Principle, practice and persona in Isambard Kingdom Brunel's patent abolitionism

Abstract

The nineteenth-century engineering hero Isambard Kingdom Brunel was a prominent patent abolitionist in debates about the patent system in Britain. His opposition is usually regarded as principled, that is, based in liberal laissez-faire opposition to monopolies and to the constraints of bureaucracy. Against this it is argued that Brunel's views on patents evolved. As late as 1840, despite lessons about patents from the bad experiences of his father, Brunel could still consider taking out a patent himself, something that a decade later he denied he had ever contemplated. Brunel's engineering persona, his experiences and conduct of engineering practice were the base from which he eventually formulated principled opposition to the patent system. The paper examines his responses to importunate inventors who pestered him with inventions in the 1840s and elucidates how he dealt with the patented inventions of others that he wanted to use in his projects. It is suggested that for Brunel patent abolitionism was in effect a way of doing business before it became a political cause. The case suggests the value of approaching the history of patents and, by implication, of intellectual property more generally, through detailed examination of practices.

Open instrumentation, like open data, is key to reproducible science. Yet, without incentives it won’t thrive

“…Isambard Kingdom Brunel, often considered to be Britain's most prolific engineer, famously announced in 1851 that: I have never taken out a Patent myself, or ever thought of doing so and I have gradually become convinced that the whole system of Patents … is one productive of immense evil. [25] It is concerning that the chief engineer employed by ninteenth century railway entrepreneurs was free to avoid the monopolies that patents provide, whereas twenty-first century academic contracts can be used to bind researchers to seek these same monopolies. The question that should be asked is how the economic argument for patents can possibly apply to academia?…”

“…I have never taken out a Patent myself, or ever thought of doing so and I have gradually become convinced that the whole system of Patents … is one productive of immense evil. [25]…”

Understanding influences on engineering creativity and innovation: a biographical study of 12 outstanding engineering designers and innovators

“…For instance, Rolt (1957) wrote on Bell: "His almost maniacal experimentation with wooden and wrought-iron bridges is a more prosaic example of the way in which Brunel 'never stood still, never rested content with past achievements." (Miller, 2008) Bell said, Wherever you may find the inventor, you may give him wealth or you may take from him all that he has; and he will go on inventing. He can no more help inventing than he can help thinking or breathing.…”

Review of periodical literature published in 2008

“…James Watt and his contemporaries viewed the steam engine as a chemical, rather than a physical, device, argues Miller (in Annals of Science ), but subsequent changes in scientific attitudes towards definitions of heat led to a reclassification of Watt's work as ‘physics’. John Harrison's innovative use of diamond in reducing friction in his fourth longitude timekeeper is highlighted by Hird et al., while I. K. Brunel's evolving position on patents is examined in detail by Miller (in British Journal for the History of Science ), who shows that although Brunel urged the abolition of patents after the 1840s, he had earlier considered taking one out himself. Finally, Watts points out that eighteenth‐century ideas have often been characterized as chiefly masculine, though the letters and publications of female thinkers frequently show how they managed to participate in the dissemination of ideas in areas where they were ostensibly excluded.…”