Red Herring reports on a recent study of IP in nanotech:

With 3,818 U.S. patents awarded and 1,777 patent applications awaiting judgment, the young nanotechnology field has an unwieldy mess of intellectual property (IP), . . . .

To avoid the perils of IP battles in the software industry, nanotech firms should pool their patents and initiate joint-licensing schemes, said the study by Lux Research.

Though profits without research are tempting, patent infringement litigation as a revenue model “would have a chilling effect on nanotechnology,” said Matthew Nordan, vice president of research at Lux. “It could set back commercialization by a decade or more.”

Lux used the metaphor of a gold rush to describe the current mentality of nanotech entrepreneurs. University and corporate researchers file patent applications at every turn, betting that the patents will generate lucrative licenses.

It is an interesting article, with lots of fodder for thought about possibilities of patent thickets and gridlock, but it has two problems. First, the provenance of the study is not provided, so one does not know about possible biases. Second, it is far from clear how much of the problem is the familiar one of patent quality -- is the concern over too much density in the space or over too many bad patents?