Changing landscape in biotechnology patenting

World Patent Information

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 219-225

  Singh, Angad ^a   Hallihosur, Sharanabasava ^a   Rangan, Latha ^a  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY GUWAHATI   (India)

Author keywords

Academic patents; Asia; Biotechnology; Europe; India; IPR; Landscaping; Nanotechnology; Patents; Pharmaceuticals; Review; Transgenics

Indexed keywords

EID: 67349174665     PISSN: 01722190     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wpi.2009.03.004     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Latimer M.T. Patenting inventions arising from biological research. Genome Biol 2 6 (2004) 203
2. Chakrabarti S., Amba S., and Ramasami T. Study of landscape of global leather patents and analysis of technology linkages to trade. World Patent Inform 28 (2006) 226-234
3. Malmstrom Bo G., and Andersson B. The nobel prize in chemistry: the development of modern chemistry. In: Agneta Wallin L., and Nils R. (Eds). The nobel prize: the first 100 years (2001), Imperial College Press and World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd
4. Gupta R.K., and Subbaram N.R. Patenting activity in the field of biotechnology: Indian scenario. World Patent Inform 14 1 (1992) 36-41
5. Karki M.M.S., and Garg K.C. Patenting activity in the third world - a case study of biotechnology patents filed in India. World Patent Inform 15 (1993) 165-170
6. Akers L. The future of patent information - a user with a view. World Patent Inform 25 (2003) 303-312
7. WIPO Press Room February 21, 2008; PR/2008/536 .
8. Lakshmikumaran M. Patenting of genetic inventions. J Intel Prop Rights 12 (2007) 45-56
9. Wood D. European patents for biotechnological inventions - past, present and future. World Patent Inform 23 (2001) 339-348
10. Moreira A.C., Almeida Müller A.C., Pereira Jr. N., Antunes D.E., and Souza A. Pharmaceutical patents on plant derived materials in Brazil: Policy, law and statistics. World Patent Inform 28 (2006) 34-42
11. Armour K.J., and Harrison P.S. Poisons and politics - indigenous rights and IP protection. World Patent Inform 29 (2007) 255-261
12. Swaminathan MS. Managing technological changes in agriculture with particular reference to transgenics. In: Transgenic rice biosafety workshop, Chennai; 30th October 2002.
13. Spillane C. Could agricultural biotechnology contribute to poverty alleviation? AgBiotechNet, vol. 2. ABN042; 2000.
14. Holman C.M. Trends in human gene patent litigation. Science 322 (2008) 198-199
15. Paradise J., Andrews L., and Holbrook T. Patents on human genes: an analysis of scope and claims. Science 307 (2005) 1566-1567
16. Caulfield T., Cook-Deegan R.M., Kieff F.C., and Walsh J.P. Evidence and anecdotes: analysis of human gene patenting controversies. Nature Biotechnol 24 (2006) 1091-1094
17. WIPO academy DL course on biotechnology and intellectual property; 2008.
18. Whittaker P. Human embryonic stem cell patents: a European perspective. J Intel Prop Rights 12 (2007) 30-37
19. Byrne N. Patents for human genes, ownership of biological materials and other issues in patent law. World Patent Inform 15 (1993) 199-202
20. OECD. Turning science into business. Patenting and licensing at public research organizations. Paris: OECD Publications; 2003.
21. Perdue U.D. The changing landscape for patenting transgenic plants in Europe. CASRIP Newslett (1999) 6
22. Paarlberg R.L. The real threat to GM crop in poor countries: consumer and policy resistance to GM foods in rich countries. Food Policy 27 (2002) 247-250
23. Intellectual Property Office, India Annual Reports 2001-2002, 2002-2003, 2003-2004, 2004-2005, 2005-2006, 2006-2007.
24. Kardam K.S. Patenting in the emerging fields of technology. J Intel Prop Rights 12 (2007) 15-29
25. Zucker L., Darby M., and Brewer M. Intellectual human capital and the birth of US technology enterprises. Am Econ Rev 88 (1998) 290-306
26. Owen-Smith J., and Powell W. The expending role of university patenting in the life sciences: assessing the importance of experience and connectivity. Res Policy 32 9 (2003) 1695-1711
27. Sapsalis E., de la Potterie B., and Navon R. Academic versus industry patenting: an in-depth analysis of what determines patent value. Res Policy 35 (2006) 1631-1645
28. Baldini N., Grimaldi R., and Sobrero M. Institutional changes and the commercialization of academic knowledge: a study of Italian universities' patenting activities between 1965 and 2002. Res Policy 35 (2006) 518-532
29. Geuna A., and Nesta L. University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging European evidence. Res Policy 35 6 (2006) 790-807
30. Mowery D., Nelson R.R., Sampat B., and Ziedonis A. The growth of patenting and licensing by US universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980. Res Policy 30 1 (2001) 99-119
31. Powell W., and Owen-Smith J. Universities and the market for intellectual property in the life sciences. J Policy Anal Manage 17 (1998) 253-277
32. Mansfield E. Academic research and industrial innovation. Res Policy 20 1 (1991) 1-12
33. Mansfield E. Academic research underlying industrial innovations: sources, characteristics, and financing. Rev Econ Stat 77 1 (1995) 55-65
34. Mansfield E. Academic research and industrial innovation: an update of empirical findings. Res Policy 26 (1998) 773-776
35. Mansfield E., and Lee J.Y. The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support. Res Policy 25 7 (1996) 1047-1058
36. Meyer M., Sinilainen T., and Utecht J. Towards hybrid Triple Helix indicators: a study of university-related patents and a survey of academic inventors. Scientometrics 58 2 (2003) 321-350
37. Sampat B.N. Patenting and US academic research in the 20th century: the world before and after Bayh-Dole. Res Policy 35 (2006) 772-789
38. Henderson R., Jaffe A., and Trajtenberg M. University as a source of commercial technology: a detailed analysis of university patenting, 1965-1988. Rev Econ Stat 80 1 (1998) 119-127
39. van Dulken S. News on patent, trademark and design databases on the internet. World Patent Inform 29 (2007) 270-271
40. Falciola L. Searching biotechnology information: a case study. World Patent Inform 31 (2009) 36-47
41. Lecrubier A. Patents and public health. EMBO Rep 3 12 (2002) 1120-1122
42. Shand H., and Wetter K.J. Trends in intellectual property and nanotechnology: implications for the global south. J Intel Prop Rights 12 (2007) 111-117
43. Buanec B.L. Protection of plant-related innovations: evolution and current discussion. World Patent Inform 28 (2006) 50-62
44. Kowalski S. Rational risk/benefit analysis of genetically modified crops. J Intel Prop Rights 12 (2007) 92-103
45. Edfjall C. The future of European patent information. World Patent Inform 30 (2008) 135-138
46. Scheu M., Veefkind V., Verbandt Y., Molina Galan E., Absalom R., and Forster W. Mapping nanotechnology patents: the EPO approach. World Patent Inform 28 (2006) 204-211
47. Gersten D.M. The quest for market exclusivity in biotechnology: navigating the patent minefield vol. 2 (2005), The American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, Inc. 572-8
48. Cheeptham N., and Chantawannakul P. Intellectual property management and awareness at the university level in the biotechnology era: a Thai perspective. World Patent Inform 23 (2001) 373-378