Universities across the country are increasingly trying to claim credit for its researchers’ work. N.C. State officials said this isn’t the case at the University, but there are still exceptions to the rule.
In 2011, the Supreme Court case Stanford vs. Roche made it unconstitutional for universities to take credit for patented inventions received by researchers working for that school. However, certain institutions, most notably the University of California System, are rewriting their faculty patent rights agreements and claiming that the institutions themselves should own the patents, according to Inside Higher Ed.
According to the American Association of University Professors, the reason for universities taking credit for inventions is because the faculty members of an institution are not seen as independent but instead as members of the University which they are working for. Therefore, they should accredit their work to the institution, not themselves.
N.C. State’s patent policy clearly says that any work conducted independently by the researcher without the use of university tools and supplies belongs solely to that person and not to the institution, according to William Cross, director of the Copyright and Digital Center at N.C. State.
“The basics of N.C. State’s policy regarding patent rights are essentially if you make it, you own it,” Cross said.
However, Cross mentioned some examples where this might not be the case.
“If you are making something under your scope of employment as a student or you are making exceptional use of university resources, then the patent belongs to the institution,” Cross said.
Cross said he believes other universities could justify taking the rights of N.C. State researchers.
“I can imagine other universities saying they are partners in bringing a product to market so they should be partners in sharing the credit as well,” Cross said.
According to Cross, there are imminent dangers of giving intellectual property to universities instead of to researchers.
“Every time you lock up intellectual property you run the risk of limiting the ability of the public and the tax payers to have access to that information to improve their own lives and industry and innovation and those sorts of things.” Cross said.
N.C. State has a very specific policy regarding patents. According to the University General Council, all members of the University conducting researching must notify the department of their invention. The researchers must also sign patent agreements notifying that they are aware of the University’s policies.
A researcher who is a part of the institution must have their work reviewed by the vice chancellor for Research and the Intellectual Property Committee who will decide whether or not the researcher’s invention should be submitted for a patent.
The process of gaining a patent requires a substantial amount of patience and work by the researcher after they have made an invention.
David Zwicky, engineering services librarian at N.C. State, briefly described the process of applying for a patent.
“You first do a patent search to try to get a sense of whether or not your idea is novel and non-obvious. Then you make a series of decisions about your filing strategy.”
According to Zwicky, the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s current backlog is more than half a million applicants.
“The United States is a First-To-File country, leading a lot of applicants to opt for provisional applications. Once your application is in, it’s just a case of waiting for the examiner to get to it. It can be a long wait,”
