AI and patents in sport: ready, set, innovate

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly reshaping the global sports industry at a point where elite professional competitions, sophisticated media ecosystems and intellectual property frameworks increasingly converge. From performance analytics and officiating technologies to fan engagement and data monetisation, AI has moved from being an experimental tool to a core strategic asset. As a consequence, the ability to protect AI‑enabled innovation (particularly through patents) is becoming commercially critical.

AI on the pitch: performance, health, and decision‑making

Technology has long played an important role in elite sport, but AI is accelerating both the scale and sophistication of data analysis. Teams in professional leagues such as the NFL, NBA and the English Premier League now routinely deploy AI‑enabled player‑tracking systems to analyse performance, inform tactical decisions and guide training programmes.

These systems are particularly well suited to processing the vast quantities of tracking data generated during a match. Modern systems can automatically analyse video footage in real time or near real time to track every player on the pitch, including those not directly involved in the play. Such platforms can process millions of data points per game, capturing player positioning, movement patterns, workload, biomechanics and tactical structures with a level of granularity that would be impossible for human analysts alone.

Beyond performance optimisation, AI is increasingly used to manage player health. AI‑based injury‑risk models can identify early warning signs of fatigue or biomechanical stress, while AI‑enabled monitoring systems allow clubs to manage training loads more precisely. The commercial incentives are obvious: reducing time lost to injury not only improves sporting outcomes but also protects substantial investments in player contracts.

A range of AI techniques underpin these applications, from neural networks and computer vision systems to more recent advances in generative AI. Generative AI, in particular, is being used to transform complex analytical outputs into structured reports, natural‑language insights and visualisations that can be more easily interpreted by coaches, medical staff and analysts.

AI off the pitch: fan engagement and monetisation

AI’s impact extends well beyond the field of play. Fan engagement and monetisation are central to the success of modern sports leagues, broadcasters and media organisations, and AI is increasingly deployed to personalise content, enhance storytelling and drive audience interaction.

According to  Stats Perform’s 2026 Sport Fan Engagement, Monetisation and AI Trends Report, 81 per cent of sports media organisations increased their use of AI in the past year. Applications range from automated highlight generation and personalised match summaries to AI‑assisted commentary, interactive graphics and real‑time data overlays during live broadcasts. For rights holders and broadcasters operating in highly competitive markets, these AI‑driven enhancements can provide meaningful differentiation and new revenue streams.

FIFA World Cup and AI‑enabled officiating

The 2026 FIFA World Cup illustrates how AI is being embedded in officiating, broadcasting and fan engagement at the highest level of international sport.

Video Assistant Referee (VAR) technology is now firmly established in top‑tier football, albeit not without controversy. In the 2024–2025 English Premier League season, FIFA and its technology partners introduced semi‑automated offside technology. This system uses AI alongside ball‑tracking technology and specialist cameras to track players’ body movements, allowing offside decisions to be made more quickly than traditional VAR reviews, with reported reductions in review times of around 30 seconds.

For the 2026 World Cup, FIFA has indicated that players may be represented by highly detailed AI‑enabled 3D model created by rapidly scanning individual players in a dedicated chamber. The aim is to improve the precision of officiating decisions by modelling a player’s actual physical dimensions (something not fully accounted for in earlier systems) while also enhancing the visual presentation of decisions for spectators in stadiums and television audiences. The technology was successfully tested during FIFA’s Intercontinental Cup in 2025.

Importantly, this evolution shifts the core innovation away from the sporting rules themselves and towards complex technical systems involving computer vision, 3D modelling, real‑time data processing and broadcast integration. This shift can have significant implications for patent protection.

Protecting AI innovation in sport

Developing AI‑enabled systems for elite sport typically involves substantial research and development investment. Technology providers will therefore want to ensure that commercially valuable innovations can be protected, licensed and enforced where appropriate.

Patents can protect novel and non-obvious technical solutions to technical problems, and this principle applies equally in the sports context. Indeed, patents have already been granted for technologies relating to officiating and decision support. One example is European Patent EP1944067B1, entitled “Method and system for detecting an offside situation”, which addresses automated assistance for offside decisions.

That patent was also the subject of Unified Patent Court (UPC) litigation in Ballinno B.V. v UEFA, Kinexon GmbH and Kinexon Sports & Media GmbH (UPC_CFI_151/2024), initiated shortly before the UEFA 2024 European Championships. Although the patentee was ultimately unsuccessful in its infringement action, the case illustrates the willingness of rights holders and suppliers to litigate over officiating technologies.

It is notable that EP1944067B1 does not rely on modern AI techniques. Instead, it involves detecting sound associated with a ball being kicked and comparing that sound to a predetermined reference signal. Nevertheless, it demonstrates that computational methods and algorithmic decision‑making have long been part of sports officiating—and that such systems can, in principle, be protected by patents.

Patentability of AI‑related inventions

Securing patent protection for AI‑related inventions can, however, be challenging without sufficient technical detail of the invention. At the European Patent Office (EPO), exclusions from patentability include mathematical methods and presentations of information as such.

These exclusions are frequently relevant to AI inventions. Computational models and algorithms may be characterised as mathematical methods, while dashboards, visual overlays or decision graphics generated by AI systems may be considered presentations of information. As a result, claims directed solely to data analysis or information display are likely to encounter difficulties.

That said, such exclusions are not absolute. An invention that includes mathematical methods or information presentation may still be patentable if those features contribute to a technical effect and form part of a technical solution to a technical problem. In the AI context, this typically requires demonstrating that the computational model or algorithm is applied in a specific technical context or adapted to a particular technical implementation. For example, if the model is executed on a computer, the focus may be on how it addresses a specific technical constraint, such as latency, sensor noise, or real-time synchronisation.

An additional nuance arises because sport is not, in itself, a field of technology. However, this does not preclude patent protection for AI systems used in sport. The relevant question is whether the invention has a technical effect, such as improving the operation of a computer system, enhancing the accuracy of computer vision techniques, or interacting with physical entities in the real world.

Returning to the example of semi‑automated offside technology, a patent application would likely emphasise novel technical features in the computer vision techniques used to detect and track players, the fusion of camera data with 3D models, or the real‑time processing architecture that enables visualisation under strict latency constraints. Provided these technical features are sufficiently detailed and credibly linked to a technical improvement, they may contribute to patentability.

Conclusion

As elite sport becomes ever more data‑driven, AI systems are no longer peripheral tools but core components of performance analysis, officiating, broadcasting and fan engagement. High‑profile events such as the 2026 FIFA World Cup highlight how closely technical innovation, commercial value and public scrutiny now intersect.

In this environment, patents can serve as strategic assets that can help justify and protect significant investment in AI technologies. While AI‑related inventions in sport may face particular patentability challenges, these hurdles are not insurmountable. Careful framing of the invention as a technical solution to a technical problem, grounded in areas such as computer vision, sensing or real‑time data processing, can be decisive.

For technology developers, sporting governing bodies and media organisations alike, the key lesson is that IP strategy should be considered early and alongside system design, including through patent clearance searching where protection may be available for sporting technologies. As AI continues to transform how sport is played, officiated and experienced, the ability to protect genuine technical innovation will increasingly shape competitive advantage both on and off the field.