- Our LinkedIn Page
- Our Twitter Feed
- Our Facebook Page
- Newsletter Subscribe to our monthly e-newsletter. Current Issue
- Our Flickr Feed
- Our YouTube Feed
Authors
- Abigail Hirsch
- Alan Eisenberg
- BIOtechNOW Editor
- Bruce Dale
- Celia Economides
- David Thomas
- George Goodno
- George MacDougall
- Jason Corum
- Jeff Joseph
- Jim Greenwood
- Karen Batra
- Kelly Cappio
- Lila Feisee
- Matt Carr
- Nathan Schock
- Paul Winters
- Paulina Ibarra
- Robbi Lycett
- Roy Zwahlen
- Sarah Sneeringer
- Sondra Behan
- Stephanie Fischer
- Stephen Marmaras
- Timothy Coetzee
- Tracy Cooley
Tags
Food and Fuel indirect land use change Partnering Animal biotechnology One-on-One's Plant biotechnology Benefits of biotech crops BIO Investor Forum greenhouse gas emissions Biofuel Technology global food crisis Climate Change Greenhouse Gas Emission renewable fuel standard ethanol agriculture Food biotechnology BIOPatently BIOtech
Archive
- January 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (2)
- November 2011 (3)
- October 2011 (3)
- September 2011 (5)
- August 2011 (4)
- July 2011 (8)
- June 2011 (16)
- May 2011 (8)
- April 2011 (9)
- March 2011 (14)
- February 2011 (9)
- January 2011 (15)
- December 2010 (7)
- November 2010 (6)
- October 2010 (4)
- June 2010 (1)
- May 2010 (4)
- April 2010 (14)
- March 2010 (4)
- January 2010 (5)
- November 2009 (3)
- October 2009 (1)
- August 2009 (6)
- July 2009 (9)
- June 2009 (9)
- May 2009 (8)
- April 2009 (9)
- March 2009 (9)
- February 2009 (3)
- January 2009 (1)
- November 2008 (1)
Category Archives: Patently BIOtech
The Real Reason Why Salk Refused to Patent the Polio Vaccine
A guest writer in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal repeated the oft quoted Jonas Salk statement about his Polio vaccine: “There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?” Many use this statement as the moral impetus for refusing patents on medically important innovations (see Michael Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story). Unfortunately, Jonas Salk created a myth that day by leaving out several crucial details. As pointed out by Robert Cook-Deegan at Read More >
Brazilian Innovation: A Patent Success
The story of Acheflan highlights the role of patents in homegrown innovation in developing countries. Professor Michael Ryan of Georgetown reviewed several case studies (including Acheflan) in Brazil that highlight the differences in biomedical innovation both pre- and post-intellectual property reforms. In the early 1980’s, Ache Laboratorios Farmaceuticos (a Brazilian generics manufacturer) became aware of a plant that grew near coastal cities that local fishermen would mash into an oil rub to serve as an Read More >
NIH Licensing Efforts Target Start-Ups
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has developed a new short-term licensing arrangement they hope will encourage licensing of NIH and FDA inventions to start-up companies. The NIH Start-Up Exclusive License Agreements targets start-up companies less than 5 years old, with less than $5M in raised capital, and fewer thans than 50 employees. By offering an exclusive license, they hope to accelerate the technology transfer process. However, this temporary pilot program runs only until September 30, Read More >
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 >
