DuPont's Oncomouse patent licensing program continues to cause a stir in academia and industry.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Study on research universities funded by the European Commission (http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/rank-2003.mht).
Association of University Technology Managers survey (2000) and Working Together, Creating Knowledge, The University-Industry Research Collaboration Initiative (2001).
Campbell, E. et al. Health Affairs 23, 64–76 (2004).
Hall, Z.W. & Scott, C. Science 291, 553 (2001).
Edwards, M.G. et al., Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 618–624 (2003).
Associated Press. Uproar over mighty mouse (8 November, 2003).
Marshall, E. Science 296, 1212–1213 (2002).
Smaglik, P. Nature 403, 350 (2000).
Memorandum of Understanding between E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Company and Public Health Service (MOU) (http://ott.od.nih.gov/textonly/oncomous.htm).
Gordon, J.W. & Ruddle, F.H. Science 214, 1244–1246 (1981).
Palmiter and Brinster reported in the scientific literature the first cancer prone transgenic mouse 4 months earlier than Leder and days before the filing of Harvard's patent. Brinster R.L. et al. Cell 37, 367–379 (1984).
Stewart, T.A., Pattengale, P.K. & Leder, P. Cell 38, 627–637 (1984).
US Patent 4,736,866.
US Patent 5,925,803.
Grants 1Z01HD000074-4 through 1Z01HD000074-11, awarded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (http://crisp.cit.nih.gov/).
Grossblatt, N. (ed.). Sharing Laboratory Resources: Genetically Altered Mice. Summary of a Workshop Held at the National Academy of Sciences, March 23–24, 1993 by National Research Council, Ch. 4, 21–23 (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1994).
Melbourne Herald Sun, Australia. p. 52 (8 November 2003).
Lamb, C. Sacramento Business Journal (3 November 2003).
Heller, A. & Eisenberg, R.S. Science 280, 698–701 (1998).
See MOU, supra note 9, at Section (1).
See, for example, Cook, G. The Boston Globe (31 May 2002).
See, for example, Policy Guidelines Governing Openness and Freedom to Publish (http://www.spo.berkeley.edu/Policy/ucmemos/publish.html), and Principles Regarding Rights to Future Research Results in University Agreements with External Parties (http://www.ucop.edu/ott/preamble.pdf).
See Memo Operating Guidance on Industry-University Relationships, No. 89-20 (6 June 1989) (http://www.ucop.edu/raohome/cgmemos/89-20.html).
Lawler, A. Science 299, 330–333 (2003).
AUTM 2000, 2001 and 2002 studies (http://www.autm.net/).
See NIH letter to UC (http://206.151.87.67/docs/OncoMouseDuPont.doc).
Madey v. Duke, 307 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Blaug, S., Chien, C. & Shuster, M. Managing innovation: university-industry partnerships and the licensing of the Harvard mouse. Nat Biotechnol 22, 761–763 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0604-761
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0604-761
This article is cited by
-
Pharmaceutical Technology Licensing: An Analysis in the Field of Cardiovascular Disease
Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation (2016)
-
Profitable Exchanges for Scientists: The Case of Swedish Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Health Care Analysis (2007)
-
Drug discovery through industry-academic partnerships
Nature Chemical Biology (2006)
-
The mighty mouse: genetically engineered mouse models in cancer drug development
Nature Reviews Drug Discovery (2006)