201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21441827)
1. Patent and license pearls and pitfalls for taking an idea to the marketplace.
Mukharji I
J Investig Med; 2011 Jun; 59(5):758-61. PubMed ID: 21441827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Patents and innovation in cancer therapeutics: lessons from CellPro.
Bar-Shalom A; Cook-Deegan R
Milbank Q; 2002; 80(4):637-76, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 12532643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Science and the law. Working through the patent problem.
Walsh JP; Cohen WM; Arora A
Science; 2003 Feb; 299(5609):1021. PubMed ID: 12586928
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. University-based science and biotechnology products: defining the boundaries of intellectual property.
Kesselheim AS; Avorn J
JAMA; 2005 Feb; 293(7):850-4. PubMed ID: 15713775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Columbia University's Axel patents: technology transfer and implications for the Bayh-Dole Act.
Colaianni A; Cook-Deegan R
Milbank Q; 2009 Sep; 87(3):683-715. PubMed ID: 19751286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Intellectual property. University licensing and the Bayh-Dole Act.
Thursby JG; Thursby MC
Science; 2003 Aug; 301(5636):1052. PubMed ID: 12933996
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Technology transfer at US universities: seeking public benefit from the results of basic research.
Goodwin CD
Technol Health Care; 1996 Sep; 4(3):323-30. PubMed ID: 8931243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Who owns federally funded research? The Supreme court and the Bayh-Dole act.
Kesselheim AS; Rajkumar R
N Engl J Med; 2011 Sep; 365(13):1167-9. PubMed ID: 21879888
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Patent law. New rules for German professors.
Kilger C; Bartenbach K
Science; 2002 Nov; 298(5596):1173-5. PubMed ID: 12424355
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Academic research: policies and practice.
Bertha SL
J Ethnopharmacol; 1996 Apr; 51(1-3):59-73. PubMed ID: 9213631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Bayh-Dole: if we knew then what we know now.
Boettiger S; Bennett AB
Nat Biotechnol; 2006 Mar; 24(3):320-3. PubMed ID: 16525405
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Academic Medical Centers as Innovation Ecosystems: Evolution of Industry Partnership Models Beyond the Bayh-Dole Act.
Silva PJ; Ramos KS
Acad Med; 2018 Aug; 93(8):1135-1141. PubMed ID: 29668523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Patent rights and the free research. The boundary between basic research and private sector is not longer razor-sharp].
Westerlund L
Lakartidningen; 2005 Sep 26-Oct 2; 102(39):2737. PubMed ID: 16245544
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The Bayh-Dole Act turns 30.
Loise V; Stevens AJ
Sci Transl Med; 2010 Oct; 2(52):52cm27. PubMed ID: 20926832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. MORE THAN MONEY: THE EXPONENTIAL IMPACT OF ACADEMIC TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.
McDevitt VL; Mendez-Hinds J; Winwood D; Nijhawan V; Sherer T; Ritter JF; Sanberg PR
Technol Innov; 2014 Nov; 16(1):75-84. PubMed ID: 25061505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Intellectual property and biotechnology: the U.S. internal experience--Part I.
Brody B
Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 2006 Mar; 16(1):1-37. PubMed ID: 16770885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Intellectual property conundrum for the biological sciences.
Olds JL
Anat Rec B New Anat; 2004 Mar; 277(1):5-9. PubMed ID: 15052648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Bayh-Dole: almost 25.
Kennedy D
Science; 2005 Mar; 307(5714):1375. PubMed ID: 15746390
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Who owns what? Private ownership and the public interest in recombinant DNA technology in the 1970s.
Yi D
Isis; 2011 Sep; 102(3):446-74. PubMed ID: 22073770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Intellectual property rights. Public sector collaboration for agricultural IP management.
Atkinson RC; Beachy RN; Conway G; Cordova FA; Fox MA; Holbrook KA; Klessig DF; McCormick RL; McPherson PM; Rawlings HR; Rapson R; Vanderhoef LN; Wiley JD; Young CE
Science; 2003 Jul; 301(5630):174-5. PubMed ID: 12855794
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
