及与平台经济发展相关的知识产权保护规则”，并承诺持续完善专利相关法律制度。它释放出信号：人工智能相关知识产权的规则仍在构建之中，走向是更清晰、更有针对性的保护，而非简单排斥。
新修订《专利优先审查管理办法》（局令第85号）自2026年9月1日起施行，取代2017年版，将快车道资源导向高价值申请——涉及新兴产业、未来产业或关键核心技术攻关，或省级、设区的市级人民政府重点鼓励产业等情形——并对违反诚信原则的行为设定罚则。2026年8月26日的实施工作通知明确衔接：自9月1日起提交的优先审查请求按新办法办理，此前已提交的按原办法办理；复审或无效宣告案件的优先审查请求通过”专利业务办理系统”的”专利事务服务”模块线上办理；自9月1日起适用新版《专利优先审查请求书》表格。
商标侧：使用证据与”连续三年不使用撤销”
商标领域，”连续三年不使用撤销”（”撤三”）程序的证据纪律收紧得最为明显。注册商标无正当理由连续三年未真实使用的，可经请求被撤销；审查如今更重视可采信的电子材料，强调形成可追溯、相互印证的完整链条：一份合同、对应订单、付款记录、物流凭证、平台在售页面与宣传记录应彼此印证。一张孤立发票已不足够；虚假交易发票、缺乏真实履行的形式化订单，或仅为制造”使用痕迹”而设的防御性挂靠安排，正被持续挤出。
这一方向得到新修订《商标法》的强化。该法于2026年6月26日通过，自2027年1月1日起施行，是1983年施行以来的首次全面修订。修订将诚实信用原则写入法律文本，收紧注册入口以遏制囤积与抢注，并强化对商标代理机构的监管。对境外品牌权利人而言，更严格的使用证据期待叠加诚信法定原则，意味着有据可查的真实商业使用，是维持商标存续、击退”撤三”请求最稳妥的方式。
申请人实务要点
人工智能相关专利申请：一是记录人的贡献——确保列名发明人为自然人，并保留谁主导、谁完成创造性工作的内部记录；二是围绕三要素撰写，将技术手段、问题与效果作为一体化方案阐明；三是留存研发与数据来源痕迹，记录训练数据的来源与授权；四是提前备妥审查意见答复材料，用检索报告与现有技术材料从整体上说明方案为何构成合法技术贡献。
商标保护：一是为核心商标建立使用证据档案，保存带日期的合同、订单、付款、物流、平台在售信息与宣传材料；二是以平台页面、海关记录等独立来源使证据链自我印证；三是将防御性注册与实际商业规划挂钩，明显超出正常经营需要的申请有驳回与恶意认定风险；四是提前备好撤销答辩材料，而非待”撤三”请求来临才着手。
相关阅读
- 新版《专利审查指南》（2026年1月1日施行）关于发明人地位与客体判断的规定。
- 最高人民法院《关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见》（2026年9月7日），第三部分专述知识产权纠纷。
- 《知识产权保护和运用”十五五”规划》（国发〔2026〕30号）。
- 新修订《专利优先审查管理办法》（局令第85号，2026年9月1日施行）。
来源
- 国家知识产权局（官网）：https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/
- 林州市人民政府（新版《专利优先审查管理办法》全文转载）：https://www.linzhou.gov.cn/2026/09-07/3658810.html
- 浙江省市场监督管理局（浙江省知识产权局）《关于做好〈专利优先审查管理办法〉有关实施工作的通知》转载：https://zjamr.zj.gov.cn/col/col1229094027/art/2026/art_c86f0eda26b8439d806be9a748519f47.html
- 最高人民法院（官网）：https://www.court.gov.cn/
- 最高人民法院知识产权法庭《以人为本 智能向善——聚焦〈最高人民法院关于依法审理涉人工智能纠纷案件的意见〉》：https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-6036.html
- 国家知识产权局《国务院关于印发〈知识产权保护和运用”十五五”规划〉的通知》（国发〔2026〕30号）：https://www.cnipa.gov.cn/art/2026/7/31/art_3693_207456.html