BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Nanotech Boom Leads To Big Legal Questions

 
 
FinderWolf
19:45 / 30.09.03
Wacky stuff -- and to think the first time I heard of nanites and nanotechnology was years ago on a 2nd season episode of STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION!

-------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo News

Nanotech Boom Expected To Force Legal Scrambling
Tue Sep 30,10:06 AM ET

By Doug Tsuruoka

Imagine a robot that's 80,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair.

The device would be tiny enough to slip into a human egg and alter its genetic code. That would let it design "improved" humans who are smarter and resist disease.

Such a robot is one of the many promises of nanotechnology - the science of very small things. The potential is huge for the emerging field. But the legal and ethical issues stirred by nanotechnology are enormous as well.

Lawmakers are closely watching these developments. That means as nanotechnology evolves, rules and regulations could follow.

"Law always develops behind new technology," said Mark Grossman, who chairs the technology law group at Becker & Poliakoff PA in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. "It's in the nature of the beast, and nanotechnology is no different."

The National Science Foundation (news - web sites) predicts that nanotech could generate annual sales of $1 trillion by 2015. And Congress this month is finalizing items in the president's 2004 budget that would give almost $1 billion to nanotech research.

The past three years, researchers at companies such as IBM Corp. and Intel Corp. have made strides in using magnetism or other forces to form linelike patterns on a molecular level. That could lead to molecule-sized chips, which would make it possible to build supercomputers no bigger than a wristwatch. Or there could be nano robots the size of bacteria that do the work of red blood cells.

In the last year alone, scientists have developed molecular motors, atom-sized switches and nano devices that detect proteins.

As nanotech moves from science fiction to reality, some say the laws surrounding it are lagging behind.

Grossman compares laws governing nanotech to where Internet law was in 1995. They're virtually nonexistent.

Over the last year, analysts say, nanotech has figured in state statutes approved in Indiana, California and Florida. Nearly all the laws dealt with promoting nanotechnology in those states.

Nanotech will inevitably run into legal issues, just like Internet gambling and music piracy.

Grossman says most businesses aren't aware how nanotech will effect key sectors of the U.S. economy. Impacted fields will include information technology, medicine, manufacturing, advanced materials and environmental control.

The laws that have covered products and technology since the Industrial Revolution may not apply to nanotech.

Some of the legal questions include:

-Can you patent an atomic or molecular structure?

-How do you protect an atom or molecule-sized device from being illegally copied?

-How do you regulate and tax trade in devices too small to be seen?

-Should nano devices that alter human genes or cells be controlled?

-Should government limit how nanotech is used in surveillance or other security technology?

-What health, safety and product liability issues are raised by devices and processes too small to be seen by the naked eye?

Some legislators think the government should prepare now for such legal issues.

Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., introduced a bill earlier this year that would create a national board to advise the president on nanotech policy issues.

The bill has been referred to the House Committee on Science. Washington, meanwhile, continues to pour money into nanotech research.

President Bush (news - web sites)'s 2004 budget calls for $849 million in funds for the National Nanotechnology Initiative. That's a 10% boost from 2003. The House in May passed another nanotech funding bill totaling $2.36 billion the next three years.

The money will be used by a host of federal agencies to pursue nanotech research.

Current federal outlays on a yearly basis for nanotech research represent a 600%-plus boost over 1997.

When government and the private sector invest billions in emerging fields like nanotech, they rarely think of legal consequences, Grossman says. That's especially true in cases where more than one party teams up to nurture a technology.

"A lot of the contracting that needs to be done is infantile at best, and illiterate at worst," Grossman said. "They don't take time to consider the legal and business issues that are confronting them. They don't take time to negotiate clear understandings between the parties."

Some say the gap between nanotech and current laws isn't that great.

T.S. Twibell, an associate attorney with the Kansas City, Mo., law firm Kurlbaum Stoll Seaman Mustoe & McCrummen, writes about nanotech legal issues.

He says existing federal and local laws are adequate to cover nanotech without serious revision.

Laws already on the books relating to genetic engineering, for instance, could be used to cover nanotech.

But such laws may fall short if there are big advances in nanotech, Twibell says. "That's the time when we may need ethical or other laws to address the peculiarities of nanotechnology," Twibell said.

Legal and ethical questions raised by nanotech shouldn't be taken lightly, says Ted Schettler, science director for the Science and Environmental Health Network, a group of doctors and scientists who advise on environment and health policy.

"Nano particles may have unique biochemical properties that we should know about before we turn them loose in the world of medicine, consumer products and other things," said Schettler, a medical doctor.

One big question, Schettler says, is how nano devices will interact with human tissue. It still isn't clear if there will be adverse effects. It also isn't known if nano devices will enter parts of the body that they're not supposed to, Schettler says.

If you think such issues are purely theoretical, think again, says Don Eigler, a top IBM nanotech researcher. Nanotech isn't decades away, he says; it's already here.

Simple nano devices are already used in some types of chip and data storage technology, Eigler notes.

More advances could be just around the corner. "In science, things just happen," he said. "You just can't predict when somebody is going to have a real breakthrough idea."
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
10:10 / 01.10.03
Before we get too exited, let's take a closer look at some of the claims this piece makes. We're told that new developments "could lead to molecule-sized chips, which would make it possible to build supercomputers no bigger than a wristwatch. Or there could be nano robots the size of bacteria that do the work of red blood cells." (My italics.)

I'm fascinated by nanotech too, in a slightly nervous way, but those are pretty big coulds.
 
 
Cheap. Easy. Cruel.
16:00 / 02.10.03
As nanotech moves from science fiction to reality, some say the laws surrounding it are lagging behind.

This is always the case. Unless lawmakers are clairvoyant, tech will always run ahead of the law. As humans, we will exploit technology before we fully understand what the consequences are. It has happened over and over again. Will there be some hideous and terrible consequences from the continued use and developement of nano-tech? Yes. Will we, as a species, overcome it? Yes. I don't think that the potential for misuse is a reason to turn into Luddites. Technology will always bring change with it, and that change is part of growing. Growing is painful. Always.

I think that Kurzweil summed it up in his book The Age of Spiritual Machines. I don't particularly agree with his, "Everything is coming up roses" outlook. But, on the whole I think he has got it right, though.
 
 
grant
15:41 / 06.10.03
Nature, on the current state-of-play in one nanotech field:

Nanosurgery.

With pulses of intense laser light a millionth of a billionth of a second long, US researchers are vaporizing tiny structures inside living cells without killing them. The technique could help probe how cells work,
and perform super-precise surgery.



Physicist Eric Mazur of Harvard University and
his colleagues have severed parts of cells' internal protein skeleton, have destroyed a single mitochondrion, the cell's powerhouse, leaving its hundreds of neighbours untouched, and have
cut a nerve cell's connection without killing it. They christen their technique laser nanosurgery.

"It's a microscopic James Bond type of scenario," says team member Donald Ingber, a cell biologist at Harvard. "It generates the heat of the Sun, but only for quintillionths of a second, and in a very small space."


There's more at the link. These aren't microscopic machines, but it's basically doing complex engineering on a microscopic level.
 
 
Cheap. Easy. Cruel.
16:05 / 06.10.03
Or they could pick off cancerous cells, suggests Wiseman. At present, tumours are only found when they are too big for such treatment, but researchers are striving to improve detection.

This should be an interesting tech to watch. I wonder how the detection of cancerous cells at the single cell level would play out? Does anyone know if they have singled out the signals that are present when a cell becomes malignant?
 
 
gaff
13:57 / 07.10.03
As a second year student in a Nanotechnology degree, I think those coulds are more a matter of the laws the article discusses, than a matter of science. As part of the degree, we take courses in 'Innovation' to give some grounding in business, becuase there is some thought being put into the effects and applications of technology now. I'm fairly skeptical about this 'boom' but an industrial revolution (both in manufacturing and in business conduct) might be coming.
 
 
FinderWolf
17:01 / 30.12.04
Green breakthrough for nanoscience
Monday, December 6, 2004 Posted: 9:22 AM EST (1422 GMT)

CNN.com

The latest nanoscience breakthrough is environmentally friendly

(CNN) -- A South Korean scientist says he has come up with an inexpensive way to produce nanoparticles on a large scale without harming the environment.

The breakthrough may help to address concerns about the safety of nanotechnology -- the engineering and use of materials at an atomic or molecular scale.

Taeghwan Hyeon, associate professor at Seoul National University's School of Chemical Engineering, claims he and a group of fellow researchers had come up with a safe and easy way to acquire a large amount of monodisperse nano-crystals using non-toxic salts.

Nanotechnology -- the "nano" refers to the nanometer, a measurement of a millionth of a millimeter -- has potential applications in a wide range of industries, from medical diagnostics and treatment to data storage and cleaner energy.

But many scientists say it is too early to assess the possible risks to health and the environment of releasing nanoparticles into the ecosystem.

In the first study into the possible impact of nanotechnology, a UK-government commissioned report published in July called for further research into the environmental implications and possible toxicity to humans of manufactured nanoparticles.

The results of Taeghwan's research were published in the December issue of the Nature Materials journal.

He said he was extremely excited about the breakthrough, which had been four years in the making.

South Korea is one of the world's leading investors in nanotechnology, after setting aside $2 billion for research and development in the field last year.

One of the greatest challenges for nanoscientists is coming up with a way to produce large quantities of nanoparticles without using expensive toxic chemicals.

Mark Welland, professor of nanotechnology at Britain's Cambridge University said the most significant thing about the South Korean scientists' work was that it addressed two major issues regarding nanotechnology, by making it commercially accessible and environmentally friendly.
 
 
FinderWolf
17:07 / 30.12.04
a funny related article on nanotech I saw on CNN:

--

Little robots in your pants
Making sense of revolutionary nanotechnology claim
By Jenny Everett
Popular Science
Saturday, January 10, 2004 Posted: 12:08 AM EST (0508 GMT)

--FORTUNE.COM

HOW DOES IT WORK?
Probably the most visible nanotech product to date are the stain- and wrinkle-resistant slacks developed by North Carolina-based Nano-Tex LLC and sold as Levi Dockers and Lee Jeans among others.

Billions of tiny whiskers create a thin cushion of air above the cotton fabric, smoothing out wrinkles and allowing liquids to bead up and roll off without a trace.

The whiskers are added by dipping cotton fabric in a proprietary chemical solution before the fabric is cut, said Nano-Tex's Dolores Sides.

Because the particles are so small, they easily penetrate the fabric and coat each cotton thread completely without changing the way it looks or feels, she said.

The company has developed similar stain-resistant products for synthetic fibers and upholstery. One new product wraps synthetic fibers in an organic, cotton-like substance to create a garment that combines the longevity of polyester with the comfortable feel of natural fabric, she said.

--REUTERS

(POPULAR SCIENCE) -- Dockers recently came out with a new brand of pants, the Go Khakis, which promise to keep your legs stain-free using revolutionary nanotechnology.

We couldn't help thinking that Dockers might be using the word "nanotechnology" more for marketing muscle than for true scientific purposes, so we called its customer service line to ask a few pointed questions. Here's a slice of the conversation.

Dockers: How can I help you today?

Popular Science: I just bought a pair of the Go Khakis, and I noticed it says they use something called nanotechnology for stain resistance. Can you please explain how that works?

D: Umm, it's, uh, DuPont Teflon coating, and basically what we're asking you to do is not to use powdered detergent and press them after every fifth wash, and dry cleaning is an option also. And do not use fabric softener, because it can interfere with that stain-defending property.

PS: Great, but can you explain what makes this nanotechnology rather than just a coating? What is nanotechnology?

D: One moment please. Did you get the pleated or flat-front?

PS: Flat-front.

D: OK, one moment please. Because the one that says nanotechnology is the versatile pant that wicks moisture away from you.

PS: It says nanotechnology repels stains.

D: OK, one moment please. Can you give me a style number off that?

PS: Sorry, I don't have it with me. But it was a "stain defender," and I believe it said "Go Khaki."

D: And that was the flat-front one.

PS: I believe so.

D: OK, I believe it does say nanotechnology because it's the 60-cotton, 40-micropoly blend.

PS: So that's where the nanotechnology comes in?

D: Uh-huh.

PS: I still don't understand. Are there microscopic machines repelling the stain? How does it work?

D: Umm . . . I guess it's the type of fabric that makes it the nano.

PS: So the "nano" has more to do with the size of the fibers? And water is small enough to get through for washing, but other liquids are not—they bead up and roll off?

D: You know, I'm really not sure, but I do know they'll come clean. My kid has a pair of these. Messy kid. So I got the shirt and pants, and he's doing great with them. You just need to remember to press after every fifth wash.

PS: But would you say the stain defender was the Teflon coating or the size of the fibers?

D: It's a Teflon finish on the pants.

PS: So is nanotechnology affecting the stain resistance?

D: I would say not. I need to help other customers, ma'am. Can I ask how you got the number to call us today?

PS: 1-800-DOCKERS? Lucky guess.

-----------

 
  
Add Your Reply