Slashdot Mirror


Why Geim Never Patented Graphene

gbrumfiel writes "As we discussed on Tuesday, Andre Geim won this year's Nobel prize in physics for graphene, but he never patented it. In an interview with Nature News, he explains why: 'We considered patenting; we prepared a patent and it was nearly filed. Then I had an interaction with a big, multinational electronics company. I approached a guy at a conference and said, "We've got this patent coming up, would you be interested in sponsoring it over the years?" It's quite expensive to keep a patent alive for 20 years. The guy told me, "We are looking at graphene, and it might have a future in the long term. If after ten years we find it's really as good as it promises, we will put a hundred patent lawyers on it to write a hundred patents a day, and you will spend the rest of your life, and the gross domestic product of your little island, suing us." That's a direct quote.'"

8 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If a Nobel prize doesn't count as prior art, the system is even more broken that it seems

  2. Patents help the little guy by Stiletto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is as fine example as any about how patents help the small business and/or lone inventor.

  3. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by dougmc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, they don't have to patent graphene itself -- they can just patent every possible application of it that they can think of.

    That's really the way things seem to work -- if you patent something really awesome, somebody with a lot more lawyers will surround your invention with patents so it can't be used, even by you, without infringing on one of their patents. In general, these patents tend to be "obvious to the layperson" and therefore should be thrown out, but that requires lots of money, and it's easier to just pay their extortion money.

    The system is screwed up. It would be even more screwed up if you needed a Nobel prize to protect yourself against it, but at least in this case it's not needed -- and doesn't even help.

  4. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by DJ+Jones · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTFA. In the next paragraph Geim talks about what the guy from the electronics company meant. Patents only work if they are for specific devices or processes. Since graphene hasn't been use in any practical real-world solutions yet, there's really nothing to patent at this stage. The company that develop devices and uses for Graphene will end up filing more specific and enforceable patents.

    He wasn't necessarily knocking the system.

  5. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's how patents work in biotech. First you find a gene, then you immediately patent it - don't worry about figureing out what it does, because if you delay to do that a competitor might file first. Then you figure out what it does, and then you patent every possible application just to be safe. Commercial biotech research is basically driven by patents, but it can get extremally aggressive.

  6. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by Spatial · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We've arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science and technology. And this combustible mixture of ignorance and power, sooner or later, is going to blow up in our faces. I mean, who is running the science and technology in a democracy if the people don't know anything about it?

    Carl Sagan

  7. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey, I work in commercial biotech research! Are you calling me aggressive?

    You wanna come over and say that, buddy?

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  8. Re:But if he doesn't patent it... by Kvasio · · Score: 5, Funny

    mod parent +1, aggressive