- The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law
- List of Contributors
- Intellectual Property Law: An Anatomical Overview
- The Basic Structure of Intellectual Property Law
- What Kind of Rights Are Intellectual Property Rights?
- Intellectual Property as a Public Interest Mechanism
- Intellectual Property and Human Rights: Mapping an Evolving and Contested Relationship
- Intellectual Property Incentives: Economics and Policy Implications
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Western Europe
- The Emergence and Development of the International Intellectual Property System
- The Emergence and Development of United States Intellectual Property Law
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Canada
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Australia and New Zealand
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Central and Eastern Europe
- Intellectual Property in Asia: ASEAN, East Asia, and India
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in the Middle East
- Three Centuries and Counting: The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in Africa
- The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in South America
- Patents and Related Rights: A Global Kaleidoscope
- Trade Marks and Allied Rights
- Design Protection
- Rights in Data and Information
- Overlapping Rights
- Intellectual Property Licensing
- Cross-Border Intellectual Property Enforcement
- Users, Patents, and Innovation Policy
- Traditional Knowledge, Indigenous Peoples, and Local Communities
- Intellectual Property, Development, and Access to Knowledge
- Workers in the “Groves of Academe”: The Claim of Academics to Copyright and Patents
- Intellectual Property Meets the Internet
- Intellectual Property and Competition Law
- Intellectual Property and Private Ordering
- Intellectual Property and Public Health
- Intellectual Property and Climate Change
Abstract and Keywords
This chapter weighs the claim of university academics to control over works and inventions produced as a part of their work in teaching and research. It does so relying on the most commonly advanced justifications for the intellectual property (IP) regimes. It is the contention here that while an academic has a strong claim to prima facie ownership of copyright in works produced in the course of her university teaching and research (albeit a form of copyright potentially limited in one important respect), her claim to the ownership of patent rights, and to copyright in computer programs, is very much weaker.
Keywords: Intellectual property, copyright, patents, university ownership of IP, academic freedom, justifications for IP, technology transfer, Bayh Dole Act, academic authorship, academic inventorship
Michael Spence is Vice-Chancellor and Principal at the University of Sydney.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.