-
Featured Authors
-
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
-
Meta
Author Archive: Roy Zwahlen
Exclusive Licenses Do Not Discourage Follow On Research
A recent study presented at the Patent Statistics for Decision Makers Conference organized at the United States Patent Office questions the logic behind a nonexclusive license preference often found in U.S. government technology transfer policy. In “The Role of Exclusive Licensing in Follow-on Research of Academic Patented Inventions” presentation the authors demonstrate that, contrary to the belief by some, exclusive licensing does not impede future research. The authors ask two questions. First, does exclusive licensing affect licensee follow-on research? Read More >
BIO’s Prometheus v. Mayo Amicus Brief Filed
BIO filed an amicus brief in the Prometheus v. Mayo Clinic case. In this case the Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether diagnostic and personalized medicine claims that depend on a correlation of observed phenomena should be excluded from the patent system at the outset, as patent-ineligible abstract ideas or “laws of nature.” BIO’s brief argues that these judicially-created exclusions from patent-eligibility have traditionally been used only under narrow circumstances, and that their Read More >
EU Stem Cell Patent Decision Hurts Science
A great article in the Economist titled European science stemmed addresses the recent and controversial decision by the European Court of Justice regarding the patentability of certain inventions derived from embryonic stem cells. ANY country, you might think, would relish being able to call itself the world’s leader in scientific research. America and Europe, however, seem to be in a bizarre parallel contest: which can make its scientists’ lives more difficult by imposing the most muddled Read More >
Australian Senate Committee Recommends Against Banning ‘Gene Patents’
The Australian Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee recommended against the Patent Amendment (Human Genes and Biological Materials) which would have banned DNA patents in Australia. The push by members of the Australian Senate seemed to mirror efforts in the United States surrounding the Myriad case. The Committee found that: “While previous inquiries and public discussions have focused on the patenting of human genes, the Bill goes further and proposes a specific exclusion for biological materials which Read More >
Technology Transfer Symposium in San Francisco
In the midst of turbulent economic times, and at a moment when the U.S. is looking to encourage technology job creation in the coming decade, an increasing number of public and private sector initiatives have been proposed to spur job creation. While the U.S. leads in the area of biotechnology, there is no guarantee that this competitive edge will continue. Moreover, although the U.S. is more prolific in life science discoveries than any other single country in the Read More >



