Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T05:06:41.944Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction: plurality in patenting: medical technology and cultures of protection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2016

JAMES F. STARK
JAMES F. STARK*
Affiliation:
School of Philosophy, Religion and History of Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. Email: J.F.Stark@leeds.ac.uk.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Introduction
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 49 , Special Issue 4: Owning Health: Medicine and Anglo-American Patent Cultures , December 2016 , pp. 533 - 540
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Biagioli, Mario, Jaszi, Peter and Woodmansee, Martha (eds.), Making and Unmaking Intellectual Property: Creative Production in Legal and Cultural Perspective, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bowker, Geoff, ‘What's in a patent?’, in Bijker, Wiebe E. and Law, John (eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992 Google Scholar.

2 Gooday, Graeme and Arapostathis, Stathis, Patently Contestable: Electrical Technologies and Inventor Identities on Trial in Britain, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013 Google Scholar.

3 World Intellectual Property Organization, ‘PCT: the international patent system’, at www.wipo.int/pct/en (2016), accessed 5 September 2016.

4 Hopwood-Lewis, Jonathan and MacLeod, Christine, ‘Patents, publicity and priority: the Aeronautical Society of Great Britain, 1897–1919’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A (2013) 44(2), pp. 212–221 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Charnley, Berris and Radick, Gregory, ‘Intellectual property, plant breeding and the making of Mendelian genetics’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A (2013) 44(2), pp. 222–233 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 MacLeod, Christine and Radick, Gregory, ‘Claiming ownership in the technosciences: patents, priority and productivity’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A (2013) 44(2), pp. 188–201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Porter, Roy, Health for Sale: Quackery in England 1650–1850, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989 Google Scholar; Jenner, Mark and Wallis, Patrick (eds.), Medicine and the Market in England and Its Colonies, c.1450–1850, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ueyama, Takahiro, Health in the Marketplace: Professionalism, Therapeutic Desires, and Medical Commodification in Late-Victorian London, Palo Alto: The Society for the Promotion of Science and Scholarship, 2010 Google Scholar.

7 Gerlach, Neil, Hamilton, Sheryl N. and Sullivan, Rebecca (eds.), Becoming Biosubjects: Bodies, Systems, Technologies, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011 Google Scholar; Gottweis, Herbert, Salter, Brian and Waldby, Catherine, The Global Politics of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Science: Regenerative Medicine in Transition, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Magnus, David, Caplan, Arthur L. and McGee, Glenn (eds.), Who Owns Life?, Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 2002 Google Scholar.

8 Johns, Adrian, Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Pancaldi, Giuliano, ‘The web of knowing, doing and patenting: William Thomson's apparatus room and the history of electricity’, in Biagioli, Mario and Riskin, Jessica (eds.), Nature Engaged: Science in Practice from the Renaissance to the Present, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, pp. 263–285 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gooday and Arapostathis, op. cit. (2), pp. 19–20.

10 ‘Instrument for converting alternating electric currents into continuous currents’, US patent no 803684, 7 November 1905.

11 ‘British Wireless Exhibition: development of the industry’, The Times, 29 September 1924, p. 7.

12 ‘London Medical Exhibition’, The Lancet, 29 October 1932, pp. 973–975; ‘The London Medical Exhibition’, The Lancet, 28 October 1933, pp. 1005–1008.

13 Details of the principal patents, including dates and patent numbers, taken out by Kromayer were emblazoned on a metal plate on the Kromayer Lamp. These included, most prominently: ‘Therapeutic apparatus’, US patent no 834209, 23 October 1906.

14 Jamieson, Annie, ‘More than meets the eye: revealing the therapeutic potential of “light”, 1896–1910’, Social History of Medicine (2013) 26(4), pp. 715–737 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Hanovia Chemical and Manufacturing Company, Presenting Hanovia Quartz Lamps, Newark, NJ: Hanovia Chemical & Mfg. Co., 1932 Google Scholar.

16 Westinghouse Electrical Corporation v. Hanovia Chemical & Mfg. Co., 179 F.2d 293, 84 U.S.P. Q. 110, United States Court of Appeal Third Circuit, 27 December 1949.

17 Stark, James, ‘“Recharge my exhausted batteries”: Overbeck's rejuvenator, patenting and public medical Consumers, 1924–37’, Medical History (2014) 58(4), pp. 498–518 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Overbeck, Otto, A New Electronic Theory of Life, Grimsby: Chantry House, 1925 Google Scholar.

19 Church, Roy and Tansey, E. M., Burroughs, Wellcome & Co.: Knowledge, Trust, Profit and the Transformation of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, 1880–1940, Lancaster: Crucible, 2007, p. 319 Google Scholar.

20 Church and Tansey, op. cit. (19), p. 321.

21 Anderson, Julie, Neary, Francis and Pickstone, John V., Surgeons, Manufacturers and Patients: A Transatlantic History of Total Hip Replacement, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gomez, P. and Morcuende, J., ‘A historical and economic perspective on Sir John Charnley, Chas F. Thackray Limited, and the early arthroplasty industry’, Iowa Orthopaedic Journal (2005) 25, pp. 30–37 Google Scholar.