Patent pools and clearinghouses in the life sciences

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 29, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 569-576

  Van Zimmeren, Esther ^a   Vanneste, Sven ^b   Matthijs, Gert ^a   Vanhaverbeke, Wim ^c,d,e   Van Overwalle, Geertrui ^a,f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

^c HASSELT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^d VLERICK BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Belgium)

^e ESADE BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Spain)

^f TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOPHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; GLAXO SMITHKLINE; GLOBAL HEALTH; LIFE-SCIENCES; MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS; MPEG LA; OPEN INNOVATION; PATENT LICENSING; PATENT POOL; TECHNOLOGY FIELDS; TROPICAL DISEASE;

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; MOTION PICTURE EXPERTS GROUP STANDARDS; PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

LAKES;

BIOMEDICINE; CLEARINGHOUSE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG INDUSTRY; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; LICENCE; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; PATENT POOL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE DISCIPLINES; BIOPHARMACEUTICS; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DRUG INDUSTRY; HUMANS; PATENTS AS TOPIC;

EID: 80054685856     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2011.06.002     Document Type: Review

References (57)

1. Shapiro C. Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools, and standard-setting. Innovation Policy and the Economy 2001, 119-150. MIT Press. A. Jaffe (Ed.).
2. Heller M.A. The tragedy of the anticommons: property in the transition from Marx to markets. Harv. Law Rev. 1998, 111:621-688.
3. Heller M.A. The Gridlock Economy: How Too Much Ownership Wrecks Markets, Stops Innovation, and Costs Lives 2008, Basic Books.
4. Heller M.A., Eisenberg R.S. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 1998, 280:698-701.
5. Access to Medicines Foundation Access to Medicines Index 2010 2010, Access to Medicines Foundation.
6. Hunt, P. (2008) The Right to Health: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health, UN General Assembly.
7. Simon J.H.M., et al. Managing severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) intellectual property rights: the possible role for patent pooling. Bull. World Health Org. 2005, 83:707-710.
8. UNITAID (2008) UNITAID Moves Towards a Patent Pool for Medicines, Press Release, UNITAID, Geneva, 9 July 2008.
9. UNITAID Executive Board (2010) Provisional Minutes: Resolution No. 5, Executive Board Meeting, 11th Session, Special Session on Patent Pool, 5 February 2010, WHO, Geneva.
10. WHO and Medicines Patent Pool Foundation (2010) Memorandum of Understanding, 14 September 2010.
11. UNITAID (2010) US National Institutes of Health (NIH) First to Share Patents with Medicines Patent Pool, Press Release, UNITAID, Geneva, 30 September 2010.
12. Witty, A. (2009) Big Pharma as a Catalyst for Change, Speech to Harvard Medical School, Boston, 13 February 2009.
13. Witty, A. (2010) Open Labs, Open Minds: Breaking Down Barriers to Innovation and Access to Medicines and Vaccines in the Developing World, Remarks delivered to the Council on Foreign Relations, New York, 20 January 2010.
14. Gamo F.-J., et al. Thousands of chemical starting points for antimalarial lead identification. Nature 2010, 465:305-310.
15. BVGH Pool for Open Innovation against Neglected Tropical Diseases: Core Principles 2010, BVGH.
16. Ebersole T.J., et al. Patent pools and standard setting in diagnostic genetics. Nat. Biotechnol. 2005, 23:937-938.
17. Goldstein J.A. Biotechnology patent pools and standards setting. Patent Law and Theory: A Handbook of Contemporary Research 2008, 712-721. Edward Elgar Publishing. T. Takenaka (Ed.).
18. Verbeure B., et al. Patent pools and diagnostic testing. Trends Biotechnol. 2006, 24:115-120.
19. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2002) Genetic Inventions, Intellectual Property Rights and Licensing Practices: Evidence and Policies, OECD.
20. Human Genome Organization (HUGO) Intellectual Property Committee (2003) Statement on the Scope of Gene Patents, Research Exemption and Licensing of Patented Gene Sequences for Diagnostics, HUGO.
21. Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) (2004) Genes and Ingenuity: Gene Patenting and Human Health, ALRC, Final Report No. 99.
22. US Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health, and Society (SACGHS) (2010) Revised Draft Report on Gene Patents and Licensing Practices and Their Impact on Patient Access to Genetic Tests, Office of Science Policy, National Institutes of Health: Office of Biotechnology Activities.
23. European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) Working Party on Patenting and Licensing (2008) Patenting and licensing in genetic testing: recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics. Eur. J. Hum. Gen. 16, S3-S9.
24. Nicol D., Hope J. Cooperative strategies for facilitating use of patented inventions in biotechnology. Law in Context 2006, 24:85-112.
25. Van Overwalle G., et al. Models for facilitating access to patents on genetic inventions. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2006, 7:143-148.
26. van Zimmeren E., et al. A clearing house for diagnostic testing: the solution to ensure access to and use of patented genetic inventions?. Bull. World Health Org. 2006, 84:352-359.
27. Gene Patents and Collaborative Licensing Models: Patent Pools, Clearinghouses, Open Source Models and Liability Regimes 2009, Cambridge University Press. G. Van Overwalle (Ed.).
28. Clark, J. et al. (2000) Patent Pools: A Solution to the Problem of Access in Biotechnology Patents, USPTO.
29. WHO Expert Working Group on Research and Development Financing Research and Development: Coordination and Financing 2010, WHO.
30. van Zimmeren, E. et al. Patent Licensing in Medical Biotechnology in Europe: A Role for Collaborative Licensing Strategies? Acco (in press).
31. Caulfield T., et al. Evidence and anecdotes: an analysis of human gene patenting controversies. Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24:1091-1094.
32. Joly Y. Open source approaches in biotechnology: utopia revisited. Maine Law Rev. 2007, 59:386-405.
33. US National Research Council of the National Academies: Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic and Protein Research and Innovation Reaping the Benefits of Genomic and Proteomic Research: Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health 2005, National Academies Press.
34. Hopkins M.M., et al. The Patenting of Human DNA: Global Trends in Public and Private Sector Activity 2006, SPRU.
35. Huys I., et al. Legal uncertainty in the area of genetic diagnostic testing. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 27:903-909.
36. Chandrasekharan S., Cook-Deegan R. Gene patents and personalized medicine: what lies ahead?. Genome Med. 2009, 1:92-95.
37. Van Overwalle G. Turning patent swords into shares. Science 2010, 330:1630-1631.
38. Pressman L., et al. The licensing of DNA patents by US academic institutions: an empirical survey. Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24:31-39.
39. Walsh J.P., et al. Where excludability matters: material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research. Res. Policy 2007, 36:1184-1203.
40. Nicol, D. and Nielsen, J. (2003) Patents and Medical Biotechnology: An Empirical Analysis of Issues Facing the Australian Industry, Centre for Law and Genetics, Occasional Paper No. 6.
41. Thumm, N. (2003) Research and Patenting in Biotechnology: A Survey in Switzerland, Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property, Report No. 1.
42. Nicol, D. (2010) Patent Licensing in Medical Biotechnology in Australia: A Role for Collaborative Licensing Strategies? Centre for Law and Genetics, Occasional Paper No. 7.
43. Nicol D. Collaborative licensing in biotechnology: a survey of knowledge, experience, and attitudes in Australia. Biotechnol. Law Rep. 2010, 29:465-483.
44. US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (2002) Madey v. Duke University. 307 F.3d 1351.
45. Holman C.M. Trends in human gene patent litigation. Science 2008, 322:198-199.
46. Yancey A., Stewart C.N. Are university researchers at risk for patent infringement?. Nat. Biotechnol. 2007, 25:1225-1228.
47. US Department of Justice and US Federal Trade Commission (1995) Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property, Washington.
48. European Commission (2004) Guidelines on the Application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to Technology Transfer Agreements, Brussels, OJ C101/02.
49. Japan Fair Trade Commission (2005) Guidelines on Standardization and Patent Pool Arrangements, Tokyo.
50. van Zimmeren E. Clearinghouse mechanisms in genetic diagnostics: conceptual framework. Gene Patents and Collaborative Licensing Models: Patent Pools, Clearinghouses, Open Source Models and Liability Regimes 2009, 63-119. Cambridge University Press. G. Van Overwalle (Ed.).
51. Intellectual Property and Competition Law: New Frontiers 2011, Oxford University Press. S. Anderman, A. Ezrachi (Eds.).
52. Intellectual property and Competition 2011, Edward Elgar Publishing. M.A. Carrier (Ed.).
53. Trott P., Hartmann D. Why open innovation is old wine in new bottles. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2009, 13:715-736.
54. Melese T., et al. Open innovation networks between academia and industry: an imperative for breakthrough therapies. Nat. Med. 2009, 15:502-507.
55. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm 2008, Oxford University Press. H.W. Chesbrough (Ed.).
56. Chesbrough H.W. Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape 2006, Harvard Business School Press.
57. Chesbrough H.W. Open Innovation: the New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology 2003, Harvard Business School Press.