Talented people are at the centre of Rawls’ theory of justice. Of two principles, one is devoted to specifying what they are entitled to: equal opportunities for the equally talented, regardless of their social position; and unequal income for the unequally talented, provided that it benefits the least advantaged. Talented people are at the centre of the patent system, too. Within this system, some of the most talented people — those who are the first to invent and divulge a new device — are entitled not to a higher income, but to monopoly rights. They have a twenty-year right to prevent anyone from using, fabricating or selling the invention without their consent. How they manage this right determines the level of their income. Are monopoly rights for talented people justified by Rawls— criteria of justice?