Law review article: Who owns stem cell breakthroughs?
Sean M. O'Connor says
In conclusion, the current patchwork, hit-or-miss IP rights
allocation system in stem cell research will lead to a nightmare of litigation proportional to the very success of the most ambitious projections for stem cell therapies.
Further, until a future presidential administration relaxes the current limitations on federal funding of hPSC research, the stem cell therapy environment will suffer a reduced ability of the standard Bayh-Dole IP rights allocation framework to
govern, as it will formally apply to a smaller subset of patents
arising in the field. At the same time, non-traditional funding and IP rights allocation systems, such as Proposition 71 may come to dominate the field, creating a tangle of ownership claims.
39 New Eng.L. Rev. 665
LBE says: O'Connor sets the baseline as the "standard Bayh-Dole IP rights allocation framework." When taxpayers in California, Kansas, New Jersey, etc. find out they are getting no benefits out of their tax dollars, there might be a bit of disenchantment. Taxpayers do not want to be, unknowingly, venture capitalists. The standard Bayh-Dole allocation framework is being questioned (see Sept. 15 post on IPBiz about the article in Fortune on Bayh-Dole).
In conclusion, the current patchwork, hit-or-miss IP rights
allocation system in stem cell research will lead to a nightmare of litigation proportional to the very success of the most ambitious projections for stem cell therapies.
Further, until a future presidential administration relaxes the current limitations on federal funding of hPSC research, the stem cell therapy environment will suffer a reduced ability of the standard Bayh-Dole IP rights allocation framework to
govern, as it will formally apply to a smaller subset of patents
arising in the field. At the same time, non-traditional funding and IP rights allocation systems, such as Proposition 71 may come to dominate the field, creating a tangle of ownership claims.
39 New Eng.L. Rev. 665
LBE says: O'Connor sets the baseline as the "standard Bayh-Dole IP rights allocation framework." When taxpayers in California, Kansas, New Jersey, etc. find out they are getting no benefits out of their tax dollars, there might be a bit of disenchantment. Taxpayers do not want to be, unknowingly, venture capitalists. The standard Bayh-Dole allocation framework is being questioned (see Sept. 15 post on IPBiz about the article in Fortune on Bayh-Dole).
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 9:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home