 |
|
Biotechnology Products and University-Based Science
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
To the Editor: In their Special Communication on university-based science and biotechnology products,1 Drs Kesselheim and Avorn reviewed problems related to academic patents and possible solutions. However, the de facto contract between society and universities was not discussed, even though private contributions to universities exceeded 24 billion dollars in 2004.2
Universities exist to collect knowledge, objectively evaluate it, and make it available for students, other scholars, and society. To these ends they are granted unique privileges, which include tax-free status, access to tax deductible gifts, and governmental support. Open flow of information and collaboration among colleagues are fundamental features of academic life. This arrangement allows research to proceed without personal financial risk. Traditionally (as with the Salk vaccine), the public did not pay a second time in the form of royalties when the results were commercialized.
The development of proprietary information requires opposite values. Patents require confidentiality for their . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Philip Lempert, MD
eyechartplus@aol.com
Cayuga Medical Center
Ithaca, NY
RELATED ARTICLES
Biotechnology Products and University-Based Science
Gregory K. Sobolski
JAMA. 2005;293(23):2862.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Biotechnology Products and University-Based Science
David Korn and Stephen J. Heinig
JAMA. 2005;293(23):2862-2863.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Biotechnology Products and University-Based Science—Reply
Aaron S. Kesselheim and Jerry Avorn
JAMA. 2005;293(23):2863.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
University-Based Science and Biotechnology Products: Defining the Boundaries of Intellectual Property
Aaron S. Kesselheim and Jerry Avorn
JAMA. 2005;293(7):850-854.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
