Metal 3D printing: Patent law, trade secrets, and additive manufacturing.

There has been significant investment in research and development in respect of metal 3D printing in the United States (as well as a number of other jurisdictions). There has been growing conflict over the ownership of intellectual property in respect of metal 3D printing (involving not only patents but also trade secrets and confidential information, as well as contract law and unfair competition). In 2018, Desktop Metal Inc. launched litigation against Markforged Inc. and Matiu Parangi in relation to intellectual property and metal 3D printing in the United States. As well as complaints of patent infringement, Desktop Metal Inc. has alleged that the defendants had engaged in acts of trade secret misappropriation, unfair and deceptive business practices, and breach of contract. Markforged Inc. made various counter-claims of its own. In July 2018, a Federal Jury found that Markforged Inc. did not infringe two patents held by its rival Desktop Metal Inc. Claims of further violations of trade secrets and contract law were also considered. In the end, the dispute was settled, with neither party obtaining an advantage in the litigation. There was further conflict over whether the terms of the settlement in respect of non-disparagement were honored. The parties have also faced further intellectual property conflict. In 2021, Continuous Composites has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Markforged Inc. In 2021, Desktop Metal Inc. brought legal action against SprintRay in Germany. Drawing upon this case study, this paper considers whether metal 3D printing will disrupt patent law, policy, and practice. It also explores the tension between the use of trade secrets in commercial 3D printing (such as in metal 3D Printing), and the open source ethos of the Maker Movement. This paper considers the larger implications of this intellectual property dispute over metal 3D printing for scarcity, regulation, and the abundance society. It also explores the innovation policies of the Biden administration in respect of advanced manufacturing-with a focus upon metal 3D printing and additive manufacturing.

Who owns your body? Patricia Piccinini and the future of bioethics.

This article analyses some popular cultural representations of biotechnology, especially the artistic work of the Australian artist Patricia Piccinini to reflect on the role of law, technology and ethics in relation to bodily material. Her view that "with creation...comes an obligation to care for the result", so evident in her poignant pictures, is a sober reminder to us of our responsibilities in regulating new technologies.

The case for the plain packaging of tobacco products.

AIMS: The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) requires nations that have ratified the convention to ban all tobacco advertising and promotion. In the face of these restrictions, tobacco packaging has become the key promotional vehicle for the tobacco industry to interest smokers and potential smokers in tobacco products. This paper reviews available research into the probable impact of mandatory plain packaging and internal tobacco industry statements about the importance of packs as promotional vehicles. It critiques legal objections raised by the industry about plain packaging violating laws and international trade agreements. METHODS: Searches for available evidence were conducted within the internal tobacco industry documents through the online document archives; tobacco industry trade publications; research literature through the Medline and Business Source Premier databases; and grey literature including government documents, research reports and non-governmental organization papers via the Google internet search engine. RESULTS: Plain packaging of all tobacco products would remove a key remaining means for the industry to promote its products to billions of the world's smokers and future smokers. Governments have required large surface areas of tobacco packs to be used exclusively for health warnings without legal impediment or need to compensate tobacco companies. CONCLUSIONS: Requiring plain packaging is consistent with the intention to ban all tobacco promotions. There is no impediment in the FCTC to interpreting tobacco advertising and promotion to include tobacco packs.

The attack of the clones: patent law and stem cell research.

This article considers the integral role played by patent law in respect of stem cell research. It highlights concerns about commercialization, access to essential medicines and bioethics. The article maintains that there is a fundamental ambiguity in the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) as to whether stem cell research is patentable subject matter. There is a need to revise the legislation in light of the establishment of the National Stem Cell Centre and the passing of the Research Involving Embryos Act 2002 (Cth). The article raises concerns about the strong patent protection secured by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation and Geron Corporation in respect of stem cell research in the United States. It contends that a number of legal reforms could safeguard access to stem cell lines, and resulting drugs and therapies. Finally, this article explores how ethical concerns are addressed within the framework of the European Biotechnology Directive. It examines the decision of the European Patent Office in relation to the so-called "Edinburgh patent", and the inquiry of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies into "The Ethical Aspects of Patenting Involving Human Stem Cells".