Slashdot Mirror
Nanomedicine Patent Thickets Threaten Future
cheesedog writes "Over 5000 nanomedicine/nanotech patents have now been granted, and the patent land grab continues unabated. Dr. Raj Bawa says, "Patent thickets are considered to discourage and stifle innovation. Claims in such patent thickets have been characterized as often broad, overlapping and conflicting - a scenario ripe for massive patent litigation battles in the future." According to Bawa, nanomedicine start-ups may soon find themselves in patent disputes with large, established companies, as well as between themselves. In most of the patent battles the larger entity with the deeper pockets will rule the day even if the innovators are on the other side."
"Why is the assumption that innovation will be followed by excessive litigation?" - Well, for starts, how about because it's demonstrably true? With the availability of the human genome, we should be seeing an EXPLOSION in the number of drug treatments for various diseases. And yet, how many medicines gained FDA approval in 2005 for use on humans? 20. Yep - lowest number ever. And the reason? Pharmasetical companies are content to keep making the drugs they have patents on, and not to any new research.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
This "article" is really a press release from a company that serves as "the missing link between buyers and suppliers of nanomaterials." However, Dr. Bawa seems to be someone who knows a lot about the subject and has been talking about this to anyone who will listen.
My knowledge of nanotech could fill a nanotube, but I pay attention when someone who does seem to be deeply involved in nanotech raises the alarm about this tide of patents.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Actually, I remember that. The story was that import restrictions on computers left the Iraq regime strapped for computing resources, and an easy way to get around that was to buy PS2's and use them to crunch numbers. Here's 1 link: http://ps2.ign.com/articles/089/089251p1.html
For the true Einstein like scientist, what would be his/her motivation to stay in a western country? Seriously?
If this doesn't change then in 50 years time we are going to find ourselves being totally owned by the other half of the world.
Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
Sigh, another day at slashdot of patent bashing.
If I think flying cars are going to be produced in the next 10 years. I can't get a patent just by writing a claim that says:
1. An apparatus comprising:
a car; and
a flight engine attached to said car allowing said car to fly.
There is really nothing wrong with this claim, the problem is going to come in the description. 35 U.S.C. 112 is the written description, and it requires the specification (the part before the claims) and figures to adequately support the claims and explain how it works. While the claim can be cast in these fluffy terms like "flight engine". If a person of skill in the art wouldn;t know what a flight engine is the patent is going to be invalid unless its adequately described in the specification.