Open-source nanotechnology: Solutions to a modern intellectual property tragedy
Source abstract
Abstract
Despite being an extremely active area for patent applications, nanotechnology development is being impaired by current intellectual property law. In contrast to other emerging fields at their times, nanotechnology was born as the Bayh–Dole Act enabled universities to lock down fundamental research effectively preventing open competition. Both technical complexity and bureaucratic mishandling of nanotechnology patent applications have created a dense patent thicket of overlapping claims and rights. This intellectual property tragedy restricts downstream innovation by preventing development of more complex technologies due to exorbitant transaction costs. This article addresses this tragedy with the application of the free and open-source paradigm from software development as open-source methodologies will both accelerate nanotechnology innovation and improve the social return from public investment in nanotechnology research.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Intellectual Property and Patents · Innovation Policy and R&D · Open Source Software Innovations
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (32)
Show source-provided references
1. Anderson · 2012
2. Makker · South. Calif. Law Rev. · 2011 · 84 · 1163
3. The Economist · Economist · 2002
4. Phoenix · Nanotechnology · 2004 · 15 · 86910.1088/0957-4484/15/8/001 ↗
5. Boldrin · 2008
6. Mowery · Res. Policy · 2001 · 30 · 9910.1016/S0048-7333(99)00100-6 ↗
7. Heller · Science · 1998 · 280 · 69810.1126/science.280.5364.698 ↗
8. Garfinkel · 1999 · 35
9. Chesbrough · 2006
10. Pearce · Nature · 2012 · 491 · 51910.1038/491519a ↗
11. Mushtaq · 2012 · 191
12. Chen · Nat. Nanotechnol. · 2008 · 3 · 12310.1038/nnano.2008.51 ↗
13. Schummer · 2007 · 291
14. Heller · Science · 1998 · 280 · 69810.1126/science.280.5364.698 ↗
15. Stiles · Drexel Law Rev. · 2012 · 4 · 555
16. Miller · 2005
17. Burgi · Curr. Sci. · 2006 · 90 · 645
18. Einsiedel · Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. · 2004 · 24 · 2810.1177/0270467604263110 ↗
19. Lemley · Stanford Law Rev. · 2005 · 58 · 601
20. Vaidhyanathan · 2006 · 225
21. Pearce · Environ. Dev. Sustain. · 2012 · 14 · 42510.1007/s10668-012-9337-9 ↗
22. Woelfle · Nat. Chem. · 2011 · 3 · 74510.1038/nchem.1149 ↗
23. Maurer · PLoS Med. · 2004 · 1 · e5610.1371/journal.pmed.0010056 ↗
24. Bruns · Nanotechnology · 2001 · 12 · 19810.1088/0957-4484/12/3/303 ↗
25. Deek · 2008
26. E.S. Raymond, The Cathedral and the Bazaar (O’Reilly, 1999). Available via http://www.catb.org/∼esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ (accessed 01.03.13).
27. Bergquist · Inf. Syst. J. · 2001 · 11 · 30510.1046/j.1365-2575.2001.00111.x ↗
28. Salamanca-Buentello · PLoS Med. · 2005 · 2 · e9710.1371/journal.pmed.0020097 ↗
29. Kepler · Aust. J. Chem. · 2006 · 59 · 29110.1071/CH06095 ↗
30. Pearce · Science · 2012 · 337 · 130310.1126/science.1228183 ↗
31. Zhang · PLoS ONE · 2013 · 8 · e5984010.1371/journal.pone.0059840 ↗
32. J.P. Holdren, Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research, Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy. Available: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf (accessed 01.03.13).