Published Sunday, June 13, 2004
The Bee's series "Seeds of Doubt" shows the promise of new research discoveries at the University of California and, at the same time, the perils of certain kinds of university partnerships with industry.
Before 1980, research funded by the public belonged to the public.
That changed with the Bayh-Dole Act, allowing universities that do publicly funded research to keep title to a discovery. They had to file a patent application and take "necessary steps" to commercialize the discovery, such as granting exclusive licenses to private companies. These companies could then develop a product at their expense and pay fees and royalties to the university on the product sales. This allowed the university, researchers and businesses to make money from their discoveries.
The idea was that more research would end up in the marketplace.
It has, particularly in California. But unresolved issues remain. After a generation of experience, it's time to address those issues.
The Bee's example from the African country of Mali, where wild rice is naturally resistant to bacteria blight, shows the promise of new discovery. A UC Davis scientist was able to isolate the disease-resistant gene, Xa21, and clone it. This advance has potential not only for producing disease-resistant rice, the world's most widely consumed food, but for creating disease-resistant corn, millet, sorghum and other crops - without using pesticides. It should be available to all.
But UC Davis filed a patent and Monsanto and Pioneer Hi-Bred signed options to license the Xa21 gene. Both decided not to use it, however. The nonprofit research center in the Philippines that originally gave the UC Davis scientist Mali rice samples was charged a $10,000 fee for access to the gene.
In short, the Bayh-Dole system can be used as an engine of monopoly for universities and private companies. Research becomes private property, not new public knowledge. As The Bee series noted, "What was once owned by all - plant and animal DNA, the building blocks of life - is now the property of a few."
Traditionally, university researchers shared information openly. Confidentiality is the new ethos. The Bee series cited instances of faculty declining to share research results with other university scientists and delaying publishing results to protect a private funder's commercial interests. This is a major change in the role of the university as a "warehouse" of knowledge.
UC Davis nematology professor Bruce Jaffee summed up concerns of many faculty at the chancellor's 1999 conference: "In the corporate-dependent laboratory, the important questions are those that produce products fast and make money within a few years." With the post-1980 emphasis on patentable, profitable results, whole areas of research are devalued - and unfunded.
After 24 years, it's time to re-examine the Bayh-Dole Act. Safeguards are needed to ensure that publicly funded gene research remains in the public domain and does not become the private property of a few private companies. In agricultural research, for example, ensure that crops and their genes cannot be patented, privatized and removed from public use.
Restore this principle: Publicly funded research at public universities belongs to the public.