Patents a big deal in nanotech?
In a mindless piece titled proposed intellectual property model for nanotechnology, nanowerk wrote:
Stanford Law School researcher Mark Lemley said in a 2005 study entitled Patenting Nanotechnology that “…patents will cast a larger shadow over nanotech than they have over any other modern science at a comparable stage of development.”
In "Patenting Nanotechnology" [Stanford Law Review], Lemley wrote that Gary Boone invented the integrated cirucuit, which removed the real integrated circuit story from his consideration. Lemley separately thought the transistor inventors contemplated only hearing aid applications, limiting his analysis of the story of patents and the transistor.
The foolishness originated with Wagdy Sawahel at Intellectual Property Watch.
***
One notes that a different puff piece titled Nanotechnology: What Is It and Why Do Law Librarians Need to Know About It? emphasized tort above patent litigation issues with nanotechnology:
Concerns about exposure could lead to various tort claims, as well as cases involving consumer fraud. From an employment law perspective, workplace exposure or disability claims could be filed.
***
See also PLI blog
***In passing
The 30 Nov 08 episode of "The Unit"had an unflattering portrayal of an academic, who directed the members to a non-existent anthrax factory and otherwise omitted certain details. Sounded just like certain IP academics.
Stanford Law School researcher Mark Lemley said in a 2005 study entitled Patenting Nanotechnology that “…patents will cast a larger shadow over nanotech than they have over any other modern science at a comparable stage of development.”
In "Patenting Nanotechnology" [Stanford Law Review], Lemley wrote that Gary Boone invented the integrated cirucuit, which removed the real integrated circuit story from his consideration. Lemley separately thought the transistor inventors contemplated only hearing aid applications, limiting his analysis of the story of patents and the transistor.
The foolishness originated with Wagdy Sawahel at Intellectual Property Watch.
***
One notes that a different puff piece titled Nanotechnology: What Is It and Why Do Law Librarians Need to Know About It? emphasized tort above patent litigation issues with nanotechnology:
Concerns about exposure could lead to various tort claims, as well as cases involving consumer fraud. From an employment law perspective, workplace exposure or disability claims could be filed.
***
See also PLI blog
***In passing
The 30 Nov 08 episode of "The Unit"had an unflattering portrayal of an academic, who directed the members to a non-existent anthrax factory and otherwise omitted certain details. Sounded just like certain IP academics.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 8:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home