Public agricultural research and the protection of intellectual property: Issues and options.

Abstract

This paper discusses the significance of intellectual property (IP) protection by public research institutes. It argues that such protection can be compatible with the mission of public organizations, especially in cases where private firms will underinvest due to thin markets, high development costs or technological complexity. The paper outlines the main reasons for obtaining IP protection by way of examples from the Michigan State University experience. Key words: intellectual property rights; biotechnology; Michigan State University; research and development; technology transfer. The expansion of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in agriculture has created new opportunities and challenges for research cooperation between the public and private sectors. The enactment of the Plant Patent Act in 1930 and the Plant Variety Protection (PVP) Act in 1970 expanded the IPR regime in the United States (U.S.) to include the protection of biological innovations. The 1980 Bayh-Dole Act allowed universities ownership rights to intellectual property generated by federally funded research. The passage of Public Law 98-620 further expanded universities ’ ownership rights in 1984. These last two pieces of legislation, along with the expanded IPR for biological innovations, have made universities a major participant for contracting IPRs in biotechnology. The ability to protect intellectual property gives universities an opportunity to increase the source of funds, as well as provide incentives to researchers to produce innovations. Although the extension of

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.