Formalizing the rights of public research institutions to intellectual property as a key driver for science and innovation. Best practice of OECD countries
Subject One of the main reasons for low efficiency of R&D and unsatisfactory level of commercialization of intellectual activity results in the Russian Federation is the lack of proper regulation of rights of government agencies to intellectual property items protected by law, which are created under the State budget financing. The article considers foreign practices in this sphere. Objectives The aim is to analyze the aspects of foreign legislation relating to regulation of rights to IP assets created by government agencies and paid from the State budget. Methods Using the comparative analysis method, we review the specifics of regulation of government agencies’ rights to intellectual property created using the funds of national (federal) budgets in a number of developed countries. Results The analysis shows the key features of the regulation, namely, formalization of rights of government agencies to the results of intellectual activity, and incorporation of procedures for distribution of income generated by application of IP assets among the stakeholders. Conclusions The findings enable to determine the areas of perfecting the Russian legislation on intellectual property to the extent of formalizing the rights to IP assets created by various government agencies within public contract performance.
Keywords: intellectual property, IP asset, government agencies, State budget, innovation
References:
Voinikanis E.A. Pravo intellektual'noi sobstvennosti v tsifrovuyu epokhu. Paradigma balansa i gibkosti [Intellectual property law during the digital era. Paradigm of balance and flexibility]. Available at: Link. (In Russ.)
Atamas' A.V. Pravovye problemy raspredeleniya prav storon na rezul'taty rabot, vypolnennykh po gosudarstvennomu kontraktu na NIOKR [Legal problems of distribution of rights of parties to results of works performed under the State contract for research and development]. Probely v rossiiskom zakonodatel'stve = Gaps in Russian Legislation, 2008, no. 2, pp. 158–160. Available at: Link.
Ignatov I.I. Rol' Akta Beya-Doula (Bayh-Dole Act-1980) v transfere nauchnykh znanii i tekhnologii iz amerikanskikh universitetov v korporativnyi sektor: itogi tridtsatiletnego puti [The role of Bayh-Dole Act (1980) in scientific knowledge transfer from American universities to the corporate sector: 30-year experience results]. Available at: Link. (In Russ.)
Kryukov D., Pokrovskii K. Intellektual'naya sobstvennost', sozdannaya pri gosudarstvennom finansirovanii. Politika Pravitel'stva SShA [Intellectual property created under State financing. The policy of the U.S. government]. Elektronika: Nauka. Tekhnologiya. Biznes = Electronics: Science. Technology. Business, 2004, no. 3, pp. 88–91.
Schacht W. The Bayh-Dole Act: Selected Issues in Patent Policy and the Commercialization of Technology. Available at: Link.
Levenson D. Consequences of the Bayh-Dole Act. Available at: Link.
So A.D., Sampat Bh.N., Rai A.K., Cook-Deegan R., Reichman J.H., Weissman R., Kapczynski A. Is Bayh-Dole Good for Developing Countries? Lessons from the US Experience. PLOS Biology, 2008, vol. 6, iss. 10, pp. 2078–2084. Available at: Link.
Mowery D.C., Nelson R.R., Sampat Bh.N., Ziedonis A.A. The effects of the Bayh-Dole Act on U.S. University Research and Technology Transfer: An Analysis of Data from Columbia University, the University of California and Stanford University. Available at: Link.
Henderson J.A., Smith J.J. Academia, Industry, and the Bayh-Dole Act: An Implied Duty to Commercialize. Available at: Link.
Geuna A., Rossi F. Changes to university IPR regulations in Europe and the impact on academic patenting. Research Policy, 2011, no. 40, pp. 1068–1076.
Malva A.D., Lissoni F., Llerena P. Institutional Change and Academic Patenting: French Universities and the Innovation Act of 1999. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2011, vol. 23, iss. 1, pp. 211–239. Available at: Link.
Represa-Sánchez D., Castro-Martínez E., Fernández-de-Lucio I. Encouraging Protection of Public Research Results in Spain. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 2005, vol. 10, pp. 382–388. Available at: Link.
Cervantes M., Meissner D. Commercialising Public Research under the Open Innovation Model: New Trends. Forsait = Foresight-Russia, 2014, vol. 8, no 3, pp. 70–81. Available at: Link.
Cervantes M. Academic Patenting: How universities and public research organizations are using their intellectual property to boost research and spur innovative start-ups. Available at: Link.
Arundel A., Bordoy C. Developing internationally comparable indicators for the commercialization of publicly-funded research. UN University, Working Paper, 2008, no. 075.
Model Intellectual Property Policy for Universities and Research Institutions. World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: Link.
Corrado C.A., Hulten C.R. How do you Measure a ‘Technological Revolution’? American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 100, 2010, May, pp. 99–104.
Wunsch-Vincent S. Harnessing public research for innovation – the role of intellectual property. In: World Intellectual Property Report, WIPO, 2011. Available at: Link.
The Economics of Intellectual Property: Suggestions for Further Research in Developing Countries and Countries with Economies in Transition. WIPO, 2009. Available at: Link.
