Try none of the above. The greatest imminent roadblock for the evolution of technology is being constructed not in the lab but in the courthouse. The lack of clear, widely accepted guidelines for protecting, buying, sharing and trading in intellectual property could put the brakes on the whole business sooner than we might think.

Do I sound like Chicken Little? Consider this: The outlook for the computer server-the most profitable portion of the PC market-is in jeopardy because two camps of vendors are locked in a high-stakes debate over ownership and use of intellectual property for next-generation I/O subsystems. Consumer companies seeking to design digital TVs believe they may be liable for royalties on as many as 95 patents, but they're uncertain which patents pertain and whom they must pay.

Now take one more step into the abyss: If tomorrow's silicon-for any application-is designed of reusable components strung together in system-level chips, don't we need to have a legal environment in which we can compensate Joe for his UART and Frank for his PCI controller and then indemnify Carol against liability for any failures of those components in the resulting chip? Sure, that's what we need. But it doesn't exist.

What does exist is a run on intellectual property of all sorts-and a tussle over how to protect and share it-that's reminiscent of the Gold Rush. Out on the bleeding edge of technology, there prevails a Wild West mentality about intellectual property; and the current legal system, about as technologically savvy as a small-town sheriff, is ill-equipped to maintain order. And that's the biggest barrier to innovation as we step toward the 21st century.

It's also the theme of our special report starting on page 1 this week. I welcome your comments on it.