Law Commons^™

Reply - Commercialization Without Exchange, Michael J. Burstein

Articles

In this brief reply to Prof. Ted Sichelman’s comments on my article Exchanging Information Without Intellectual Property, I argue that justifications for intellectual property that rely on the incentives exclusive rights offer for commercialization are not economically distinguishable from traditional theories based on incentives to invent or create in the first instance. Because innovation is not an event but a process, innovative activities may be subject to misappropriation – and therefore under-production – at multiple points along the supply chain that runs from conception to commercialization. The grant of exclusive rights is an intervention that can be made at any …

The Aftermath Of Stanford V. Roche: Which Law Of Assignments Governs?, Sean M. O'Connor

Articles

The discovery and commercialization of biotechnology innovations often rely on collaborations between universities and for-profit firms. In the United States, the federal government funds much of university life sciences research and, under the Bayh-Dole Act, has some rights to research arising from that funding.

Two important strands of invention ownership issues in this web of collaboration arose under litigation that culminated in the recent United States Supreme Court decision Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. (“Stanford v. Roche” or “Stanford”). The first is the question of whether Bayh-Dole …