Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2011
  • Online publication date: December 2011

15 - Patents, Material Transfers, and Access to Research Inputs in Biomedical Research

from Part IV - Perspectives on the University Innovation

Summary

Introduction

As patenting of both the inputs and outputs of scientific research have become more common, policy makers are faced with the question of whether introducing patenting into the system of scientific rewards is hurting or helping the causes of scientific and technological progress. The impact of patent protection on the research conducted in public research institutions – namely universities, government labs, and nonprofit organizations – is not well understood. This issue has taken on increasing importance since the combined events of the passage of the Bayh-Dole Amendment in 1980 and related legislation encouraging institutions to patent findings from research supported by public funds; the 1981 Diamond v. Chakrabarty court decision affirming the patentability of life forms; and the revolution in molecular biology, combinatorial chemistry, bioinformatics, and related fields that has spawned discoveries of enormous commercial value since the 1970s.

Scholars have recently argued that patents may now impose significant costs upon upstream, noncommercial research. Heller and Eisenberg (Heller and Eisenberg 1998) suggest that the patentability of a broad range of the inputs that researchers need to do their work may give rise to an anticommons or “patent thicket” that may make the acquisition of licenses and other rights too burdensome to permit the pursuit of what should otherwise be scientifically and socially worthwhile research (cf. Shapiro 2000). Merges and Nelson (1990) and Scotchmer (1991) highlight the related possibility that, in some domains, the assertion of patents on only one or two key upstream, foundational discoveries may significantly restrict follow-on research. A further concern is that the prospect of realizing financial gain from upstream research may increase researchers’ reluctance to share information or research materials with one another, thereby impeding the realization of research efficiencies and complementarities. Similarly, researchers may be trading away rights to conduct future research or to freely disseminate their discoveries in exchange for current access to research inputs or financial support (Cohen, Florida, and Goe 1994; Thursby and Thursby 1999). Finally, prospective financial gains from the exploitation of intellectual property (IP) may induce researchers to choose research projects on the basis of commercial potential rather than scientific merit.

References
Baeuerle, P. ABaltimore, D 1996 NF-kB: Ten Years AfterCell 87 13
Bekelman, Justin ELi, YanGross, Cary P 2003 Scope and Impact of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical ResearchJournal of the American Medical Association 289 454
Brickley, P 2003
Campbell, Eric GClarridge, Brian RGokhale, ManjushaBirenbaum, LaurenHilgartner, StephenHoltzman, Neil ABlumenthal, David 2002 Data Withholding in Academic GeneticsJournal of the American Medical Association 287 473
Ceci, Stephen J 1988 Scientists’ Attitudes toward Data SharingScience, Technology and Human Values 13 45
Cohen, S 1962 The Isolation of a Mouse Submaxillary Gland Protein Accelerating Incisor Eruption and Eyelid Opening in New-Born AnimalJournal of Biological Chemistry 237 1555
Cohen, S 1983 The Epidermal Growth Factor (EGFCancer 51 1787
Cohen, W. MFlorida, RGoe, R 1994
Cole, J. RCole, S 1972 The Ortega HypothesisScience 178 368
Dasgupta, PMaskin, E 1987 The Simple Economics of Research PortfoliosEconomic Journal 97 581
Department of Health and Human Services 1999 72090
Dillman, D. A 1978 Mail and Telephone SurveysNew YorkWiley-Interscience
Eisenberg, R. S 2001 Bargaining over the Transfer of Proprietary Research ToolsExpanding the Boundaries of Intellectual Property223Dreyfuss, R. CZimmerman, D. LFirst, HOxfordOxford University Press
Eisenberg, Rebecca S 2003 Patent Swords and ShieldsScience 299 1018
Hagstrom, W. O 1974 Competition in ScienceAmerican Sociological Review 39 1
Heller, M. AEisenberg, R. S 1998 Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical ResearchScience 280 698
Kastan, M. BBartek, J 2004 Cell-Cycle Checkpoints and CancerNature 432 316
Kristiansen, O. PLarsen, Z. MPociot, F 2000 CTLA-4 in Autoimmune Diseases – A General Susceptibility Gene to AutoimmunityGenes & Immunity 1 170
Linsley, P. SBrady, WUrnes, MGrosmaire, L. SDamle, N. KLedbetter, J. A 1991 CTLA-4 Is a Second Receptor for the B-Cell Activation Antigen-B7Journal of Experimental Medicine 174 561
Marx, J 2002 Chromosome End Game Draws a CrowdScience 295 2348
Merges, R. PNelson, R. R 1990 On the Complex Economics of Patent ScopeColumbia Law Review 90 839
Merton, Robert K 1973 The Sociology of ScienceChicagoThe University of Chicago Press
Mowery, D. CNelson, Richard RSampat, Bhaven NZiedonis, Arvids A 2001 The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh–Dole Act of 1980Research Policy 30 99
Murray, FionaStern, S 2007 Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 63 648
National Research Council 2003 Sharing Publication-Related Data and Materials: Responsibilities of Authorship in the Life SciencesWashington, DCNational Academies Press
National Research Council 2005 Patenting and Licensing of Genomic and Proteomic InnnovationsWashington, DCNational Academies Press
National Science Board 2002 Science and Engineering IndicatorsWashington, DCGPO
National Science Board 2004 Science and Engineering IndicatorsWashington, DCGPO
Oosterwegel, M. AGreenwald, R. JMandelbrot, D. ALorsbach, R. BSharpe, A. H 1999 CTLA-4 and T Cell ActivationCurrent Opinion in Immunology 11 294
Sampat, Bhaven N 2004 Genomic Patenting by Academic Researchers: Bad for ScienceRoundtable on Engineering Entrepreneurship ResearchAtlanta, GA: Georgia Institute of Technology
Scherer, F. M 2002 The Economics of Human Gene PatentsAcademic Medicine 77 1348
Scotchmer, S 1991 Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent LawJournal of Economic Perspectives 5 29
Sen, RBaltimore, D 1986 Multiple Nuclear Factors Interact with the Immunoglobulin Enhancer SequencesCell 46 705
Shapiro, C 2000 Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard-SettingInnovation Policy and the Economy119Jaffe, ALerner, JStern, SCambridge, MAMIT Press
Thursby, J. GThursby, M. C 1999
Thursby, Jerry GThursby, Marie C 2003 University Licensing and the Bayh-Dole ActScience 301 1052
Walsh, J. PArora, ACohen, W. M 2003 The Patenting and Licensing of Research Tools and Biomedical InnovationPatents in the Knowledge-Based Economy285Cohen, W. MMerrill, SWashington, DCNational Academies Press
Walsh, J. PArora, ACohen, W. M 2003 Working through the Patent ProblemScience 299 1020
Walsh, J. PCho, CCohen, W. M 2005 View from the Bench: Patents and Material TransfersScience 309 2002
Walsh, J. PHong, Wei 2003 Secrecy Is Increasing in Step with CompetitionNature 422 801
Yamamoto, YGaynor, R. B 2001 Role of the NF-kappaB Pathway in the Pathogenesis of Human Disease StatesCurrent Molecular Medicine 1 287