Nội dung được dịch bởi AI, chỉ mang tính chất tham khảo
Quyền sở hữu trí tuệ và việc thương mại hóa nghiên cứu và phát triển
Tóm tắt
Mối quan tâm về việc thương mại hóa nghiên cứu đang gia tăng, đặc biệt trong việc thử nghiệm các loại thuốc mới. Vấn đề này liên quan đến những giả định đơn giản hóa và phân cực về nghiên cứu và phát triển (R&D) cũng như quyền sở hữu trí tuệ (IP). Để giải quyết vấn đề này, bài báo này đề xuất một quy trình RT&D ba giai đoạn phức tạp hơn, bao gồm Nghiên cứu Khoa học (R), Đổi mới Công nghệ (T) và Phát triển Sản phẩm Thương mại (D) hoặc quy trình RT&D. Nghiên cứu khoa học và thử nghiệm đổi mới liên quan đến những công việc trí tuệ tốn kém và không sản xuất hàng hoá miễn phí, mà thực tế yêu cầu phải có quy định về quyền sở hữu trí tuệ. Các quy trình RT&D liên quan đến một sự chuyển dịch quyền sở hữu trí tuệ chưa được công nhận từ quyền sở hữu trí tuệ chung đối với hàng hóa công cộng như thông tin và kiến thức sang quyền sở hữu trí tuệ riêng trong các sản phẩm và tài sản hữu hình khác. Vấn đề đặt ra là, loại quyền sở hữu trí tuệ nào: riêng tư hay chung? Bởi vì nghiên cứu khoa học và thử nghiệm đổi mới yêu cầu tính minh bạch về những phát hiện bất lợi, cũng như việc phân phối kết quả rộng rãi và với chi phí thấp, chúng cần một quyền sở hữu trí tuệ chung, mang tính bao trùm. Quyền sở hữu trí tuệ chung là phù hợp với cả việc chia sẻ hàng hóa tri thức và thu hồi chi phí sản xuất. Hơn nữa, nghiên cứu tương thích với thương mại hóa và sự hỗ trợ từ các lợi ích xã hội khác. Mặt khác, nó không tương thích với quyền sở hữu trí tuệ riêng biệt mang tính loại trừ cho phép công bố hạn chế hoặc hoàn toàn bóp nghẹt thông tin. Quyền sở hữu trí tuệ riêng tư thay vì thương mại hóa lại mâu thuẫn với những yêu cầu về tính minh bạch trong nghiên cứu khoa học và thử nghiệm đổi mới. Tuy nhiên, nguồn tài trợ thương mại về nguyên tắc là tương thích với nghiên cứu và thử nghiệm, đặc biệt khi được điều chỉnh bởi một quyền sở hữu trí tuệ chung. Điều này phản ánh một quan điểm thực dụng về sự kết nối cơ bản giữa tri thức và các lợi ích xã hội khác.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Nathan, D., Weatherall, D. (2002) Academic freedom in clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 247: 1370.
Seely Brown, J., Duguid, P. (2001) The Social Life of Information. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, Mass: 150.
Thompson, J., Baird, P., Downie, J. (2001) The Olivieri Report: the Complete Text of the Report of the Independent Inquiry Commissioned by the CAUT. Lorimer, Toronto.
Olivieri, Nancy F. (2003) Patients’ health or company profits? the commercialization of academic research. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (1): 29–42.
Weatherall, D. (2000) Academia and industry: increasingly uneasy bedfellows. The Lancet. 355: 1574.
di Norcia, V. (2002a) Diverse Knowledges, Competing Interests: An Essay on Socio-Technical Problem-Solving. Science and Engineering Ethics. 8: 83–98.
Freeman, C. (1986) The Economics of Industrial Innovation. MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
Buderi, R. (2000) Engines of Tomorrow. Simon and Schuster, New York.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Henley, P. (1998) Introduction. In: Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Henley, P., eds. Capitalizing Knowledge. SUNY, Albany, NY: 1–20.
Kuhn, T. (1963) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Garte, S. J. (1995) Guidelines for training in the ethical conduct of scientific research. Science and Engineering Ethics 1: 59–70.
Myhrvold, N. (1998) Supporting science. Science 282: 621–22.
Lonergan, B. (1958) Insight, A Study of Human Understanding. Longmans, Green, London.
La Montagne, J. R. (2001) Biotechnology and research: promise and problem. The Lancet 358: 1723–24.
Schon, D. (1963) The Displacement of Concepts. Tavistock, London: Chapter 1.
Brown, R. (2001) Who Rules in Science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Freeman, C., Soete, L. (1997) The Economics of Industrial Innovation. 3rd ed. Pinter, London.
White, C. (2002) New guidance issued on promoting integrity in scientific research. British Medical Journal 325: 182.
In Gibbs, W. W. (1996) The price of silence. Scientific American. 271, November: 10–12.
Pearn, J. (1995) Publication, an ethical imperative. British Medical Journal 310: 131–15.
Bird, S., Housman, D. E. (1995) Trust and the collection, selection, analysis and interpretation of data: a scientist’s view. Science and Engineering Ethics 1: 371–82.
Scott, P. (2003) The ethical implications of the new research paradigm. Science and Engineering Ethics 9: 73–84.
Kennedy, D. (2000) Secrecy and science. Science 289: 724.
Munthe, C., Welin, S. (1996) The morality of scientific openness. Science and Engineering Ethics 4: 411–428.
Shore, E. G. (1995) Effectiveness of research guidelines in the prevention of scientific misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 1: 383–87
Deyo, R. A., Psaty, G., Simon, G., Wagner, E., Omen, G.S. (1997) The messenger under attack. New England Journal of Medicine 336: 1776–80.
Huth, E. J. (1996) Conflicts of interest in industry-funded research. In Bleidt B. and Montagne, M., eds. Clinical Research In Pharmaceutical Development. Marcel Dekker, New York: 389–405.
Healy, D. (2003) In the grip of the python: conflicts at the university-industry interface. Science and Engineering Ethics 9: 59–72.
Mahler, J. (2004) The Anti-depressant dilemma. The New York Times Magazine. Nov. 21: 59–65, 100.
Wise, J. (1997) Research suppressed for seven years by drug company. British Medical Journal 314: 1145.
Kassirer, J. (2001) Financial conflicts of interest: an unresolved ethical frontier. American Journal of Law & Medicine 27: 149–62.
Stelfox, H. T., Chau, G., O’Rourke, K., Detsky, A. (1998) Conflict of interest in the debate over calcium-channel antagonists. New England Journal of Medicine 338: 101–08.
Pfeffer, J. (1994) The costs of legalization. In Sitkin, S. B., Bies, R.J., eds. (1994) The Legalistic Organization.. Sage, California: 346–58.
Kennedy, D. (2003) Forensic science: oxymoron? Science. 302: 1625.
Huber, P. W. (1991) Galileo’s Revenge, Junk Science in the Court Room. Harper, New York.
Anonymous. (1998) Supreme court clarifies junk science stance. Science 279: 35.
Kennedy, D. (2004) Science, law and the IBM case. Science 305: 309.
Murr, A. (2001) A dentist takes the stand. Newsweek. 20 August; from www.newsweek.com.
Levy, S. (1984) Hackers, Penguin, New York.
Borsook, P. (2000) Cyberselfish. Public Affairs, New York.
di Norcia, V. (1998) Hard Like Water — Ethics in Business. Oxford University Press, Toronto: Chapter 6.
Pollard, T. D. MD. (2002) The future of biomedical research. Journal of the American Medical Association 287: 1725–27.
Bumol, T. F., MD, Watanabe, A. M., MD. (2001) Genetic information, genomic technologies, and the future of drug discovery. Journal of the American Medical Association 285: 551–55.
Rowen, L., Wong, G.K.S., Lane, R.P., Hood, L. (2000) Publication rights in the era of open data release policies. Science 289: 1881.
Gelijns, C., PhD, Thier, MD, S.O. (2002) Medical innovation and institutional independence. Journal of the American Medical Association 287: 72–77.
Monbiot, G. (2003) Guard dogs of perception: the corporate takeover of science. Science and Engineering Ethics 9: 49–58.
Bero, L. A. (1999) Accepting commercial sponsorhip. British Medical Journal 319: 653–4.
di Norcia, V. (1990) Communications, power and time. Canadian Journal of Political Science XIII: 336–57.
Malakoff, D. (2003) U.S. court opens door to free trade in ideas. Science 301: 1643.
Thursby, J. G., Thursby, M.C. (2003) University licensing and the Bayh-Dole Act. Science 301: 1052.
Lessig, L. (2001) The Future of Ideas. Random House.
Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 30f
di Norcia, V. (1987) The hard problem of management is freedom, not the commons. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 6: 57–71.
Dahlman, C. (1980) The Open Field System. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Rowland, W. (1999) The Spirit of the Web. Key Porter, Toronto.
di Norcia, V. (2002b) The knowledge economy and moral community. Journal of Business Ethics 38: 167–77.
Berners-Lee, T. (1999) Weaving the Web. Harper, New York.
Stefik, M., ed. (1996) Internet Dreams. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Stewart, T. E. (1997) Intellectual Capital — The New Wealth of Organizations. Doubleday, New York.
Malakoff, D. (2004) Most academics eschewing patents. Science 303: 1757.
Ducor, P. (2000) Coauthorship and coinventorship. Science 289: 873–75.
Benkler, Y. (2004). Commons-based strategies and the problems of patents. Science 305: 1110–11.
Dyson, E. (1997) Release 2.0. Broadway, New York.
Winner, L. (1977) Autonomous Technology, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
Ellul, J. (1964) The Technological Society. Random House, New York.
Petroski, H. (1994) The Evolution of Useful Things, Vintage, New York.
Homer-Dixon, T. (2000). The Ingenuity Gap. Knopf, Toronto.
Gardner, H. (1983) Frames of Mind. Basic, New York.
di Norcia, V. (1994) Ethics, technology development and innovation. Business Ethics Quarterly 4: 235–52.
di Norcia, V. (2002c) Technological complexity and ethical control. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 21: 33–39.
Martin, J. (2000) The idea is more important than the experiment. Lancet 356: 934–37.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (PhRMA). (2002) Pharmaceutical Industry Profile. Available at www.phrma.org/publications/publications/profile.
Hopkins-Tanne, J. (2000) US faces ethical issues after gene therapy death. British Medical Journal 320: 602.
Waldrop, M. (2001) The Dream Machine. Penguin, New York: 377f, 427
Atkinson, R.C., Beachy, R. N., Conway, G., Cordova, F. A., Fox, M. A., Holbrook, J. A., Klessig, D. F. McCormick, R. L., McPherson, P. M., Rawlings, III, H. R., Rapson, R., Vanderhoef, L. N., Wiley, J. D., Young, C. E. (2003) Public sector collaboration for agricultural IP management. Science 301: 174–5.
Malakoff, D. (2004) NIH roils academe with advice on licensing DNA patents. Science 303: 1757–58.
Marshall, E. (2000a) A deluge of patents creates legal hassles for research. Science 288: 255–57.
Cyranoski, D. W. (2003) This protein belongs to... Nature 426: 10–11.
Marshall, E. (2000b) NIH cuts deal on use of Oncomouse. Science 287: 567.
Vallance, P. (2001) Biotechnology and new companies arising from academia. The Lancet 358: 1804.
Arthur, B. W. (1994) Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
Rowland, W. (1999) The Spirit of the Web. Key Porter, Toronto: Chapter 10.
Buderi, R. (2000) Corporate R&D scorecard. Technology Review 103 (6): 99–102.
Zacks, R. (2000) The TR university research scorecard. Technology Review 103 (4): 88–93.
Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A. (1998) Entrepreneurial science: the second academic revolution. In: Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Henley, P., eds. Capitalizing Knowledge. SUNY, Albany, NY: 21–46.
Fontanarosa, P. B., MD, De Angelis, C., MD, MPH. (2001) Basic science and translational research. Journal of the American Medical Association 286: 89–91.
NIH (2000) Clinical Trials.gov. A Service of the NIH. Accessed at http//Clinical Trials.gov/et
Press, E, Washburn, J. (March 2000) The kept university. Atlantic Monthly: 39–54.
Martin, J., Kasper, D. L. (2000) In whose best interest-breaching the academic industrial wall. New England Journal of Medicine 343: 1646–49.
Djulbegovic, B., Lacevic, M., Cantor, A., Fields, K. K., Bennett, C. L., Adams, J. R., Kuderer, N.M., Lyman, G. H. (2000) The uncertainty principle and industry sponsored research. The Lancet 356: 635–38.
Evans, G. R., Packham, D.E. (2003) Ethical issues at the university-industry interface: a way forward? Science and Engineering Ethics 9: 3–16.
Malmesbury, J. J. (2000) CSM attacked over delay in reducing secrecy. British Medical Journal 321: 135.
Larkin, M. (1999) Whose article is it anyway? The Lancet 354: 136–40.
Kjaergard, L.L., Als-Nielsen, B. (2002) Association between competing interests and authors conclusions: epidemiological study of randomised clinical trials published in the BMJ. British Medical Journal 325: 249–252.
Mann, H. (2002; Aug. 3). Research ethics committees and public dissemination of clinical trial results. The Lancet. 359: 406–8.
Rennie, D. (2000) Pharmo-economic analyses: making them transparent. Journal of the American Medical Association 283: 2158–60.
Editorial. (2002) Drug marketing: unsafe at any dose? Canadian Medical Association Journal 167: 981.
Ferriman, A. (1999) Drug companies criticised for exaggeration. British Medical Journal 318: 962.
Editorial. (2002b) Just how tainted has medicine become? The Lancet 359: 1167
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2001) Sponsorship, authorship and accountability. The Lancet 358: 854–56.
Rhodes, R. (1986) The Making of the Atomic Bomb, Touchstone, New York.
Kurt, T. L. (1996) Research regulation of government scientists’ conflicts of interest. In Bleidt B. and Montagne, M. eds. Clinical Research In Pharmaceutical Development. Marcel Dekker, New York: 377–89.
Etzkowitz, H. (2001) The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 20 (2) 18–29.
Moses, H., MD, Braunwald, E., Martin, J. B., Thier, S. O. (2002) Collaborating with industry — choices for the academic medical center. New England Journal of Medicine 347: 1371–75.
Martin, J., Kasper, D. L. (2000) In whose best interest-breaching the academic industrial wall. New England Journal of Medicine 343: 1646–49.
Webster, A., Etzkowitz, H. (1998) Toward a theoretical analysis of academic-industry collaboration. In: Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Henley, P., eds. Capitalizing Knowledge. SUNY, Albany, NY: 60–66.
Lewis, M. (2000) The New New Thing. Norton, New York: pp. 81f, 113f.
Bodenheimer, T. (2000) Uneasy alliance—clinical investigators and the pharmaceutical industry. New England Journal of Medicine. 342: 1539–44.
Nelsen, L. (1997) The rise of intellectual property protection in the American university. Science 279: 1460.
Kopp, C. (2002) What is a truly innovative drug? Canadian Family Physician 48: 1413–15.
Zehr, L. (2002) Generic firms seen reaping windfall. The Globe and Mail, Toronto. 29 November: B1, B6.
Petersen, M. (2002) Madison Ave. plays growing role in drug research. New York Times. 22 November: 1. Accessed at www.nytimes.com.
Christensen, C. M. (2000) The Innovator’s Dilemma-When New Technologies cause Great Firms to fail.. Harperbusiness, New York.
Jardine, L. (1999) Ingenious Pursuits- Building the Scientific Revolution. Doubleday, New York: 7f.
Peirce, C. S. (1960) What pragmatism is. In: Hartshorne, C., Weiss, P. eds. Charles Sanders Peirce. Collected Papers, Cambridge, Mass: 5: 272–92.
Habermas, J. (1971) Knowledge And Human Interests. Beacon, Boston.
Darwin, C. (1981) The Descent of Man. Princeton University, Princeton.