Literature DB >> 15915860

Intellectual property and the commercialization of research and development.

Vincent di Norcia1.   

Abstract

Concern about the commercialization of research is rising, notably in testing new drugs. The problem involves oversimplified, polarizing assumptions about research and development (R&D) and intellectual property (IP). To address this problem this paper sets forth a more complex three phase RT&D process, involving Scientific Research (R), Technological Innovation (T), and Commercial Product Development (D) or the RT&D process. Scientific research and innovation testing involve costly intellectual work and do not produce free goods, but rather require IP regulation. RT&D processes involve an unrecognized IP shift from a common IP right in public goods like information and knowledge to private IP in products and other hard assets. The question then is, what kind of IP right: private or common? Since scientific research and innovation testing require openness about adverse findings, and wide, low cost diffusion of results, they require a common, inclusive IP right. Common IP is appropriate to both sharing knowledge goods and recovering the cost of production. Research is furthermore compatible with commercialization and support by other social interests. On the other hand it is incompatible with the exclusionary private IP rights that permit restrictive publication or total suppression of information. Private IP rather than commercialization conflicts with the openness requirements of scientific research and innovation testing. Commercial funding, however, is in principle compatible with research and testing, especially when regulated by a common IP right. This reflects a pragmatic view of the fundamental interconnections of knowledge and other social interests.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15915860     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-005-0042-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  19 in total

1.  Uneasy alliance--clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry.

Authors:  T Bodenheimer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-05-18       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  In whose best interest? Breaching the academic-industrial wall.

Authors:  J B Martin; D L Kasper
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-11-30       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Biotechnology and research: promise and problems.

Authors:  J R La Montagne
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-11-17       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Financial conflict of interest: an unresolved ethical frontier.

Authors:  J P Kassirer
Journal:  Am J Law Med       Date:  2001

5.  Guidelines for training in the ethical conduct of scientific research.

Authors:  Seymour J Garte
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 3.525

6.  Collaborating with industry--choices for the academic medical center.

Authors:  Hamilton Moses; Eugene Braunwald; Joseph B Martin; Samuel O Thier
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-10-24       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  The ethical implications of the new research paradigm.

Authors:  Peter Scott
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.525

8.  Research suppressed for seven years by drug company.

Authors:  J Wise
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-04-19

9.  The messenger under attack -- intimidation of researchers by special-interest groups.

Authors:  R A Deyo; B M Psaty; G Simon; E H Wagner; G S Omenn
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-04-17       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Patients' health or company profits? The commercialisation of academic research.

Authors:  Nancy F Olivieri
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.525

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.