Looking Forward, page-94

But you do know that you can utilise prior art in a new patent? Patents generally quote all prior art they utilise in their new patent. Just because there may or may not be prior art doesn't mean that there hasn't been an innovative step that is patentable, no?

A simple analogy - prior art is the wheel, inventive step is sticking a pneumatic tyre on it. How do you know Viktor hasn't stuck a pneumatic tyre on the wheel? Do you have any idea how detailed those research papers are? Are they speaking in broad theory or do they get down to a level of specificity that would limit the extent that someone could take the principals or theories in the paper and develop them into patentable applications? Have you ever read a patent and seen how detailed they are?