Message-ID: <199707141529.JAA134012@lamar.ColoState.EDU> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 09:29:45 -0600 From: Sarah Ward <mailto:sward@LAMAR.COLOSTATE.EDU> Subject: Patents the ultimate goal? To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
Jim,
You raise an important point. This institution is increasingly focussed on
the bottom line; research which generates income for the university, whether
through proprietary products or other means, is more highly regarded than that
which does not. This, of course, translates into better access to internal
resources for the researchers who perform it. I don't think sheer greed is
always driving it, though - as federal and other public sources of research
dollars become harder to obtain, researchers come under pressure to fund their
work as best they can. For a land grant university such as Colorado State, I
feel this situation raises questions about the nature of the land grant mission
and what our priorities should be which this university is simply ignoring. I
would be very interested to know what researchers at other land grant
institutions think about this.
Plant breeding in this context is very much between a rock and a hard place.
I did not mean to imply - as you suggest - that "hard work should be rewarded
with patents". I did point out that it take mant years for a plant breeder to
generate a new variety, and for more than 60 years in the US it has been
recognized that the breeder can legitimately claim control over that variety
for a period of time after its release. Universities generally do not have the
resources for commercial production and marketing of a new crop variety, so
some kind of licensing agreement with an agricultural company is necessary if
the material is ever to reach the farmer. This means that the euniversity must hhave some means of protecting its intell
ctual property, whether through patents
or other means - otherwise your tax dollars support research which feeds
directly into commercial sector profits. In my department here at Colorado
State, we have been discussing whether - given shrinking resources - we should
be producing finished crop varieties at all, or whether we should focus on more
research and germplasm improvement and license our findings and material for
commercial use by companies wwhich will market the final new varieties. Given
the hopelessly outdated nature of US law covering plant varieties, that is
porbably going to result in more patents, not less. Personally, I don't like
it - it complicates my work, and (despite the fantasies of a few folk out there)
it doesn't make me rich.
Any thoughts from others at similar institutions?
Sarah Ward
Assistant Professor of Plant Breeding and Genetics
Department of Soil and Crop Sciences
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
(970) 491-6517 e-mail: mailto:sward@lamar.colostate.edu