More Trouble From Universities And Patents: Lawsuits Between Universities And Professors
from the sharing-the-knowledge-or-grabbing-for-profits dept
We recently discussed how the Bayh-Dole Act, which encouraged universities to look at patenting their research, has done more harm than good for many universities. Because of the Act, many universities set up "tech transfer offices" to try to "commercialize" the research going on at those universities. However, the majority of universities have found that the tech transfer offices have lost them money. That's because (once again) they overestimate the value of the patents themselves (and underestimate the costs of running the transfer office). Now, the Associated Press is highlighting a second problem coming out of this focus on patenting every bit of research: lawsuits with professors.You would think that a university, whose mission is to help disseminate knowledge, would want to help share ideas. But Bayh-Dole turned many of them into idea-hoarding factories, believing (often incorrectly) that hoarding ideas would bring them profit, thus often stifling research. In the main case described in the article linked above, the University of Missouri gave up trying to commercialize a certain patent developed by a professor at the university. Even so, when the professor tried to reclaim the rights to his own research, for the sake of doing his own startup, the University tried to put in all sorts of strict rules and conditions -- well beyond what it even requires of other organizations it licenses patents to. Thus, the two sides are now engaged in a big lawsuit.
This, of course, hurts everyone. Rather than focusing so narrowly on patenting every bit of research and then trying to squeeze every penny from those patents, you would think that there are much more beneficial ways for everyone to benefit from the research. The professor could build his startup, and the more successful it is, the better it reflects on the University -- who can tout that the research initially came from the university. This, in turn, can lead to new (and bigger) grants and funding for new research, as the university's reputation is greatly enhanced. If the professor remains connected to the university in some fashion, this works out even more. And all of this can be done without patents. In fact, without having the professor license his own research, it keeps the costs down for the startup, making it easier for that startup to succeed. Plus, this would fit well with the recognized value of sharing ideas that come out of academia, rather than trying to hoard them for profit.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bayh-dole, innovation, patents, universities
Companies: university of missouri
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I am very grateful that my university leaves you with the patents and has a very efficient system of helping you start your business. The pros of this are numerous since many of the companies have gone on to be successful billion dollar companies (RIM for example) and hence they are very generous towards the university giving millions of dollars back and hiring tons of co-op students.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dident we learn this from WW2?
The point of this is, we go to school to learn, not learn what we cant use because it costs to much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are universities places of learning or money grabbing corporations? Do universities count as non-profit organizations?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not quite
Excepting, as always, the lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
University priorities are greatly confused
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
get the facts staright
The University is accusing the professor of falsifying required papers to mislead the university about the progress on the research. The University is also claiming that the professor filed for patents without the knowledge of the university even after signing standard agreements that any IP developed would be the property of the University.
He also claims that the suit is part of a conspiracy to prevent a grievance he filed against the university being heard by the faculty committee. I know first hand that the faculty committee is very protective of their professors and I can imagine a lawsuit filed by the legal department against a professor would only encourage the committee to hear the grievance more.
Furthermore, its not as simple to say: its a public university therefore all research needs to be in the public domain. Different projects are funded by grants from private industry or foundations. One dealing with anti-freeze might be funded by a car company (as was with earlier research at University of Missouri on catalytic converters. If a car company helped the research, then shouldn't they be able to work out some sort of preferential licensing agreement with University.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: get the facts staright
I find it interesting that you consider the University to be a troll, because the only place I found that word was in your post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: little to do with money
If money had little to do with it, they wouldn't seek such large damages. And the shift to which you refer is commonly known as class warfare.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hard to believe
I don't think the greedy folk who thought this up know what a big wrench this is going to throw into the works. Progress will grind to a halt if part of being a researcher must include obfuscating results so as to leave greedy prospective information owners with as little leverage as possible over the future developments of that researcher. Eventually, no one will understand the science or be able to nail down what it is that is being researched. Contrary to scientific tradition, collaboration will thus be minimized (and this is without counting the probable counter-reaction of exploratory lawsuits in order to try to contest patent ownership... and the counter reactions to that...)
Ugh. It looks like we're going back to the Dark Ages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
already has
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
free lunch
when you go to a cafeteria and fill up do you pay at the register or skip out without paying? no such thing as a free lunch. dont want to pay? dont eat!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]