University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
University Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980bia UniversityPrepared for the Conference in Honor of Richard Nelson, Columbia University, October 13-15, 2000. The research for this paper was supported by the Alfred p. Sloan Foundation, the Andrew w. Mellon Foundation, Columbia's office of the Executive Vice Provost, the u.c. Presrdent’s Industry University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980-University Cooperative Program, and the California Policy Seminar. We are grateful to Dick Nelson, Michael Barnes, and Arvids Zledonls for numerous dUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
iscussions, comments, and research assistance.11. IntroductionGovernment technology policy has been an important topic In Richard Nelson's research agUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980f policy in different industries and countries (1982, 1984), comparing the “national innovation systems” of industrial and industrializing economies (1993), and examining the sources of industrial leadership in a set of industries in the United States, Western Europe, and Japan during the past centu University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980ry (.Mowery and Nelson 1999). Nelson's work on innovation systems highlights the role of institutions within the technological development of nationalUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
economies—in most complex industrial economies, national technology' policies are mediated by intermediate institutions, be these firms, governmentalUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 which policies within these institutions develop, as well as an analysis of the interaction between national or sectoral policies and these institutions.In recent work. Nelson and colleagues also have devoted considerable attention (notably, in Rosenberg and Nelson. 1994) to the changing role of th University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980e U.S. university system within this nation's innovation system. In their paper. Rosenberg and Nelson argued that U.S. universities maintained close lUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
inks with industry in their research and educational activities through much of the 20" century. Among other things, this interpretation of the role oUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 last two decades. The emergence of these university-industry linkages reflected a number of unusual structural characteristics of the U.S. national university structure (notably, its decentralized, pluralistic structure and the prominent role of state governments in supporting many public universit University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980ies), as well as changes in public R&D investment and intellectual property rights policies.2Although university-industry research linkages have a lonUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
g history in the United Stales, the structure ol these relationships has changed considerably during the past 75 years. Patenting of US university invUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 activity and some discouraged patenting. During the 1970s, however, this position began to change, and many universities (particularly private institutions) lor the first lime bec ame directly involved in the management of their patent portfolios. The Bayh-Dole Act accelerated these trends, but the University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980y were well-established by 1900, the year of the Art’s passage.This paper examines the evolution of U.S. university patent policies and the availableUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
data on university patenting during the ••pre-Bayh-Dole" era. Analysis of the debates over university patenting reveals that while many of the issues University Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980y patenting that were prominent in these early debates did not appear in the debates over Bayh-Dole. And a widely held premise of the earlier debates, that universities should avoid a direct role in managing patents and licenses, scarcely appears in the debates of the 1970s. Our examination of U.S. University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980university patents during the 1925-1980 period focuses on change in the overall level of patenting and in the characteristics of the universities actiUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
ve in patenting. One of the most striking shifts in these data is the rapid growth of patenting by private universities, many of which had avoided patUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 of U.S. University Patent Policies2.1 The Pre-World War II Debatelust as the post-1975 surge in US university paleniing coincided with a broader rise in university-industry links (Mowery et al. 1999, Henderson el al. 1998). so did the first wave of university involvement in patenting, which began a University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980fter World War I. Expanding links between3https://khothuvien.cori!university and industrial research during the 1920s and 1930s triggered a debate amoUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
ng U.S. research university administrators over patent policy (McCusick 1948; Palmer 1934)?In 1933, the American Association for the Advancement of ScUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980niversity scientists? Among the questions addressed by the report were: "Should [scientists] proceed to obtain patents? What are the advantages in doing this? what are the disadvantages?" (7). The final report of the AAAS committee supported university patenting, although it was much less enthusiast University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980ic about active university involvement in patent management. The report’s summary of this debate in the 1930s about university patenting in some respeUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
cts resembles, and in others contrasts with, the debates that occurred four decades later over Bayh-Dole.The committee first considered whether patentUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980Is sufficient to give the public the results of work of scientists" (9), the report concluded that this position was naive, for several reasons. First, anticipating a central argument made in the 1970s in support of the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act, the Committee noted:1McCusick (1948) suggests that University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 "At the beginning of the Depression decade ... [t]wo different factors had turned university attention to the patent problem: first, a steady growthUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
of research sponsored cooperatively by industry demanded a generally applicable policy toward resulting patents, and. secondly, spectacular inventionsUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980ncreased dramatically over the 1930s Sevnnghaus (1932), Gregg (1933), Henderson (1933). and Gray (1936) all provide additional contemporary accounts of these debates.2The Report, entitled "The Protection by Patents of Scientific Discoveries," deals with patents on "scientific discoveries" generally, University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 not just from universities. But most of the discussion (even outside of Part III. which specifically deals with "University Patents") is concerned wiUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
th patenting by universities and other non-profit institutions, as opposed to by scientists working in firms or independently.3It was well recognized University Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980overies. The AAAS report quoted Waite of the University of Michigan Law School, who noted "[C]ertainly nobody supposes the need to offer rewards for the discovery of scientific truths. The best minds in the world are already searching for these truths. There are no better minds to be brought into th University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980e game by hope of reward" (AAAS 1934. 34).4"Discoveries or inventions which are merely published and thus thrown open equally to all, unless of greatUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
importance to the industry, are seldom adopted ... Ordinarily no manufacturer or capitalist would be willing to-day to risk his money, and expend timeUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates: 1925-1980David c. Mower)' Haas School of Business u.c. BerkeleyBhaven Sampat Economics Department Columb University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980e protected in some measure... " (10).4The Committee argued that a scientist could not expect that publication alone would lead his inventions to yield social benefits because of the presence of "patent pirates" who would "wrongfully appropriate his work" and "deny the public what he thought he gave University Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980 it," either by charging monopoly prices or withholding the invention from use (10). University patenting would reduce these risks.5A related argumentUniversity Patents and Patent Policy Debates 1925-1980
-particularly prominent in the discussion of biomedical research--was that patents on university inventions were necessary for "quality control” reasoGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook