Isis 103:328-339 (2012)

Abstract
At a time when neoliberalism and financial austerity are together encouraging academic scientists to seek market alternatives to state funding, this essay investigates why, a century ago, their predecessors explicitly rejected private enterprise and the private ownership of ideas and inventions available to them through the patent system. The early twentieth century witnessed the success of a long campaign by British scientists to persuade the state to assume responsibility for the funding of basic research : their findings would enter the intellectual commons; their rewards would be primarily reputational . The essay summarizes recent research in three separate fields of British technoscience—electricity, aviation, and agricultural botany—all of which were laying claim, at this time, to a heightened commercial or military importance that raised new questions about the ownership of scientific ideas. It suggests that each of the three established an idiosyncratic relationship with the patent system or with other forms of “intellectual property,” which would both influence their emergent disciplines and affect the extent to which commercial enterprise could remain a viable funding strategy
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/666359
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 55,968
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Design Enigmas: SSK in the Service of Practice. [REVIEW]Matthew Wisnioski - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (4):613-617.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Surgical Patents and Patients — the Ethical Dilemmas.Tadeusz Tołłoczko - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (1):61-69.
Claiming Ownership in the Technosciences: Patents, Priority and Productivity.Christine MacLeod & Gregory Radick - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (2):188-201.
Principle, Practice and Persona in Isambard Kingdom Brunel's Patent Abolitionism.David Miller - 2008 - British Journal for the History of Science 41 (1):43-72.
Patent Funded Access to Medicines.Tom Andreassen - 2015 - Developing World Bioethics 15 (3):152-161.
GM Crops: Patently Wrong? [REVIEW]James Wilson - 2007 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (3):261-283.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-01-31

Total views
1 ( #1,451,209 of 2,403,330 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #551,892 of 2,403,330 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes