Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-28T02:53:27.355Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patenting/Licensing of Microbiological Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Roman Saliwanchik
Roman Saliwanchik*
Affiliation:
8753 Merrimac, Richland, MI 49083
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Legal protection of intellectual property is a requisite to the commercialization of the intellectual property and to the conferring of proper reward to the true owner of the property. Simplistically stated, this situation with regard to intellectual property is no different from the legal protection of a variety of properties, for example, home, land, or automobile. Laws have been established in the various countries of the world that are structured specifically to attain the desired goal of legally protecting property interests. In the intellectual property field, wherein we talk about property such as new inventions, we enter an area of not only protecting the legal rights of the property owner but also insuring the position of the public with respect to the eventual unlimited use of new inventions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 34 , Issue S1: Supplement 1: Microbiological Control of Weeds Symposium , 1986 , pp. 43 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Argoudelis, et al., In re. 1970. CCPA. 186 USPQ9 99.Google Scholar
2. Bergy, , Coats, , and Malik, , In re; Chakrabarty, In re. 1979. CCPA, 201 USPQ 352.Google Scholar
3. Bowers, R.C. 1982. Commercialization of microbial biological control agents in Charudattan, R. and Walker, H. L., eds. Biological control of weeds with plant pathogens. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
4. Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent Procedure. 1977. Official Gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. 961:21–36.Google Scholar
5. Cohen, S. N. and Boyer, H. W., inventors. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University, assignee. Process for producing biologically functional molecular chimeras. U. S. Patent 4,237,224. December 2, 1980. 10 pp. Int. Cl3 C12P 21/00.Google Scholar
6. Federal Register. 1982. 47:34148–34151.Google Scholar
7. Federal Register. 1983. 48:28697.Google Scholar
8. Feldman v. Aunstrup. 1974 CCPA 186 USPQ 108.Google Scholar
9. The Patent Term Restoration Act, P. L. 98–417, was signed by President Reagan on September 24, 1984. This Act has deleted from it all references to animal drugs and agricultural chemicals. These are the subject of another patent term restoration bill, H. R. 6034, pending in Congress.Google Scholar
10. Official Gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. 1983. 1034:3.Google Scholar
11. Saliwanchik, R. 1982. Legal Protection for Microbiological and Genetic Engineering Inventions. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
12. United States Code, Title 35. 1952.Google Scholar
13. Walker, H. L., inventor. 1983. The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, DC, assignee. Control of sicklepod, showy crotalaria, and coffee senna with a fungal pathogen. U.S. Patent 4,390,360. June 28, 1983. 4 pp. Int. Cl3AO1N 63/04.Google Scholar