January 4, 2007
Choosing the greater good in promotion of UW intellectual properties
A short, simple resolution recently passed by a campus committee will help more UW-developed medicines and technologies to be distributed in developing countries worldwide.
The resolution was passed by the UW Intellectual Property Management Advisory Committee, updating the University’s policy toward the licensing and distribution of UW intellectual property.
The new policy values distributing UW intellectual properties worldwide and the societal good that can come from such innovations over the revenue they might generate if licensed only through exclusive agreements, if a choice must be made between the two.
That is, the greater good of providing for those in need should trump revenues.
The committee’s resolution states, “(T)he goal of maximizing license revenue can sometimes come into conflict with the goal of maximizing the availability and broadest use of UW technology,” and recommends that the UW “affirm that its primary goal in technology transfer is to maximize the worldwide use and societal benefit of its research and technology.”
Larry Snyder, a professor of computer science and chair of the committee, offered a bit of history. He said universities were enabled to retain patents for their inventions by the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. But that legislation also required the institutions to make intellectual properties available to the public by promoting their commercialization — a move that has since sparked the creation of many new industries and markets.
Snyder said the UW’s intellectual property committee considered the policy change after getting a visit and hearing comments from representatives of Universities Allied for Essential Medicines. The mission of that nationwide group is to encourage universities to make their life-saving medical products available in developing countries.
“It seems to me the key point here is that occasionally, social good and profit maximization may come into conflict, and in those instances where they do, the University has gone on record saying we prefer the social responsibility position to the profit maximization decision.”
It’s also true, Snyder said, that this particular situation doesn’t come up very often. “The (intellectual property) commercialization business is usually characterized by a lot of small things that are useful but don’t make a fortune, and a few home runs.”
The advisory committee’s decision was forwarded to the office of James Severson, vice provost for TechTransfer, who agreed it’s the right course to take.
“This is a confirmation of the kinds of decisions we have been making,” Severson said. He added that support for this policy change comes from a number of places in the UW community, and beyond. “There’s a heightened sensitivity now, across the country and in this area, and this makes a statement about where our intent should be.”
For more information on the UW’s TechTransfer Office, visit online at http://depts.washington.edu/techtran/. For more information on Universities Allied for Essential Medicines visit online at http://www.essentialmedicine.org/.
