Diagnostic Kits/IP Profile of Universities working in Kits

Answer the questions:

1. What are the 5 top Universities in this field?
   • Correlate them with their main outputs (Data. Narratives. Tools)
   • Understand and identify cases where these universities are “experimenting” or “adopting” commons based approach. Are they adopting OA policies, for instance? Are they adopting Social Responsible License approaches?
   • Identify these cases and treat them as entities that will also be placed in our mapping device (the quadrants)
   • Identify what universities are the “Microsofts” of the field and what companies are the “IBMs” of the field (Use the questionnaire to guide your research when appropriate - Carol will select specific relevant questions)

Pressman Article...

A pilot survey on the licensing of DNA inventions focuses on the: ((Henry, M.R., et al., 2003))

• • patenting and out-licensing strategies
  • licensing negotiations: exclusivity, uses, and terms
  • Protection of non-patented technologies: MTAs, NDAs

• Institutions chosen for the study had patents of inventions using human DNA and both for profit and non-profits were sampled. The study found that for profit and non-profit entities approach patent and licenses differently:
  • Patenting Behavior ((Henry, M.R., et al., 2003))
    • For profits more often fill patent applications for all new technologies and then deciding what to pursue based on commercial interest.
    • Non-profits were more selective about when to apply for a patent.
  • Licensing Behavior ((Henry, M.R., et al., 2003))
    • For both entities, licensing was most often used as a method of commercialization. Licensing for research was very infrequent.
    • One important difference found was that nonprofits were more than twice as likely to license exclusively as compared to for-profit companies.

Navigation

Main Page Diagnostic_Kits