Abstract
Publicly funded research aims to serve the public good; hence monopolies introduced by patents are highly debatable in their characteristic to foster innovation and economic growth. However, even with patent protection the research results could be transferred responsibly. This article explores option to enhance technology dissemination of publicly funded research results which are patent protected, using alternative licensing strategies such as equitable licensing and patent pools instead of exclusive licensing. We found that German research institutes lack incentives to license patents under these schemes and suggest that social responsibilities could be protected by implementing legal frameworks, and through policies of research organizations and research funding organizations. With our analysis we aim to contribute to the responsibility debate of technology transfer from publicly funded research to private industry.
Keywords
- Technology Transfer
- Intellectual Property Right
- Private Industry
- Technology Transfer Office
- Royalty Rate
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Anderson, M. 2007. Making drugs available at affordable prices: How universities’ technology transfer offices can help developing countries. Journal of Intellectual Property Law Practice 2(3): 145–152.
Astor, M., U. Glöckner, D. Riesenberg, and C. Czychowski. 2010, April. Abschlussbericht. Evaluierung des SIGNOFörderprogramms des BMWi in seiner ganzen Breite und Tiefe. Prognos. http://www.signo-deutschland.de/signo-unternehmen/content/e5072/e6287/SIGNO-EvaluationAbschlussberichtApril2010_ger.pdf/. Accessed 8 Oct 2010.
Baldini, N. 2009. Implementing Bayh-Dole-like laws: Faculty problems and their impact on university patenting activity. Research Policy 38(8): 1217–1224.
Bozeman, B. 2000. Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy 29(4–5): 627–655.
Carlson, S.C. 1999. Patent pools and the antitrust dilemma. Yale Journal on Regulation 16: 359–399.
Clark, J., J. Piccolo, B. Stanton, and K. Tyson. 2000. Patent Pools: A Solution to the problem of access in biotechnology patents? United States Patent and Trademark Office. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/dapp/opla/patentpool.pdf/. Accessed 30 Nov 2010.
European Commission. 2004, April 27. Leitlinien zur Anwendung von Artikel 81 Absatz 3 EG-Vertrag. Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union.
Gilbert, R.J. 2004. Antitrust for patent pools: A century of policy evolution. Stanford Technology Law Review (3).
Gilbert, R.J. 2011. Ties that bind: Policies to promote (good) patent pools. Antitrust Law Journal 77(1): 1–48.
Godt, C. 2010. Differential pricing of patent-protected pharmaceuticals for life-threatening infectious-diseases inside Europe: Can compulsory licences be employed? In Differential pricing of pharmaceuticals inside Europe: Exploring compulsory licenses and exhaustion for access to patented essential medicines, ed. C. Godt, 25–73. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Godt, C. 2011. Equitable licenses in university-industry technology transfer. GRUR International: 377–385.
Godt, C., and T. Marschall. 2010. Equitable licensing: Lizenzpolitik & Vertragsbausteine. http://www.med4all.org/fileadmin/med/pdf/lizenz_med4all_final.pdf/. Accessed 30 Nov 2010.
Grassier, F., and M.A. Capria. 2003. Patent pooling: Uncorking a technology transfer bottleneck and creating value in the biomedical research field. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology 9(2): 111.
Lerner, J., and J. Tirole. 2007. Public policy toward patent pools. Innovation Policy and the Economy 8: 157–186.
Mayntz, R., and F. Scharpf. 1995. Gesellschaftliche Selbstregelung und politische Steuerung, Schriften des Max-Planck-Instituts für Gesellschaftsforschung. Frankfurt am Main: Campus-Verlag.
McCarthy, J., R. Schechter, and D. Frankly. 2004. McCarthy’s desk encyclopedia of intellectual property, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Merges, R.P. 1999. Institutions for intellectual property transactions: The case of patent pools. Working paper University of California at Berkeley. http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/pubs/merges/pools.pdf/. Accessed 30 Nov 2010.
Mimura, C. 2010. Nuanced management of IP rights: Shaping industry-university relationships to promote social impact. In Working within the boundaries of intellectual property, ed. R. Dreyfuss, H. First, and D. Zimmerman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mowery, D.C., R. Nelson, B. Sampat, and A. Ziedonis. 2001. The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: An assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980. Research Policy 30(1): 99–119.
Murray, F., and S. Stern. 2006. When ideas are not free: The impact of patents on scientific research. Innovation Policy and the Economy 7: 33–69.
Sampat, B.N. 2009. Academic patents and access to medicines in developing countries. American Journal of Public Health 99(1): 9–17.
Scharpf, F.W. 1997. Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder: Westview Press.
Schimank, U. 2004. Der akteurzentrierte Institutionalismus. In Paradigmen der akteurszentrierten Soziologie, ed. M. Gabriel, 287–301. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Shapiro, C. 2000. Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting. Innovation Policy and the Economy 1: 119–150.
Straus, J. 2008. Intellectual property versus academic freedom? A complex relationship within the innovation ecosystem. In The university in the market, ed. L. Engwal and D. Weaire, 53–65. London: Portland Press.
Stumpf, H., and M. Gross. 2005. Der Lizenzvertrag. Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag Recht und Wirtschaft.
‘t Hoen, E. 2011. The medicines patent pool: Stimulating innovation, improving access. Presentation at WIPO, Geneva, 18 May 2011.
Teece, D. 2008. The transfer and licensing of know-how and intellectual property: Understanding the multinational enterprise in the modern world. Hackensack: World Scientific.
Temple Lang, J. 1994. Defining legitimate competition: Companies’ duties to supply competitors and access to essential facilities. Fordham International Law Journal 18(2): S.437.
Tinnemann, P., J. Özbay, V.A. Saint, and S.N. Willich. 2010. Patenting of university and non-university public research organizations in Germany: Evidence from patent applications for medical research results. PLoS ONE 5(11): e14059.
US Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission. 1995, April 6. Antitruts guidelines for the licensing of intellectual property. http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/0558.pdf/. Accessed 3 May 2010.
Van Overwalle, G. 2009. Gene patents and collaborative licensing models: Patent pools, clearinghouses, open source models, and liability regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Verbeure, B., E. van Zimmeren, G. Matthijs, and G. Van Overwalle. 2006. Patent pools and diagnostic testing. Trends in Biotechnology 24(3): 115–120.
Wagner-Ahlfs, C. 2009. Medizinische Forschung: Der Allgemeinheit verpflichtet. “Equitable licences” für Ergebnisse öffentlich geförderter medizinischer Forschung. Available from: http://www.bukopharma.de/uploads/file/Pharma-Brief/2009_01_spezial.pdf. Accessed 18 Oct 2010.
Wagner-Ahlfs, C. 2010. Oeffentliche Forschung für Entwicklungslaender: Zwischen Markt und sozialer Verantwortung. Deutsches Aerzteblatt 107(23). http://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/76421/. Accessed 3 Feb 2011.
WIPO. 1996. Agreement between the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization (1995), Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) (1994). WIPO Publication No. 223 (E).
Ziedonis, R.H. 2004. Don’t Fence me in: Fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms. Management Science 50(6): 804–820.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof. Dr. Christine Godt and Dr. Christian Wagner-Ahlfs for their support in the preparation of the manuscript. The research of Dr. Peter Tinnemann is founded by the VolkswagenStiftung.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Eppinger, E., Tinnemann, P. (2014). Technology Transfer of Publicly Funded Research Results from Academia to Industry: Societal Responsibilities?. In: van den Hoven, J., Doorn, N., Swierstra, T., Koops, BJ., Romijn, H. (eds) Responsible Innovation 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8956-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8956-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-8955-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-8956-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)