Blair Biotech Enters Into A Licensing Agreement

A common framework for the allocation of potential rights lies in the fact that both parties do not benefit from exclusive newly developed intellectual property rights for their internal R&D work. More extensive rights to future developed intellectual property, such as commercial rights to sell or market products, or exclusivity in some or all areas of use, can then be managed through several approaches. These approaches often involve granting option rights to the company`s partner, for example an opportunity to negotiate in good faith an exclusive license on economically reasonable terms when such new intellectual property or technology emerges. Alternatively, in the context of a project-oriented cooperation at a very early stage, the company may be content to have access only to the technology for its own research and development. It can then only address the conditions of any commercial development if it decides to extend the relationship with a new agreement. These effects have been particularly felt in the field of biotechnology, whose rapid growth has coincided with the implementation of the law and the increase in licensing activities among academic institutions. In 2000, with the expansion of technology transfer offices among academic institutions, a dozen large institutions were ranked in the top 40 biotechnology patents in the United States (Edwards et al. 2003). A number of these patents have played a fundamental role in the commercialization of biotechnology, including Stanford University`s Cohen Boyer patents for recombinant DNA, licensed in more than 450 companies.

By the time they expired in 1997, these patents had generated more than $250 million in licensing revenue (Feldman et al. 2007). . . .