지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The field of biotechnology has quickly evolved into a major industry in the world. For this reason, creators of biotechnology have been very interested in obtaining intellectual property protection for their recoveries. Without the potential future economic gain from such discoveries, scientists and investors would not have the incentive to invest in the biotechnology industry, especially in view of the fact that biotechnological research is very tune consuming, technical and expensive
The traditional mode of intellectual property protection for biotechnology has been Via the patent law. However, several requirements within patent law have been described as being unsuitable for biotechnological inventions, especially in light of certain recent court decisions.
Therefore, copyright law has been suggested as an alternative to patent law for conferring intellectual property protection for biotechnology. Nevertheless, copyright protection for biotechnology has been confronted with serious opposition. This has been due primarily to the theory that copyright protection traditionally was intended only for works of expressive art and not for functional works
As a counter-argument to the opponents of expending copyright protection for biotechnology, however, stands the strong analogy between biotechnology and computer software, the latter of which has already been extended protection by copyright Thus, proponents for extending copyright protection to biotechnology rely heavily on the similarities between biotechnological inventions and computer software. This paper discussed the field of biotechnology and several modes of obtaining intellectual property protection for biotechnological inventions. Initially, the paper set forth some background on the science of biotechnology, thus allowing the reader to gain a deeper understanding of the critical issues regarding the biotechnology industry and the areas within the technology which are susceptible to intellectual property protection Next, the paper provided a discussion of the similarities and differences between biotechnology and computer software. This was intended to further the reader's understanding of the analogy winch would be discussed in the copyright section of the paper
The paper did then provide a general discussion regarding issues relating to patent protection for biotechnological inventions. After addressing the shortcomings of patent law for protecting biotechnological innovations. As stated above, much of the discussion revolved around the similarities between biotechnology and computer software In view of the fact that computer applications, even operating systems that communicate directly with the computer hardware have been copyrighted, copyright protection should be extended to biotechnology.
Finally. a conclusion was provided which summarizes the main points of the paper and addresses future directions for intellectual property protection for biotechnology Thus, The proponents for copyright for biotechnology can properly argue that Congress, by not expressly prohibiting biotechnology in §4, may be indirectly supporting copyright for biotechnology Congress has passively authorized the copyright protection for software.
Based on current case law and the arguments presented in this paper, it seems likely that Courts will have to decide that biotechnology is indeed copyrightable Once tins happen, it will be up to Congress to decide if they wish to codify those decisions to allow copyright for biotechnology, or they will have to amend §4 to expressly prohibit copyright of biotechnology
The traditional mode of intellectual property protection for biotechnology has been Via the patent law. However, several requirements within patent law have been described as being unsuitable for biotechnological inventions, especially in light of certain recent court decisions.
Therefore, copyright law has been suggested as an alternative to patent law for conferring intellectual property protection for biotechnology. Nevertheless, copyright protection for biotechnology has been confronted with serious opposition. This has been due primarily to the theory that copyright protection traditionally was intended only for works of expressive art and not for functional works
As a counter-argument to the opponents of expending copyright protection for biotechnology, however, stands the strong analogy between biotechnology and computer software, the latter of which has already been extended protection by copyright Thus, proponents for extending copyright protection to biotechnology rely heavily on the similarities between biotechnological inventions and computer software. This paper discussed the field of biotechnology and several modes of obtaining intellectual property protection for biotechnological inventions. Initially, the paper set forth some background on the science of biotechnology, thus allowing the reader to gain a deeper understanding of the critical issues regarding the biotechnology industry and the areas within the technology which are susceptible to intellectual property protection Next, the paper provided a discussion of the similarities and differences between biotechnology and computer software. This was intended to further the reader's understanding of the analogy winch would be discussed in the copyright section of the paper
The paper did then provide a general discussion regarding issues relating to patent protection for biotechnological inventions. After addressing the shortcomings of patent law for protecting biotechnological innovations. As stated above, much of the discussion revolved around the similarities between biotechnology and computer software In view of the fact that computer applications, even operating systems that communicate directly with the computer hardware have been copyrighted, copyright protection should be extended to biotechnology.
Finally. a conclusion was provided which summarizes the main points of the paper and addresses future directions for intellectual property protection for biotechnology Thus, The proponents for copyright for biotechnology can properly argue that Congress, by not expressly prohibiting biotechnology in §4, may be indirectly supporting copyright for biotechnology Congress has passively authorized the copyright protection for software.
Based on current case law and the arguments presented in this paper, it seems likely that Courts will have to decide that biotechnology is indeed copyrightable Once tins happen, it will be up to Congress to decide if they wish to codify those decisions to allow copyright for biotechnology, or they will have to amend §4 to expressly prohibit copyright of biotechnology
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 지적재산권 보호와 생명공학
Ⅲ. 컴퓨터 소프트웨어와 DNA 재조합기술의 유사성
Ⅳ. 생명공학의 지적재산권 보호
Ⅴ. 결론
♣ 참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
생명공학에 관한 주요 법률의 개정방안 연구
과학기술법연구
2009 .01
-
National Biotechnology Innovation System in the United States
벤처창업연구
2010 .06
-
생명공학에 대한 고등학생의 인식 조사
생물교육
2011 .01
-
BIOTECHNOLOGY
GSnJ 자료집
2007 .01
-
중등 예비 생물 교사들의 생명공학에 대한 인식 조사
생물교육
2005 .01
-
유럽연합에서의 생명공학 발명의 법적 보호
한양법학
2013 .11
-
생명공학 기술에 대한 고등학교 학생들의 인식 조사 연구
환경교육
2010 .03
-
Vacillating between a Neoliberal State and a Developmental State: the Case of Development of Biotechnology Clusters in South Korea
한국경제지리학회지
2009 .01
-
내용 분석을 통한 우리나라와 미국의 농업과 생명 기술 교육 비교
실과교육연구
2007 .01
-
생물 예비 교사들의 생명 공학 기술에 대한 인식 조사 연구
생물교육
2011 .01
-
기본권의 보호와 생명과학기술의 헌법적 한계
원광법학
2007 .01
-
고등학교 생물 교과서에 기술된 생명공학 내용 분석
생물교육
2005 .01
-
지적재산권 강화경향과 정보공유와의 관계에 대한 고찰 : 헌법이념상 저작권개념을 중심으로
법학연구
2005 .12
-
생명윤리법의 발전에 따른 형사법의 변화
法學論文集
2008 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-366-014440259