New Guidance On Generative AI In Patent Work: Essential Reading For Inventors And SMEs
The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) and the Intellectual Property Regulation Board (IPReg) have issued new guidance on using generative AI for patent work.
In this article, we answer some key questions about the new guidance, and who and what it is for.
Why The New CIPA Guidance On Generative AI Matters
Generative AI tools are now everywhere. Many inventors and small, innovative businesses are already using them to:
- Brainstorm product ideas;
- Tidy up technical descriptions;
- Help draft patent-related documents; or
- Summarise prior art and patent search results.
Used well, these tools can save time and spark useful ideas. But used incorrectly, they can seriously damage the ability to get strong patent protection – in some cases potentially even invalidating patent applications altogether.
To address these risks, the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) has published new guidance on the use of generative AI in patent work, aimed at helping the patent attorney profession and the innovators we work with use these tools safely and responsibly.
The CIPA guidance on generative AI was published on 4 December 2025 and is available to download for free from the CIPA website.
Who Created The CIPA Guidance?
The CIPA guidance was developed by CIPA’s AI Committee, working with contributors from across the profession. Iain Russell, Director and Founder of Russell IP, is Chair of CIPA’s AI Committee and oversaw the work on the guidance. Producing the guidance was a team effort, involving:
- Members of the AI Committee; and
- Experts from outside the Committee.
At Russell IP, we’ve been testing and reviewing AI tools for several years (including through initiatives like Iain’s “IP Tool Demo Day”), so we’ve seen at first hand some of the opportunities and the pitfalls.
Who Is The CIPA Guidance For?
The CIPA guidance is relevant to:
- Inventors (individuals and founders);
- Small and medium-sized entities (SMEs) building their first patent portfolios;
- In-house patent teams who work with external patent attorneys; and
- Anyone involved in preparing, reviewing or instructing patent work while using generative AI tools.
If you fall into one of these categories, the CIPA guidance is for you.
Why Does The CIPA Guidance Focus On Risks?
Generative AI offers potential opportunities, such as:
- Speeding up some patent drafting tasks;
- Helping to explore “what if” variations of an invention; or
- Assisting with document organisation.
However, as a profession, we have seen a rapid increase in potentially dangerous uses of generative AI, often by people who are new to patents. These include situations where:
- Incorrect use of AI unintentionally discloses an invention publicly before a patent application was filed;
- AI-drafted text has been copied into a patent application without proper checking, leading to inaccurate or incomplete descriptions; or
- Confidential or commercially sensitive details have been provided to tools that store or reuse that data, creating serious confidentiality issues.
Because the consequences can be so serious – including losing the ability to obtain valid patent protection at all – the new CIPA guidance focuses mainly on identifying and managing risks, rather than advertising the upsides.
Key Risks Of Using Generative AI In Patent Work
Here are some of the issues the CIPA guidance is designed to help with.
1. Risk Of Jeopardising Patentability Through Public Disclosure
Many AI tools run on cloud servers. If you provide your unpublished invention details to a system that:
- Logs prompts;
- May use your data to train models; or
- Makes content visible to others inside or outside your organisation,
you may have created a public disclosure. In many countries’ patent laws, that can count as prior art against your own patent application, reducing your chances of getting a valid patent.
2. Incorrect Or Misleading Legal “Advice” From AI
Generative AI is not a qualified patent attorney. It can:
- Sound confident while being completely wrong about patent law;
- Mix rules from different countries; or
- Miss subtle but crucial requirements (for example, how much technical detail is needed to support a patent claim).
Relying on AI output instead of professional advice can therefore lead to patent applications that look plausible but are legally weak, or to dangerous advice. Providers of generative AI technologies often explicitly indicate that their products are not to be used for legal advice without human input. For example, the OpenAI Usage Policies in force at the time of publishing this article state that OpenAI services cannot be used for the “provision of tailored advice that requires a license, such as legal or medical advice, without appropriate involvement by a licensed professional”:
Your use of OpenAI services must follow these Usage Policies:
- Protect people. Everyone has a right to safety and security. So you cannot use our services for:
- threats, intimidation, harassment, or defamation
- …
- provision of tailored advice that requires a license, such as legal or medical advice, without appropriate involvement by a licensed professional
Google’s policy on the use of AI in its products, as at the date of publishing this article, has a statement indicating that human supervision is required in high-risk domains such as legal:
Generative AI models can help you explore, learn, and create. We expect you to engage with them in a responsible, legal, and safe manner. The following restrictions apply to your interactions with generative AI in the Google products and services that refer to this policy.
- Do not engage in dangerous or illegal activities, or otherwise violate applicable law or regulations. This includes generating or distributing content that:
- …
- Makes automated decisions that have a material detrimental impact on individual rights without human supervision in high-risk domains — for example, in employment, healthcare, finance, legal, housing, insurance, or social welfare.
3. Confidentiality, Privacy And Regulatory Concerns
If you provide confidential information to an AI tool:
- You may be in breach of NDAs or internal policies;
- You might be sharing third-party personal data in ways that raise data protection (e.g. UK GDPR) issues; and
- You may lose control over where copies of that information are stored or processed.
CIPA’s guidance encourages users to understand the data policies of any tool they use and to avoid sharing sensitive content inappropriately.
4. Quality And Inventorship Issues
Generative AI can help rewrite or expand text, but:
- It may invent technical features that do not reflect the original invention;
- It can blur the line between what the human inventor contributed and what the tool suggested; or
- It can introduce inaccuracies that make it harder to enforce a patent later.
CIPA’s guidance emphasises that human inventorship and judgement remain central, and that AI-assisted output must be checked carefully.
Does This Mean You Shouldn’t Use Generative AI At All?
No. The message is “it can be used, but carefully”, especially in patent-critical contexts.
The CIPA guidance recognises that:
- Generative AI can be a useful supporting tool; and
- Many attorneys and clients are already using AI in their workflows.
The CIPA guidance helps readers:
- Understand where the red lines are;
- Put in place safe-usage policies (for example, within your startup or SME); and
- Know when to speak to a patent attorney before using AI on a particular task.
Iain Russell’s Role And Russell IP’s Perspective
As Chair of CIPA’s AI Committee, Iain Russell has been closely involved in shaping the new CIPA guidance, drawing on:
- His practical experience as a UK and European patent attorney specialising in AI and computer technology;
- His work testing and comparing different IP-focused AI tools in real-world practice; and
- His building of tools with AI and using AI for a range of clients.
At Russell IP, we:
- Already follow regulatory guidance and best practice for responsible AI use;
- Help clients think through when and how to use AI tools; and
- Can review AI-generated materials to ensure they support, rather than undermine, your patent position.
If you’re unsure whether your current use of AI is safe from a patent perspective, we’re happy to discuss it.
Where To Download The CIPA AI Guidance
CIPA’s full guidance is available free of charge from the CIPA website:
https://www.cipa.org.uk/news/ai-guidance-for-smes-and-creators/
The guidance was published on 4 December 2025. It reflects the CIPA AI Committee’s thinking on generative AI in patent work as at that date. The guidance recommends monitoring for updates.
IPReg Guidance
The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (IPReg) has produced separate AI guidance to support UK patent attorneys and trade mark attorneys in considering when to use AI in their work.
As stated on the IPReg website (as at 16 December 2025):
IPReg has developed some interim guidance to help regulated persons identify those elements of IPReg’s regulatory arrangements that may be relevant when considering using AI in the course of their work.
This is a fast evolving area and we will continue to update this guidance as technology and its impact develops. IPReg is also working with CIPA and CITMA on more practical guidance which will be shared in due course.
FAQs: Generative AI Guidance For Patent Work
1. Is The CIPA Guidance Available For Free?
Yes. The CIPA guidance is intended to support the whole profession and the innovators we work with, so CIPA has made it available free of charge on its website.
2. Where Can I Download The CIPA Guidance?
You can download the CIPA guidance directly from the CIPA website:
Download link: https://www.cipa.org.uk/news/ai-guidance-for-smes-and-creators/
3. When Was The CIPA Guidance Published?
The CIPA guidance was published on 4 December 2025.
The guidance reflects CIPA’s response to developments in generative AI and its growing use in patent drafting and prosecution up to that date.
4. Who Should Read The CIPA Guidance?
The CIPA guidance may be relevant to:
- Inventors (including solo inventors and founders);
- SMEs and startups who are considering filing patents;
- In-house legal and R&D teams; and
- Anyone using generative AI in connection with invention capture, patent drafting, or patent strategy.
If you are using, or thinking of using, generative AI in any part of your patent journey, you may find the CIPA guidance useful.
5. Does The CIPA Guidance Say We Must Stop Using Generative AI?
No. The CIPA guidance does not suggest stopping using generative AI.
Instead, it:
- Explains the risks and pitfalls in relation to patent work;
- Encourages clear policies and safeguards; and
- Stresses the importance of human professional judgement in patent work.
In practice, that means using AI as a tool under careful control, rather than as a substitute for a qualified patent attorney.
6. Who Is The IPReg Guidance For?
The IPReg guidance is intended to help patent and trade mark attorneys think about when to use AI in their work.
7. How Can Russell IP Help My Business Apply The CIPA Guidance?
We can:
- Review your current or planned use of AI tools in relation to patents;
- Help design practical policies for your team (e.g. what can and can’t be provided to AI tools);
- Integrate the new CIPA guidance into your patent strategy; and
- Help you identify AI assistance which supports, rather than jeopardises, your patent protection.
If you’d like to discuss how the new CIPA guidance applies to your situation, book a free consultation.
