Small Can Be Inventive: The Patentability of Nanoscale Reproductions of Macroscale Machines

Anderson, Christopher

Journal: William & Mary Business Law Review

Volume: 9

First Page: 285

Year: 2017

Bluebook Citation: 9 WM. & MARY BUS. L. REV. 285 (2017)

Author: C. Arnold Anderson: all 10 publications


Abstract

Nanotechnology is a thriving new field of research. If even a fraction of the excitement surrounding the field proves to be true, there will be profound benefits in many aspects of our lives. Crucial to its development, however, will be the treatment of nanotechnology with respect to patents. This field has the unique potential to replicate existing machines and devices at a billionth of their size.

In light of rulings that “mere scaling” of prior inventions does not create a patentable invention, problems with patentability might arise. This Note tackles this issue, considering the patentability requirements of novelty and non-obviousness, the normative foundations of patent law, and the legal considerations unique to nanotechnology. There is something fundamentally different about machines at this scale that justifies a categorical finding of novelty and non-obviousness over macroscale predecessors.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.