Open science in play and in tension with patent protections.

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2023-07-19 eCollection Date: 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsad016
Anna Nuechterlein, Ari Rotenberg, Jeff LeDue, Paul Pavlidis, Judy Illes
{"title":"Open science in play and in tension with patent protections.","authors":"Anna Nuechterlein,&nbsp;Ari Rotenberg,&nbsp;Jeff LeDue,&nbsp;Paul Pavlidis,&nbsp;Judy Illes","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsad016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The open science (OS) movement has garnered increasing support in academia alongside continued financial and reputational incentives to obtain intellectual property (IP) protections over research outputs. Here, we explore stakeholder perspectives about intersections between OS and IP to inform the development of institutional OS guidelines for the neurosciences in Canada. We held six focus groups and three interviews with 29 faculty members from a major research and clinical center in Canada. The semi-structured interview guide probed perspectives on the respective roles of patents and OS in neuroscience-related research. We applied thematic content analysis to the transcript data, and extracted 12 major themes and 30 subthemes. Participants perceived a conflict between OS ideologies and the inherently restrictive nature of patents, and highlighted the importance of autonomy, justice, and respectful, culturally safe research practices in any future adoption of OS. Overall, the data suggest that a hybrid OS-IP policy model supported by local expertise may be best suited to meet the priorities and values of the community while mitigating perceived threats. This model includes expanded education about patenting, incentivized data sharing and collaboration, and tangible resources to support implementation of OS that includes skilled support in digital research infrastructures.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"10 2","pages":"lsad016"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/74/2c/lsad016.PMC10357088.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The open science (OS) movement has garnered increasing support in academia alongside continued financial and reputational incentives to obtain intellectual property (IP) protections over research outputs. Here, we explore stakeholder perspectives about intersections between OS and IP to inform the development of institutional OS guidelines for the neurosciences in Canada. We held six focus groups and three interviews with 29 faculty members from a major research and clinical center in Canada. The semi-structured interview guide probed perspectives on the respective roles of patents and OS in neuroscience-related research. We applied thematic content analysis to the transcript data, and extracted 12 major themes and 30 subthemes. Participants perceived a conflict between OS ideologies and the inherently restrictive nature of patents, and highlighted the importance of autonomy, justice, and respectful, culturally safe research practices in any future adoption of OS. Overall, the data suggest that a hybrid OS-IP policy model supported by local expertise may be best suited to meet the priorities and values of the community while mitigating perceived threats. This model includes expanded education about patenting, incentivized data sharing and collaboration, and tangible resources to support implementation of OS that includes skilled support in digital research infrastructures.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开放科学正在发挥作用,与专利保护关系紧张。
开放科学(OS)运动在学术界获得了越来越多的支持,同时持续的财政和声誉激励措施,以获得对研究成果的知识产权保护。在这里,我们探讨了利益相关者对OS和IP交叉点的看法,为加拿大神经科学机构OS指南的制定提供信息。我们举办了六个焦点小组,并对来自加拿大一个主要研究和临床中心的29名教员进行了三次采访。半结构化访谈指南探讨了专利和OS在神经科学相关研究中各自作用的观点。我们将主题内容分析应用于成绩单数据,提取了12个主要主题和30个子主题。与会者认为OS意识形态与专利固有的限制性之间存在冲突,并强调了自主性、公正性以及在未来采用OS时尊重、文化安全的研究实践的重要性。总体而言,数据表明,由当地专业知识支持的混合OS-IP政策模型可能最适合满足社区的优先事项和价值观,同时减轻感知到的威胁。该模式包括扩大专利教育,激励数据共享和协作,以及支持操作系统实施的有形资源,包括数字研究基础设施中的技术支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
期刊最新文献
How do we justify research into enhanced warfighters? The new EU-US data protection framework's implications for healthcare. The new regulation of non-medical neurotechnologies in the European Union: overview and reflection. Implementing the human right to science in the context of health: introduction to the special issue. Biosimilar approval pathways: comparing the roles of five medicines regulators.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1