Duke returns laser to its creator

Back-and-forth battle lasted years

After a high-profile spat, Duke University has returned a powerful research laser to the scientist who built it.

Physicist John Madey sued Duke nine years ago for possession of the MARK III research laser after the university demoted him from directing a laser laboratory.

In 2002, the dispute prompted a court ruling that universities warned would limit research on all U.S. campuses. In 2003, it put Duke in the awkward spot of turning away federal and University of Hawaii officials who traveled to Durham to inventory laser equipment for Madey.

Duke and Madey have quietly settled their differences, but both refuse to discuss the details of their agreement. The last shipment of the 1,000-piece MARK III arrived last week at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu, where Madey now works.

"Duke University ultimately did the right thing. I always believed they would," Madey said, stressing that he thinks the dispute delayed progress in an important research field.

Madey built the MARK III while a graduate student at the California Institute of Technology in the 1970s. He ran the Duke Free Electron Laser Laboratory from 1989 to 1997, after Duke recruited him from Stanford University.

How it works

The MARK III uses electrons to produce beams of energy that can be tuned at a wide range of wavelengths. It's useful in medical experiments and in designing sensors that can detect dangerous materials, including chemical weapons, at airports and harbors.

Duke took control of the laser lab after alleging that Madey left equipment dormant when other researchers were eager to use it. Madey said Duke wanted to use it for projects that were not compatible with his research funding.

Madey accused the university of violating his patents by using the laser after he resigned. He demanded that Duke release it.

Duke said that an Office of Naval Research study of the dispute concluded that Duke owned the laser. But the Department of Energy, which helped finance its development, disagreed. An Energy official traveled to Durham with University of Hawaii staff members to examine the laser, but Duke would not let them get at the device.

A 2002 federal court ruling rejected Duke's claim that universities had a wide exemption from patent claims because they were nonprofit research entities. The court said campuses profited from research.

Many research universities and their associations asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision, saying it could unfairly hamper research, but the justices declined to accept the case.

The ruling has had little chilling effect on research, said Robert Hardy of the Council of Governmental Relations, an association of universities, medical centers and research institutes in Washington, D.C.

His organizations helped the American Association of the Advancement of Science conduct a survey to see whether campuses were encountering charges that they infringed on patents after the Madey ruling. Few did, Hardy said.

A 2006 court ruling said Duke had a viable argument that it did not violate Madey's patents because the government agencies funding Duke research on the laser were exempt from some patent rules. But the case was settled.