Intellectual Property Policy Reform

Intellectual Property Policy Reform

Fostering Innovation and Development

Edited by Christopher Arup and William van Caenegem

This state-of-the-art study argues that reforms to intellectual property (IP) should be based on the ways IP is interacting with new technologies, business models, work patterns and social mores. It identifies emerging IP reform proposals and experiments, indicating first how more rigor and independence can be built into the grant of IP rights so that genuine innovations are recognized. The original contributions then show how IP rights can be utilised, through open source licensing systems and private transfers, to disseminate knowledge. Reforms are recommended. The discussion takes in patents, copyright, trade secrets and relational obligations, considering the design of legislative directives, default principles, administrative practices, contractual terms and licence specifications.

Chapter 4: Strong Patent Rights, Weak Patent Standards and Innovation in Biomedicine

Dianne Nicol

Subjects: law - academic, intellectual property law

Extract

Dianne Nicol I. INTRODUCTION There can be little doubt that the relationship between patenting and innovation is complex. Innovators who patent are provided with the advantage of a head start in bringing their inventions to the marketplace, but for follow-on innovators these same patents could block their route to market. An optimally functioning patent system will properly balance the innovation advantage provided to patent holders with the concomitant risk of innovation blockage for follow-on users. With the advent of high technology, the pace of innovation has increased dramatically. Questions need to be asked about whether the current patent system, which has essentially remained unchanged for centuries, is properly adapted to facilitate innovation in new areas of technology. In this chapter I explore the relationship between patenting and innovation in one specific area of high technology – that of ‘translational’ biomedical research. This sector focuses on taking ‘the outcomes and innovations developed within the research context into clinical practice’ (Kaye, Hawkins and Taylor 2007, p. 739). This type of research is to be distinguished from pure or basic research, traditionally performed in universities and other public research organizations, and downstream research that is tied to manufacture, marketing and product development, which would normally be conducted inhouse by large pharmaceutical companies or contracted out. Much has been written about the extent to which patents and patent licences in the biomedical sector could negatively impact on innovation by others, by creating hold-ups and anticommons effects. These issues will be considered briefly later in this...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information