I am inclined to agree with the author in this case, who supports Bayh-Dole and opposes the Kauffman foundation. Although there may be more incentives for the individual inventor if they are given control of the patent, they already have a significant incentive in additional proceeds they receive from the patent. On the other hand, if the university or company no longer has a financial interest in the patent, they will not have any motivation to provide researchers with the means to innovate. If the resources provided by the schools are not necessary for a certain innovation, the inventor may invent it outside the premises of the school and receive full financial reward for their labor. To keep the capital investment flowing, the institution must maintain some right to the finished patent.
Friday, April 13, 2012
Should ideas be owned by their founders or the institution that funds them?
While we have previously in class discussed the importance of incentives for innovation, and touched on the specific mechanisms in place to distribute these incentives, we have not touched on the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, which is an American law allowing universities to maintain patents of discoveries made by their faculty and researchers. This very system is currently under attack by the Kauffman Foundation, which seeks to move the patent into the hands of the inventor themselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Incentives for innovation are essential for an economic system to grow to its maximum potential. This means there has to be incentives for entrepreneurship i.e. a government that sets rules allowing for easy entry and exit in regards to starting a firm.
However, a little entrepreneurs new idea will not actually start to benefit the economic system until it gets picked up by a big firm allowing for mass production of said innovation. Therefore, unfortunately, this new innovation has to be bought by the firm and the inventor loses rights. So the question here isn't who should retain the ownership of the ideas its how do we ensure that large firms, after they have absorbed the innovator, continues to develop, sharpen and grow the innovation.....
People are paid for a reason ... they get the money, the institution get the idea
I completely agree with Jared. Just like everything created on the jobs by an employee is owned by the firm, universities and research institutions should have all the property rights of research produced by the researchers.
Researchers already have sufficient motivation to do research: money, fame, and promotion. The marginal benefit of extra money is very unlikely that it will drive researchers to higher productivity.
Yes but at the same time the idea is a unique construction of that individual, and his ideas cannot be proven to be dependent on the institution that surrounds him or her. Thus unless provided the construction of the idea would be more valued if the constructor can reap additional benefits as if not in the company the constructor can forge his own business based off his own ides.
Post a Comment