Carol Nottenburg, Philip G. Pardey and Brian D. Wright

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 46:3, pp.389-416 (September 2002).

Download the full paper: Accessing other people's technology for non-profit research
ABSTRACT

As patents and other forms of intellectual property become more pervasive in the next generation of biotechnologies, designing polices and practices to ensure sufficient freedom to operate (i.e., the ability to practice or use an innovation) will be crucial for non-profit research agencies, especially those intent on developing technologies destined for commercial release. Are non-profits organisations exempt from intellectual property claims? What constitutes infringement of a patent? How does a non-profit establish its freedom to operate?

We address these issues in this paper and evaluate various options for accessing other people�s technologies. Options include cross-licensing agreements, research-only or cost-free licences, market segmentation strategies, mergers or joint ventures, and patent pooling or clearinghouse mechanisms. Responding creatively to the new intellectual property environment will have far reaching consequences for the future of non-profit research.

Additional comment on State immunity to infringement actions in the United States.

A study of state immunity was conducted by the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) for the Judiciary Committee of the United States Congress. Their report was also released in September 2001. Because of the small number of infringement actions brought against state institutions when States believed they were subject to Federal jurisdiction, state officials predictably concluded that "there is no demonstrated problem." The reason(s) for the few number of lawsuits, however, was not investigated. In addtion to the reasons suggested in our paper, the United States Patent and Trademark Office suggested that because states believed they had potential liability, they had incentive to either avoid infringement, negotiate settlements or to enter into licensing arrangements.

Back to IP Policies and Practices

Comments (0)