The American Models of Technology Transfer: Contextualized Emulation by Developing Countries?

Abstract

Patents are an essential part of the US economy, sparked by ground-breaking legislation, the Bayh-Dole Act and the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act, which allowed ownership of technology resulting from research funded by the federal government, though it is far from clear whether this same type of legislation would benefit developing countries. Yet because of the legislation’s success in the United States, developing countries are increasingly adopting the same approach. Thus, studying how this legislation might be adopted by developing countries is an important topic. This article emphasized that that these two particular pieces of legislation have been tailored to specific types of institutions, Bayh-Dole to universities and small businesses, and Stevenson-Wydler to government laboratories. Just as the United States has responded to different types of institutions with legislation tailored to that institution’s needs, the needs of developing countries are unique and diverse, with particular government and research institution structures that will require highly particularized technology-transfer legislation. This Comment examines the specific reasons for the differences in technology transfer regulations for universities versus government laboratories. It then uses these differences, and the rationale for these differences, to draw conclusions for the course developing countries should take in creating legislation particularized to their unique needs.

Keywords: Intellectual Property, Patents, Technology Transfer, Developing Countries