Current interest in patent policy reaches beyond the academic community, as two recent newspaper articles demonstrate: one concerned how 'a new technique for creating embryo-free human stem cells sidesteps a controversial US patent that has slowed the pace of scientific discovery worldwide.' James Thomson of the University of Wisconsin generated the patent but also the breakthrough which circumvents it. Since another group simultaneously reported the technique no 'one team can control it', according to the author. The other article related to the Australian National University (ANU), which was told by the Australian Universities Quality Audit (AUQA) to, 'better promote the intellectual property attached to its research to raise its profile'. AUQA stressed that even if the ANU was not set to make much money from exploiting intellectual property (IP), at least exploitation 'could raise ANU's standing in the global community'.
|Title of host publication||Intellectual Property Policy Reform|
|Subtitle of host publication||Fostering Innovation and Development|
|Editors||Christopher Arup, William van Caenegem|
|Publisher||Edward Elgar Publishing|
|Number of pages||17|
|Publication status||Published - 2009|
Van Caenegem, W. (2009). Pervasive incentives, disparate innovation and intellectual property law. In C. Arup, & W. van Caenegem (Eds.), Intellectual Property Policy Reform: Fostering Innovation and Development (pp. 250-266). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781848449039.00020