Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 11 - Conclusion

  • Brad Sherman, University of Queensland
  • Book:
    Intangible Intangibles
    Published online:
    25 April 2024
    Print publication:
    09 May 2024, pp 278-283
    • Chapter
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Summary

    The conclusion draws together the arguments of the previous chapters to return to the questions posed at the outset, namely what does it mean to grant patent protection over an immaterial subject matter and what role did science and technology play in allowing the law to deal with and accommodate that subject matter? After outlining the different roles that materiality has played in patent law over time and what its absence means, I speculate on the consequences of the recent shift to dematerialised subject matter and the role that science and technology might play in that process.