Research Proposal
One way to address the problem of AET availability is to encourage the use of a commons-based approach to technology transfer and licensing in universities. While some AET are developed and patented within corporations, many are developed during the university research. These inventions may then be patented and licensed to outside companies, or else the university may create a start-up company to commercialize the technology. The goal of developing AET should not be pure profit for single entities, but instead broad availability to encourage creating a sound infrastructure of AET.
The argument for AET availability is similar to that regarding genericization of patented drugs which are essential to public health in poor nations. The barriers to entry created by exclusivity-based pricing inhibit companies from marketing cheap drugs in poor nations. Universities should reduce these barriers to access by changing their licensing structure to allow freedom to operate agreements, so a generic drug producer can market lower-priced drugs. The AET situation is different than the generic drug problem because technology is not provided directly to consumers, but to companies which further develop the technology – such as improving the infrastructure for providing alternative energy to consumers.
Eliminating barriers to entry is still essential to ensuring access to technology, though. If university technology transfer is limited to giving rights to a patented AET to single entities to encourage its commercialization, traditional patent property rights will govern. The single entity has the right to frustrate market entry by enforcing its patent rights against others. If a university uses a commons-based approach to AET licensing, it could allow many more entities to participate in developing products based on the AET. The commons-based approach is distinct from not patenting the AET though: the AET is patented, but licenses can be structured so various entities may develop products based on the technology without fear of infringing. Maintaining patent protection for the AET creates a basis for coordination, and will draw together many complementary users and encourage negotiation to develop commercial products.
My research would investigate developing a commons-based licensing system. Once a feasible system is developed, I want to create a proposal to submit to research-centered universities to encourage adoption of the scheme and participate in its implementation.
1 comment:
Ben,
While I agree that patent laws are a barrier to entry for ANY industry they are necessary to protect the fruits of our labor. More importantly, I do not think that patent law is the reason why we currently do not see deep adoption of Alternative Energy Technologies. Frankly, there are lots of technologies ready to go that anyone can develop or emulate and there are just very few markets for them. This may change as fossil fuel-based energies rise in cost or as more producers bring the cost down by competition but right now, the reason folks don't put PV cells on their roofs or wind turbines in their backyards is that the economics do not work in their favor.
I would prefer to see tax incentives to individuals to make the change to alternatives rather than changing the laws which are there for our protection. Frankly, I am concerned that combating climate change will offer a convenient excuse to curtail our rights the same way the war on terror has been used to tramble on our liberties.
Remember, the preamble to the constitution was going to say, "Life, Libery, and Property".
Post a Comment