Chat with a robot

photo: tincho franco

Sing in me, Muse Bard, and tell of that pomaceous fruit.

Specifically, I have been unable to locate the plant patent for the Aura apple.

Aura is a brand name, so not the true cultivar name under which the patent would have been granted.

Is this a job for a mild-mannered robot?

I asked Bard, Google's entry in the AI sweepstakes:

(me): Who holds the patent on the Aura apple?

Here is what Bard told me:

There is no patent on the Aura apple.

The Aura apple is a proprietary apple cultivar that was developed by the University of Minnesota. It was released in 2005 and is a cross between the Honeycrisp and Fuji apple varieties. The Aura apple is a crisp, juicy apple with a sweet flavor. It is a good all-purpose apple that can be eaten fresh or used in pies, crisps, and other baked goods.

Apple cultivars are not patentable because they are not considered to be inventions. Apple cultivars are simply the result of selective breeding of existing apple varieties. The University of Minnesota holds the copyright to the Aura apple, but anyone can grow and sell the apple without paying royalties.

That is so...so....

Let's break this down.

Once more slowly

There is no patent on the Aura apple.

The cultivar is almost certainly patented, though not under the name "Aura," which is a trademarked brand name.

The Aura apple is a proprietary apple cultivar that was developed by the University of Minnesota. 

UMinn, which has created some famous varieties, would certainly boast of Aura on its page of apple cultivars if this were true. There is no such entry.

It was released in 2005 and is a cross between the Honeycrisp and Fuji apple varieties.

Aura is a Honeycrisp x Aurora cross. 2005? Seems a bit early for an apple that did not surface until this year, but maybe.

The Aura apple is a crisp, juicy apple with a sweet flavor.

Bard really went out on a limb with this one! For a more nuanced take, see my review.

It is a good all-purpose apple that can be eaten fresh or used in pies, crisps, and other baked goods.

This is probably...true.

Of many commercial apples.

Apple cultivars are not patentable because they are not considered to be inventions.

There is an entire universe of plant patents at the US Patent Office.

Apple cultivars are simply the result of selective breeding of existing apple varieties.

Mostly true, though there is a small handful of genetically modified apple breeds now.

The University of Minnesota holds the copyright to the Aura apple, but anyone can grow and sell the apple without paying royalties.

Just to recap: Not UMinn. Also, you can't copyright a plant, though you can patent it. 

And I'll bet you an Ashmead's Kernel that rights to this apple are restricted.

Typically, licensing fees for a new variety are used to fund the marketing campaign for that variety. There would be no point in patenting an apple if you gave the rights to it away for free.

Bard and the robots

Google has made Bard available for testing if you have a Google account. 

To be fair, Google says upfront that Bard is just an "experiment" right now, and that it may not always be accurate.

The point of the tests is to improve accuracy, and other things.

Nonetheless, look for AI-generated nonsense coming soon to a website near you.