Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Patents
  • Published:

The ethics of access to patented biotech research tools from universities and other research institutions

As universities and public research organizations increasingly partner with industry to fulfill their 'third mission' of innovation activities for economic and societal benefit, they have ethical obligations to ensure access to patented research tools, especially CRISPR–Cas9 technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Top ten patent holders and the number of CRISPR–Cas9 patent applications filed.

References

  1. Cohen, W.M. et al. Res. Policy 31, 1349–1367 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sheridan, C. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 599–601 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Etzkowitz, H. & Leydesdorff, L. Res. Policy 29, 109–123 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jinek, M. et al. Science 337, 816–821 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Doudna, J.A. et al. US patent 20140068797 (2014).

  6. Cong, L. et al. Science 339, 819–823 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang, F. US patent US8697359 (2014).

  8. Jasanoff, S. States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and the Social Order (Routledge, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Biddle, J.B. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 45, 14–23 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rai, A.K. & Eisenberg, R.S. Law Contemp. Probl. 66, 289–314 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Thursby, J.G. & Thursby, M.C. Science 301, 1052 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mowery, D.C. et al. Res. Policy 30, 99–119 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Etzkowitz, H. Res. Policy 27, 823–833 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sherkow, J.S. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 256–257 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Contreras, J.L. & Sherkow, J.S. Science 355, 698–700 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Guerrini, C.J., Curnutte, M.A., Sherkow, J.S. & Scott, C.T. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 22–24 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Flattmann, G.J. & Kaplan, J.M. Nat. Biotechnol. 20, 945–947 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Herder, M. J. Bioeth. Inq. 3, 69–79 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hilgartner, S. J. Mol. Biol. 319, 943–946 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Heller, M.A. Harvard L. Rev. 111, 621–688 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Heller, M.A. & Eisenberg, R.S. Science 280, 698–701 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Eiesenberg, R.S. Houst. Law Rev. 45, 1059 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Walsh, J.P. et al. in Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy 285–286 (Cohen, W.M. & Merrill, S.A. (eds), The National Academies Press, 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Russo, A.A. & Johnson, J. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 5, a020933 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Eisenberg, R.S. Science 299, 1018–1019 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Egelie, K.J., Graff, G.D., Strand, S.P. & Johansen, B. Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 1025–1031 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Herscovitch, M., Perkins, E., Baltus, A. & Fan, M. Nat. Biotechnol. 30, 316–317 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cohen, S.N. & Boyer, H.W. US Patent 4237224 (1980).

  29. Morrow, J.F. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 71, 1743–1747 (1974).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Feldman, M.P. et al. in Intellectual Property Management in Health and Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook of Best Practices, Volumes 1 and 2, 1797–1807 (Krattiger, A. et al. (eds), 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Colaianni, A. & Cook-Deegan, R. Milbank Q. 87, 683–715 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Elbashir, S.M. et al. Nature 411, 494–498 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Tuschl, T. et al. US patent EP2028278 (2014).

  34. Esmond, R.W. & Chung, A.K.-H. Nanotech. L. & Bus. 11, 15 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fitzmaurice, L.C. International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM) Innovation Symposium (2017).

  36. Medicines Patent Pool. https://www.medicinespatentpool.org/

  37. Chi-Ham, C.L., Clark, K.L. & Bennett, A.B. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 32–36 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Graff, G.D., Cullen, S.E., Bradford, K.J., Zilberman, D. & Bennett, A.B. Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 989–995 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. EU Framework program and the EU Horizon 2020 Program http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020

  40. Collins, L. Res. Technol. Manag. 49, 2–4 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Pogge, T.W. J. Philos. 89, 79–98 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Clarivate Analytics for the assistance with patent data; Center for Intellectual Property (CIP) at University of Gothenburg, Chalmers University of Technology and Norwegian University of Science and Technology for strategic insights on intellectual property platforms. The authors also wish to express sincere thanks to the following organizations that have contributed to this collaboration as funding and supporting partners: The Research Council of Norway.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Knut J Egelie.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Egelie, K., Strand, S., Johansen, B. et al. The ethics of access to patented biotech research tools from universities and other research institutions. Nat Biotechnol 36, 495–499 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4165

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4165

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research