The Language of Nanotechnology and Its Role in Intellectual Property, Regulatory Settings, and Consumer Perception

  • Jeffrey K. Mills


One of the first lessons to which new law students are exposed is the critical role that language and word choice play in the legal field. Whether it is the interpretation of a contract between two parties or the meaning of a specific clause in a state law, every word is scrutinized and construed to determine the scope of what has been written. Even the U.S. Constitution is constantly being interpreted to determine whether new laws enacted by Congress and signed by the President are, in fact, Constitutional. Historical literalists, in fact, look to the literal meaning of the words that were first written in 1787 to determine the scope of this founding document [1].


European Union Intellectual Property Guidance Document Nanoscale Material Literal Meaning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Barron JA, Dienes CT, McCormack M, Redish MH, editors. Constitutional law: principles and policy. 5th ed. Charlottesville, VA: Michie Law Publishers; 1996. p. 31–3.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson KN, Anderson LE, Glanze WD, editors. Mosby’s medical, nursing, and allied health dictionary. 4th ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1994. p. 6.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nanoparticles-Vocabulary. British Standards Institute. PAS 71:2011. 2001. Available at: Accessed 27 Jan 2012
  4. 4.
    Rechberger W, Hohenau A, Leitner A, Krenn JR, Lamprecht B, Aussenegg FR. Optical properties of two interacting gold nanoparticles. Optics Communications. 2003;220:137–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berger M. Nanotechnology in cosmetics—2000 Years Ago. 2006. Available at: Accessed 27 Jan 2012
  6. 6.
    National nanotechnology initiative strategic plan, February 2011. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  7. 7.
    Violet F. Analysis of technical standards in the field of nanotechnology. Nanotechnology Law & Business. 2010;7:299–307.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Michalet X, Pinaud FF, Bentolila LA, et al. Quantum dots for live cells, in vivo imaging, and diagnostics. Science. 2005;307:538–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Qingjiang S, Wang YA, Song LL, et al. Bright, multicoloured light-emitting diodes based on quantum dots. Nature Photonics. 2007;1:717–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chena WX, Leea JY, Liuc Z. The nanocomposites of carbon nanotube with Sb and SnSb0.5 as Li-ion battery anodes. Carbon. 2003;41:959–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ong KZG, Zeng K, Grimes CA. IEEE Sens J. 2002;2:82–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brannon-Peppas L, Blanchette JO. Nanoparticle and targeted systems for cancer therapy. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2004;56:1649–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Anderson IE, Breeze AJ, Olson JD, Yang L, Sahoo Y, Carter SA. All-inorganic spin-cast nanoparticle solar cells with nonselective electrodes. Appl Phys Lett. 2009;94:63101–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Park S-J, Taton TA, Mirkin CA. Array-based electrical detection of DNA with nanoparticle probes. Science. 2002;295:1503–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    35 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 112, 2nd paragraph. 2005Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    United States Patent & Trademark Office, Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (M.P.E.P.) § 2111.02. 8th Ed. July 2010Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M.P.E.P. § 2111. 8th Ed. July 2010Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d. 1303, 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    See for example, Desieno MA, Stetsko G, United States Patent No. 5,573,783. 12 Nov 1996Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Anderson KS, Gaddam BN, Pocius AV, Yarwood JM. United States Patent No. 7,973,096. 5 July 2011Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rasha E, Gamota D, Jamison D, Miller J, Hermann K. Standards in nanotechnology. Nanotechnology Law & Business. 2004;1(2):185–92.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nanotechnology. A report of the U.S. food and drug administration nanotechnology task force, 25 July 2007. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  23. 23.
    Considering when an FDA-regulated product involves the application of nanotechnology. Guidance for industry, June 2011. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  24. 24.
    Policy principles for the U.S. decision-making concerning regulation and oversight of applications of nanotechnology and nanomaterials. 9 June 2011. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  25. 25.
    Bawa R. Regulating nanomedicine—can the FDA handle it? Curr Drug Deliv. 2011;8:227–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    TGA fact sheet: sunscreens. 9 Feb 2010. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  27. 27.
    Policy statement on health Canada’s working definition for nanomaterial. 6 Oct 2011. Available at: Accessed 27 Jan 2012
  28. 28.
    Safe Cosmetics Act of 2011, H.R. 2359. 24 June 2011Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on Cosmetic Products. 30 Nov 2009. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  30. 30.
    The project on emerging nanotechnologies. 2012. Available at: Accessed 27 Jan 2012
  31. 31.
    Scheufele DA, Nanotechnology and public opinion. 24 Jan 2011. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  32. 32.
    U.S. public’s perception of nanotechnology is up for grabs. 14 Mar 2007. Available at: Accessed 25 Jan 2012
  33. 33.
    Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV. The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanopart Res. 2005;7:659–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fanelli Haag & Kilger PLLCWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations