...
首页> 外文期刊>Australian intellectual property journal >VUT v Wilson, UWA v Gray and university intellectual property policies
【24h】

VUT v Wilson, UWA v Gray and university intellectual property policies

机译:VUT诉Wilson,UWA诉Gray与大学知识产权政策

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In Wilson and Gray the respective university intellectual property policies were held to be ineffective. The Federal Court therefore had to examine the default law concerning academic ownership of inventions. The trial judge in Wilson accepted that inventions that were a normal incident of the kind of research a particular academic was engaged to perform may belong to the employing university. However, French J and the Full Court in Gray emphasised that academic autonomy, duty to publish and freedom to collaborate with outsiders set academics apart. Employer ownership of inventions is therefore not to be implied into standard academic employment contracts, which are of a separate kind. A duty to research does not equate to a duty to further the university's commercial interests by pursuing patentable inventions, as is by contrast required of researchers in industry. This article examines the rulings in Wilson and Gray and explores what they mean for the structure and terms of university intellectual property policies in the future.
机译:在威尔逊和格雷,各自的大学知识产权政策被认为是无效的。因此,联邦法院必须审查有关发明学术所有权的默认法律。威尔逊的初审法官承认,发明是与特定学者从事的研究类似的正常事件,可能属于雇用大学。但是,French J和Gray的Full Court强调,学术自治权,出版义务和与外界的合作自由使学者与众不同。因此,发明的雇主所有权不被包含在单独的标准学术雇佣合同中。相比之下,研究的责任并不等于通过追求可专利性的发明来促进大学的商业利益的责任,这与工业研究人员所要求的相反。本文研究了威尔逊和格雷的裁决,并探讨了它们对未来大学知识产权政策的结构和条款的意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号