Academic freedom and academic-industry relationships in biotechnology

Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 129-149

  Streiffer, Robert ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ANALYTICAL APPROACH; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CIVIL RIGHTS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CONSULTATION; CONTRACT; ECONOMICS; ETHICAL THEORY; ETHICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FREEDOM; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; HUMAN; INDUSTRY; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PATENT; PUBLIC RELATIONS; PUBLISHING; REVIEW; TRANSGENIC PLANT; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CIVIL RIGHTS; CLINICAL TRIALS; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CONSULTANTS; CONTRACTS; DISCLOSURE; ETHICAL THEORY; FACULTY; FREEDOM; GENES, BRCA1; HUMANS; INDUSTRY; INTERINSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS; PATENTS; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH SUPPORT; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 33745739963     PISSN: 10546863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/ken.2006.0013     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. AAUP. American Association of University Professors. 1940. 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure. Available at http://www.aaup. org/statements/Redbook/1940stat.htm. Accessed 3 May 2006.
2. Barham, Bradford; Foltz, Jeremy; and Kim, Kwansoo. 2001. Trends in University Ag-Biotech Patenting. Food Marketing Policy Center. Research Report 58. Available at http://www.fmpc.uconn.edu/publications/rr/rr58.pdf. Accessed 3 May 2006.
3. Bekelman, Justin; Li, Yan; and Gross, Cary. 2003. Scope and Impact of Financial Conflicts of Interest in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review. JAMA 289: 454-65.
4. Blumenthal, David. 1992. Academic-Industry Relationships in the Life Sciences: Extent, Consequences, and Management. JAMA 268: 3344-49.
5. -. 2002. Conflict of Interest in Biomedical Research. Health Matrix 12: 377-92.
6. Brown, Phyllida, and Kurt Kleiner. 1994. Patent Row Splits Breast Cancer Researchers. New Scientist 143 (1944): 4.
7. Bunk, Steve. 1999. Researchers Feel Threatened by Disease Gene Patents. Scientist 13 (20): 7.
8. Cohen, Carl. 1979a. On the Dangers of Inquiry and the Burden of Proof. In The Recombinant DNA Debate, ed. David Jackson and Stephen Stich, pp. 303-34. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9. -. 1979b. When May Research Be Stopped? In The Recombinant DNA Debate, ed. David Jackson and Stephen Stich, pp. 203-18. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
10. Dalpé, Robert; Bouchard, Louise; and Ducharme, Daniel. 2000. Scientific, Medical and Industrial Issues in Breast and Ovarian Cancer Genes Research. IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society: 91-99.
11. Dalton, Rex. 2002. Superweed Study Falters as Seed Firms Deny Access to Transgene. Nature Biotechnology 419: 655.
12. Davis, Bernard. 1979. Evolution, Epidemiology, and Recombinant DNA. In The Recombinant DNA Debate, ed. David Jackson and Stephen Stich, pp. 137-54. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
13. Desruisseaux, Paul. 1999. Canadian Professors Decry Power of Companies in Campus Research. Chronicle of Higher Education 46 (12). Available at http:// chronicle.com/weekly/v46/i12/12a05901.htm. Accessed 3 May 2006.
14. Duttfield, Graham. 2003. Intellectual Property Rights and the Life Sciences Industry: A Twentieth Century History. Hampshire, England: Ashgate.
15. Dworkin, Ronald. 1996. We Need a New Interpretation of Academic Freedom. In The Future of Academic Freedom, ed. Louis Menand, pp. 181-98. Austin: University of Texas Press.
16. Eisenberg, Rebecca. 1988. Academic Freedom and Academic Values in Sponsored Research. Texas Law Review 66: 1363-404.
17. Heller, Michael, and Eisenberg, Rebecca. 1998. Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. Science 280: 698-701.
18. Hohfeld, Wesley. 1913. Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning. Yale Law Journal 23: 16-59.
19. Jackson, David, and Stich, Stephen, eds. 1979. The Recombinant DNA Debate. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20. Kenny, Anthony. 1986. Biotechnology: The University-Industrial Complex. New Haven: Yale University Press.
21. Kryder, R. David; Kowalski, Stanley P.; and Krattiger, Anatole F. 2000. The Intellectual and Technical Property Components of pro-Vitamin A Rice (GoldenRice): A Preliminary Freedom-To-Operate Review. ISAAA Briefs No. 20. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY.
22. Leder, Philip, and Stewart, Timothy, inventors. 1988. Transgenic Non-Human Mammals. President and Fellows of Harvard College, assignee. United States 4,736,866. (12 April).
23. Machlup, Fritz. 1962. The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24. Machlup, Fritz, and Penrose, Edith. 1950. The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century. Journal of Economic History 10 (1): 1-29.
25. Marshall, Eliot. 1997. Secretiveness Found Widespread in Life Sciences. Science 276: 523-25.
26. McCarthy, David. 1997. Rights, Explanation, and Risks. Ethics 107: 205-25.
27. Merz, Jon. 1999. Disease Gene Patents: Overcoming Unethical Constraints on Clinical Laboratory Medicine. Clinical Chemistry 45: 324-30.
28. Moore, Adam. 2003. Intellectual Property, Innovation, and Social Progress: The Case Against Incentive Based Arguments. Hamline Law Review 26: 601-30.
29. Nathan, David, and Weatherall, David. 2002. Academic Freedom in Clinical Research. New England Journal of Medicine 347: 1368-71.
30. National Academies. 2004. Committee on Intellectual Property in Genomic and Protein Research Innovation. Transcript, 27 February. Available at http://www7.nationalacdaemies.org/step/Proteomics_June_transcript.pdf. Accessed 3 May 2006.
31. Okarma, Thomas. 2001. Human Embryonic Stem Cells: A Primer on the Technology and Its Medical Applications. In The Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy, ed. Suzanne Holland, Karen Lebacqz, and Laurie Zoloth, pp. 3-13. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Posner, Richard. 2002. The Law and Economics of Intellectual Property. Daedalus 131 (2): 5-12.
33. Potrykus, Ingo. 2001. Golden Rice and Beyond. Plant Physiology 125: 1157-61.
34. Rissler, Jane, and Mellon, Margaret. 1996. The Ecological Risks of Engineered Crops. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Searle, John. 1972. Two Concepts of Academic Freedom. In The Concept of Academic Freedom, ed. Edmund Pincoffs, pp. 76-96. Austin: University of Texas Press.
36. Steinberg, Donald. 2000. Biotech Faces Evolving Patent System. Scientist 14 (5): 8.
37. Stich, Stephen. 1979. The Recombinant DNA Debate: Some Philosophical Considerations. In The Recombinant DNA Debate, ed. David Jackson and Stephen Stich, pp. 183-201. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
38. Svatos, Michele. 1996. Biotechnology and the Utilitarian Argument for Patents. In Scientific Innovation, Philosophy, and Public Policy, ed. Ellen Paul, Fred Miller, Jr., and Jeffrey Paul, pp. 113-44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Thomson, Judith Jarvis. 1990. The Realm of Rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Umbeck, Paul, inventor. 1992. Genetic Engineering of Cotton Plants and Lines. Agracetus, assignee. United States 5,159,135. (27 October).
41. Van Alstyne, William. 1972. The Specific Theory of Academic Freedom and the General Issue of Civil Liberty. Reprinted in The Concept of Academic Freedom, ed. Edmund Pincoffs, pp. 59-85. Austin: University of Texas Press.
42. West, Keith P., Jr. 2002. Extent of Vitamin A Deficiency among Preschool Children and Women of Reproductive Age. Journal of Nutrition 132: 2857S-2866S.
43. Williams, Bernard. 1973. A Critique of Utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism: For and Against, ed. John Jameison Carswell Smart and Bernard Williams, pp. 77-150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. Ye, Xudon; Al-Babili, Salim; Kloti, Andreas; et al. 2000. Engineering the Provitamin A (Beta-Carotene) Biosynthetic Pathway into (Carotenoid-Free) Rice Endosperm. Science 287: 303-5.