Abstract
Much of the critique of patent systems for hindering research has focused on the scope or definition of what is patentable. We suggest, rather, that by focusing on the exchange of existing patent rights, significant improvements in freedom-to-operate can be achieved regardless of the state of patent reform. Historically, in other industries, when IP congestion has threatened productivity, both government and industry groups have intervened, forming collective rights organizations such as patent pools and royalty clearinghouses that have provided freedom to operate with substantial savings for whole industries. Furthermore, today’s advances in information technology have created new tools, “IP informatics” and “online IP exchanges,” which provide interesting new organizational possibilities for collective intellectual property rights organizations. The goal of an “intellectual property clearinghouse” for agricultural biotechnologies would be to reduce transaction costs and other market failures that hinder the exchange of IP, creating pathways through the patent thicket and giving freedom to operate with proprietary biotechnologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arora, A., Fosfuri, A., and Gambardella, A., 2004, Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Bennett, A. B., 2000, Intellectual property in agricultural biotechnology: Fueling the fire or smothering the flame. Presented at the conference Biotechnology and the Public Interest: Prospects of Biotechnology in the Developing and Developed World, University of California (April 28, 2000), Berkeley.
Byerlee, D., and Fischer, K., 2001, Accessing modern science: Policy and institutional options for agricultural biotechnology in developing countries, IP Strategy Today (1):1–27.
Clark, J., Piccolo, J., Stanton, B., and Tyson, K., 2000, Patent pools: A solution to the problem of access in biotechnology patents? U.S.P.T.O., white paper, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, D. C.
The Economist, 2000, A market for monopoly? The Economist (June 17, 2000):59–60.
Enriquez, J., and Goldberg, R. A., 2000, Transforming life, transforming business: The life-science revolution, Harvard Bus. Rev. 78(2):96–104.
Graff, G. D., Cullen, S. E., Bradford, K. J., Zilberman, D., and Bennett, A. B., 2003, The public-private structure of intellectual property ownership in agricultural biotechnology, Nature Biotech. 21(9):989–995.
Graff, G. D., Rausser, G. R., and Small, A. A., 2003, Agricultural biotechnology’s complementary intellectual assets, Rev. Econ. Stat. 85(2):349–363.
Heller, M. A., and Eisenberg, R. S., 1998, Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research, Science, 280:698–701.
Herdt, R. W., 1999, Enclosing the global plant genetic commons, presented at the Institute for International Studies, Stanford University (January 14, 1999), Stanford, California.
Kaplan, S., and Sawhney, M., 2000, E-hubs: The new B2B marketplaces: Toward a taxonomy of business models, Harvard Bus. Rev. 78(3):97–103.
Kryder, R. D., Kowalksi, S. P., and Krattiger, A. F., 2000, The intellectual and technical property components of pro-vitamin A rice (Golden Rice): A preliminary framework-to-operate review, ISAAA Briefs No. 20, International Service for the Acquisition of Agribiotech Applications (ISAAA), Ithaca.
Merges, R. P., 1996, Contracting into liability rules: Intellectual property rights and collective rights organizations, California Law Rev. 84:1293–1393.
Prakash, C. S., 2000, Intellectual capital: Hungry for biotech, MIT Tech. Rev. 103(4):32.
Press, E., and Washburn, J., 2000, The kept university, The Atlantic Monthly, 285(3):39–54.
Shapiro, C, 2000, Navigating the patent thicket: Cross-licenses, patent pools, and standard-setting. Presented at the conference, Innovation Policy and the Economy, National Bureau of Economic Research (April 11, 2000), Washington, D. C.
Shulman, S., 2000, Toward sharing the genome, MIT Tech. Rev. 103(5):60–67.
U. S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, 1995, Antitrust guidelines for the licensing of intellectual property (April 6, 1995); http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/guidelines/ipguide.htm.
Wright, B. D., 2001, Challenges for public agricultural research and extension in a world of proprietary science and technology, in: Knowledge Generation and Transfer: Implications for Agriculture in the 21st Century, S. Wolf and D. Zilberman, eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp. 63–78.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Graff, G., Zilberman, D. (2005). Towards an Intellectual Property Clearinghouse for Agricultural Biotechnology. In: Cooper, J., Lipper, L.M., Zilberman, D. (eds) Agricultural Biodiversity and Biotechnology in Economic Development. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 27. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-25409-9_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-25409-9_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-25407-4
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-25409-8
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)