|
|
| (6 intermediate revisions not shown) |
| Line 4: |
Line 4: |
| | | | |
| | ==Intellectual Property== | | ==Intellectual Property== |
| - | *[https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AngNayWeH_rTdHdMb09iNDNaYV95TllLazFNTmdCQlE Survey] for other teams | + | [https://2012.igem.org/Team:British_Columbia/Human_Practices/FAQ FAQ] |
| - | *Professionals to Consult | + | *IP [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AngNayWeH_rTdHdMb09iNDNaYV95TllLazFNTmdCQlE Survey] |
| - | **Ask UBC [http://www.uilo.ubc.ca tech transfer office]
| + | *IP Survey [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AngNayWeH_rTdC1QTTVoXzdHc0pZY0RxTFBOcy1Bb1E Results] |
| - | ***Mike Gold suggested dropping his name to Ian Bell, Technology Transfer Manager for the Life Sciences
| + | |
| - | **Dr. Andre Marziali, EngPhys Director
| + | |
| - | **OSLI?
| + | |
| | *[http://biobricks.org/bpa/faq/ biobrick agreement] | | *[http://biobricks.org/bpa/faq/ biobrick agreement] |
| | ===Previous iGEM work=== | | ===Previous iGEM work=== |
| - | *[https://2011.igem.org/Team:UQ-Australia/Human_Practices]
| + | [https://2011.igem.org/Team:UQ-Australia/Human_Practices 2011 UQ-australia] |
| - | ===Survey questions for iGEM===
| + | [http://classic.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53835/ 2010 The Scientist Article] |
| - | The 2012 UBC team is planning on making a FAQ to help iGEMers better understand intellectual property (IP) and how it is concerns us . We're hoping your iGEM team would like to collaborate with us by answering some survey questions and sharing your experiences. IP, according to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office, are "legal rights that result from intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific, literary, and artistic fields" [http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/h_wr00011.html [1]]. This can come in the forms such as patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets. Copyrights give creators of original, dramatic, artistic, musical, and literary works exclusive rights to use them [http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/h_wr00003.html?OpenDocument [2]]. These are applicable to computer programs. Patents, on the other hand, are the "right[s], granted by government, to exclude others from making, using, or selling your invention" [http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/h_wr00001.html [3]]. To qualify for a patent, the idea must fufill certain criteria:
| + | [https://2010.igem.org/Team:Caltech/Human_Impact 2010 Caltech] |
| - | | + | [http://igem.uwaterloo.ca/share/Outreach/Human%20Practices%202010/Role%20of%20Biotech%20IPR%20in%202030.pdf 2010 Waterloo] |
| - | * '''Utility''': The invention must do what you claim it to do
| + | [https://2007.igem.org/wiki/index.php/Edinburgh/Intellectual_Property_Talk 2007 Edinburgh] |
| - | * '''Novelty''': The idea must be unique and not previously mentioned in any literature
| + | [https://2008.igem.org/Team:UCSF/Human_Practices 2008 UCSF] |
| - | * '''Non-obviousness''': The invention must not be of something that can easily be thought up by non-experts
| + | |
| - | * '''Material Patentability''': The subject matter must be considered patentable by the government issuing the patent
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Our FAQ will focus mainly on patents, how it relates to iGEM projects, and how it affects the usage of the BioBrick registry.
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | * What experiences have you had with IP in iGEM?
| + | |
| - | ** How did you approach the process?
| + | |
| - | ** What resources did you use? Do you know how to find resources?
| + | |
| - | ** What issues did you encounter?
| + | |
| - | ** Have you consulted anyone outside of your team about IP?
| + | |
| - | ** What would you like to have done to improve your experience?
| + | |
| - | ** Do you have experience outside of iGEM?
| + | |
| - | * Has IP concerns affected your project? If so, how?
| + | |
| - | * What do you want to know about IP that we can help you with?
| + | |
| - | * Are you worried about the IP aspect of your project? <span style="color:#FF0000;">I would try and keep questions open ended. This question is a very leading question. I would suggest rephrasing or removing.</span>
| + | |
| - | * Would you be interested in a FAQ about IP for iGEM?
| + | |
| - | ** What type of format would you prefer? (e.g., video, FAQ page, "Choose your own adventure" walkthrough, etc.)<span style="color:#FF0000;">If you implemented this survey as a form in a google docs spreadsheet you could easily track the answers and could make questions like this multiple choice or radio button style. Here's some more information on setting up surveys with google docs. [[http://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=87809]]</span>
| + | |
| - | * Are you interested in protecting our own IP (e.g., through patenting)?
| + | |
| - | * Do you think Biobricks can be patented?
| + | |
| - | * Do you think iGEM teams can produce patentable projects?
| + | |
| - | * Do you think you can take your patent country to country easily?
| + | |
| - | * How much do you think patenting something costs? <span style="color:#FF0000;">here's another question where offering a range of answers multiple choice style would be useful. You could then show the results of your survey as a bar graph - and compare how much iGEMers think it costs with real costs.</span>
| + | |
| - | * How much time do you think the patenting process would take? <span style="color:#FF0000;">same comment as above, ask iGEMers to find out how long they think it takes, ask professionals same question - and then compare the results. A multiple choice format would help you to do this in a more standardized way</span>
| + | |
| - | * What is your main IP concern: Use of existing patents or establishing ownership of new patents? <span style="color:#FF0000;">This question is too leading. I would suggest rewording to: What are you more interested in learning more about: use of existing patents or establishing...</span>
| + | |
| - | * Do you know if your team's project depends on anything that is protected by IP rights?
| + | |
| - | ** Do you think this would get in the way for patenting your own project?
| + | |
| - | * What aspect of dealing with IP would you like the most help with? What would you like to get out of a FAQ?
| + | |
| - | * How do you think IP protection affects innovation?
| + | |
| - | ** Do you think IP protection and open source ideals can coexist?
| + | |
| - | * How does IP help/hurt your project? <span style="color:#FF0000;">Some of your questions are quite repetitive - this one for example. Can you group the questions under similar headings and then keep only the essential questions? You want to make sure the survey is quick and easy to complete!</span>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | ===Questions for Professionals===
| + | |
| - | * What's a good rule of thumb for determining what things in biotechnology <span style="color:#FF0000;">and/or synthetic biology</span> would be patentable?
| + | |
| - | ** Does that strongly vary among jurisdiction? <span style="color:#FF0000;">what do you mean by jurisdication? Perhaps you should just ask, Does this vary?</span>
| + | |
| - | * What are particularly difficult jurisdictions to get patents in? <span style="color:#FF0000;">again, clarity is an issue here. What are you trying to ask?</span>
| + | |
| - | * What pitfalls might an iGEM team run into? <span style="color:#FF0000;">This question is very leading. I would try and keep it more open ended. For example, what patent issues do you think iGEM teams should be aware of? or ... do you think would affect iGEM teams?</span>
| + | |
| - | * Do you think it's worthwhile for iGEM teams to explore patenting for their projects? (ask Randy Retberg/iGEM HQ too)
| + | |
| - | * How do you think IP protection affects innovation?
| + | |
| - | * Is it generally worth getting a patent in just one country?
| + | |
| - | * How does the industry approach/handle patents held by researchers?
| + | |
| - | * How does IP help/hurt your project? <span style="color:#FF0000;">I would suggest removing this question and instead replacing it with "how long" and "how much time" does it take questions from above. That way you can compare your survey results from iGEMers with the answers from professionals.</span>
| + | |
| - | * How do you decide if something is worth patenting/licensing?
| + | |
| - | * What are the university's policies concerning ownership of researchers' work? How are they generally compared to other universities?
| + | |
| - | * How does the UILO/TTO help researchers reach their goals in getting IP protection?
| + | |
| - | * What happens when someone infringes a patent?
| + | |
| - | * What happens when someone doesn't give the university ownership of the IP? For example, if the researcher claims that he/she worked on it on their own time or at another institution?
| + | |
| - | * How does company sponsorship affect IP ownership?
| + | |
| - | * What are some typical problems researchers encounter? <span style="color:#FF0000;">I would suggest looking at the order of your interview questions and making sure that related questions are grouped together and that the progression of questions make sense. For example, perhaps it would be more relevant to ask some of the more basic questions about patents before you ask about iGEM specifics.</span>
| + | |
| | | | |
| | ==Community Outreach== | | ==Community Outreach== |
"
