Abstract
Biotechnology is besides computer and information technology a key-technology for the economic development of the new millennium. This is revealed with particular clarity by the sector’s growth rates in figure 9 (normalised to 1995).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Reference
See e.g. the Alpha-interferon case, BIOGEN/Alpha interferons EPO Appeal Board Decision T301/87, EPO Official Journal OJ EPO 1990/8, 335.
Pirages [1996] page 273.
Foray [1992] page 9.
Thurow [1997] page 98.
See for example, Goodman, Walsh [1997] and the story of taxol or “The European Patent Directive: License to plunder” http://www.grain.org/publications/reports/plunder.htm.
The World Bank 1998 p. 35.
Find the complete questionnaire in appendix M.
The answering structure in the original questionnaire was actually a reverse one, so that “1” indicated the highest degree and “5” the lowest one. In the graphical representation of the answering scales this provides with the difficulty that smallest bars express the highest value, whereas largest bars represent the lowest one. This is against human intuition, which is why the data representation of a 1–2–3–4–5 scale was transformed into a 5–4–3–2–1 scale.
European Commission [1999] page 49.
C12N: Micro-organisms or enzymes; Compositions thereof; Propagating, preserving, or maintaining mirco-organisms; mutation or genetic engineering; culture media. This covers of course only one part of biotechnology. Other biotechnological fields would be covered by the IPC classes CO7G; C12M; P; Q; R and S. However, about 90% of all patents in biotechnology are filed in class C12N.
In special situations it is also worthwhile to apply for separate priority files, for European assignees first of all the USA. Compare section 6.3.4.5.
After the general market conditions, but before the regulatory framework, pressure from competitors, consumer acceptance, availability of skilled staff, technology transfer mechansisms, availability of equity capital, scale & quality of public R&D, access to innovative suppliers, see Ballantine, Thomas, [1997] page 47.
Thurow [1997].
Additional time of consideration and proving is crucial, for example with pharmaceuticals. There pre-clinical (in vivo) tests need time and might come up with unexpected results! Therefore it is important to pay the greater part of costs as late as possible.
Compare Grupp [1999] page 81.
Derwent [1999] page 65.
According to an evaluation of Straus, average cost of a European Patent with 8 designations cover 22% external patent attorney costs and 33% translation costs. Straus [1997] page 33.
With a file for only DEM 100 a priority claim is established at the German Office.
European Commission [1999] page 20.
Derwent, [1998] finding 10.
In an OECD study this is called a “blocking scenario”, where the assignee has no interest in working in the area covered by these patents. Compare OECD [1997] page 30.
Abraham [1998] page 204.
In reference to the classic economic metaphor of the “tragedy of the commons”, Heller and Eisenberg call the deterrent effect of too much patenting and the following under-use of scarce resources “the tragedy of the anticommons” Heller, Eisenberg [1998].
One difficulty in such kind of patenting activities is the late disclosure after 18 months.
European Commission, (1999) page 37.
For a comprising overview on the discussion around the community patent see: European Commission (1997).
E.g. case 15/74 Centrafarm v. Sterling Drug (1974) 1 and case 187/80 Merck v. Stephar (198) 3 CMLR 463 (European Court of Justice).
See e.g. Grupp (1999) page 65.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg15/en/intprop/654.htm European Commission (1999) page 46.
Grupp (1999) page 252.
Technical Board of Appeal, 1995, (T 356/93).
T 1054/96 (OJ 1997, 551) Novartis.
E.g. Van Overwalle (1999).
Crespi (1998) page 4.
This is a USA specific issue, since there patents can be kept pending almost indefinitely without publication.
Are EPO examiners to have courses in moral philosophy or theology? And if so, of what variety?“ Grupp [1999] page 258.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thumm, N. (2000). Patent Protection for Biotechnological Inventions. In: Intellectual Property Rights. Contributions to Economics. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12101-6_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-12101-6_6
Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-1329-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-12101-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive