More on patents to block free inquiry...In the March 10 issue of The Scientist, Ed Ergenzinger and Murray Spruill summarize the consequences of last year's holding in Madey v. Duke University (Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, October 2, 2002). You might know that "experimental use" is a defense against patent infringement. That's true. You might think that scientific experimentation in universities is covered by this rule. It isn't. The experimental use defense doesn't apply when the experiment serves the business interests of the alleged infringer. Since the business of universities is "educating and enlightening students and faculty" and securing "lucrative research grants", and scientific experimentation serves these goals, the experiments are not covered and patent-holders may sue for damages. Madey was the first case to apply this doctrine to universities.
In Madey, the alleged infringement was the unauthorized use of a patented laser in a scientific lab. But to see how the Madey doctrine can thwart even basic research into nature, without regard to the technologies of research, recall the application by Andras Pellionisz to patent any attempt "to count, measure and compare" the fractal properties of DNA introns (blogged to FOS News on 11/26/02).
Posted by
Peter Suber at 3/19/2003 05:30:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
