University-Based Science and Biotechnology Products: Defining the Boundaries of Intellectual Property
JAMA, Vol. 293, pp. 850-854, 2005
Posted: 4 Dec 2006
There are 2 versions of this paper
University-Based Science and Biotechnology Products: Defining the Boundaries of Intellectual Property
University-Based Science and Biotechnology Products: Defining the Boundaries of Intellectual Property
Abstract
The medical research and biotechnology industries have long relied on patenting as the primary means of allocating ownership and control over new discoveries. Yet patent protection is a double-edged sword that has major implications for the future of innovation in American biomedical science. On one hand, multiple patents on genes and molecular targets can hinder further research and drug development it generates a need for expensive and inefficient cross-licensing. But limiting basic science patenting can allow private entities to use the results of years of publicly funded research at no cost to produce very lucrative medications paying any compensation to university- or public sector-based innovators. This can deprive academic and other non-profit research centers of revenue for the pursuit of novel therapeutics and seminal research work that may not be patentable. Two recent court cases epitomize these conflicting aspects of ownership and control of basic biomedical science and biotechnology discoveries. Several solutions have been proposed to avoid a thicket of overlapping basic science patents while still rewarding pivotal discoveries and encouraging further innovation in the biomedical arena. These include establishing basic science patent pools and mandating arbitration arrangements to assign credit and royalties for biotechnology innovations that are dependent on prior research performed and/or financed in the public sector.
Keywords: Patent, Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation