Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patents

Contracts and intellectual property rights in translational R&D: furthering safeguards in the public interest

  • Patents
  • Published:

From Nature Biotechnology

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Intellectual property safeguards should be more widely incorporated into the bilateral contracts that underpin the translational R&D process to preserve the public interest, especially where public funds and resources have spearheaded the innovation process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gaviria, M. & Kilic, B. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 546–548 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. World Intellectual Property Organization. Patent Landscape Report: COVID-19-related vaccines and therapeutics: Preliminary Insights on related patenting activity during the pandemic (2022).

  3. Contreras, J. U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 13, 435–512 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Nurse, P. Independent Review of the UK’s Research, Development and Innovation Organisational Landscape: Final Report and Recommendations (March 2023); https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-development-and-innovation-organisational-landscape-an-independent-review

  5. Anderson, M. J. Intellect. Prop. Law Pract. 2, 145–152 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Association of University Technology Managers. In the Public Interest: Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology (6 March 2007); https://www.autm.net/AUTMMain/media/Advocacy/Documents/Points_to_Consider.pdf

  7. Van Norman, G. A. & Eisenkot, R. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Basic Trans. Science 2, 197–208 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Anderson, M. Drafting Agreements in the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Industries (Oxford Univ. Press, looseleaf, 2009 and onwards).

  9. Contreras, J.L. Intellectual Property Licensing and Transactions: Theory and Practice (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).

  10. Sciacchitano, S. & Bartolazzi, A. Front. Public Health 9, 647955 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Perehudoff, K. Lancet Reg. Health Eur. 16, 100375 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Wellcome Trust. Wellcome’s approach to equitable access to healthcare interventions (accessed 5 January 2024); https://wellcome.org/what-we-do/our-work/access-healthcare-interventions/wellcomes-approach-equitable-access-healthcare-interventions

  13. US National Institutes of Health. Intellectual property policy (accessed 5 January 2024); https://grants.nih.gov/policy/intell-property.htm

  14. Sampat, B. N. Res. Policy 35, 772–789 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Caulfield, T. & Ogbogu, U. BMC Med. Ethics 16, 70 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. UK Intellectual Property Office. University and business collaboration agreements: Lambert Toolkit (6 October 2016, last updated 5 January 2022); https://www.gov.uk/guidance/university-and-business-collaboration-agreements-lambert-toolkit

  17. TenU. The USIT Guide: Leading Universities and Investors Launch Set of Recommendations for the Innovation Sector (24 April 2023); https://ten-u.org/news/the-usit-guide

  18. Eggington, E., Osborn, R. & Kaplan, C. Collaborative Research between Business and Universities: The Lambert Toolkit 8 Years On (2013); https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-lambert-toolkit-8-years-on

  19. Swaminathan, S. et al. Nature 602, 207–210 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Slade, A. & Hawkins, N. Intell. Prop. Q. 1–30 (2023).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by ESRC Impact Acceleration Account 2019: Leicester (ES/T501967/1) and ESRC Impact Acceleration Account Sheffield (ES/T502017/1). The authors sincerely thank all participants at the project workshops held in February and March 2023. In particular, we thank J. Wilkinson, A. Walsh, M. Gibbs and A. Chaix, panelists at the event held on 23 March 2023. We also thank our research assistants N. Agrawal, L. Ensign, I. Ewelukwa and A. Mc Koy for their valuable help in the project. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and they do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of any of the participants at the project workshops. All authors contributed equally.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Anderson Law LLP, Wallingford, UK

    Mark Anderson

  2. UCL Faculty of Laws, University College London, London, UK

    Mark Anderson

  3. University of Sheffield School of Law, Sheffield, UK

    Naomi Hawkins

  4. University of Leicester Law School, Leicester, UK

    Alison Slade

Authors
  1. Mark Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naomi Hawkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alison Slade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naomi Hawkins.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anderson, M., Hawkins, N. & Slade, A. Contracts and intellectual property rights in translational R&D: furthering safeguards in the public interest. Nat Biotechnol 42, 179–182 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-023-02117-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-023-02117-8

  • Springer Nature America, Inc.

Search

Navigation