The legislation proposed by MST (ministry of science & Technology) has been modeled on the United States’ Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act commonly known as Bayh-Dole Act (BDA) that came into existence in 1980. BDA created a uniform patent policy for the universities to own rights to patent resulting from federal funded research and to license these patents on an exclusive or non-exclusive basis. It encouraged universities to set up Technological Transfer Offices (TTO) to manage and promote their patents. The underlying objective of this act was to stimulate innovation and ensure commercialization of the technology leading to increased public access to federally funded research. The act also allowed for march-in rights under which the government can acquire the compulsory licensing of the patent.The Bayh Dole Act in the US came into practice with an implied duty to commercialize. Prior to Bayh Dole, while lots of patents were being held by US universities, very few of them were being licensed to industry for commercial development. This act was an attempt to stimulate public institutions’ participation in an established IP regime and commercialise their research. This act has received more criticism than acclaim in the US.On one hand, it is regarded as a catalyst for bringing boom to the US economy and facilitates transfer of technology from academic institutions to industry. On the other hand, this legislation is seen as detrimental to the innovation system that hinders innovation access to public.There is evidence of striking increase in the patenting and licensing activities in American Universities since 1980. In 1980, approximately 20 universities had technological transfer offices. The number rose to 200 in 1990 and by 2000 nearly every major university had a TTO. Large number of universities verified that technology transfer programmes aided licensing of inventions and commercialisation of federally funded research. This resulted in invention of many new technologies which were successfully introduced for public use 4. With the significant increase in number of patents issued, royalties and licensing fees received by the inventor and the universities respectively immensely benefited the universities. The US economy was also estimated to grow post Bayh-Dole Act owing to creation of additional jobs and generated. substantial economic activity.

Apprehensions about the Proposed Indian Bill

In line with the US Bayh Dole Act, the proposed Indian bill seems to assume that public funded R&D cannot be fruitful without IP protection. However, experts are claiming this bill which aims at IP management and protection will not serve any purpose in our country. The bill is being labeled as an ill-studied one which has not been backed by enough empirical research . It needs to be supported by data on how much patenting and technology transfer takes place in universities.
Arguments are also being made that the bill has been drafted with the assumption that IPR is the best way to steer innovation. Another question that comes to one’s mind is whether our universities have the potential and capacity to commercialize their inventions.
Which are creative and different and are not much concerned about its commercial value or end use of the inventions. The creation of IP cell which is expected to provide support in this regard may not be of much help keeping in view the absence of proper training on IP management. IP is but one way of incentivizing innovation and too much of IP may prove to be fatal.
Too much of IP may skew the balance in favor of patent holder and may lead to monopoly. Alternative ways need to be sought after to incentivize innovation . Which are creative and different and are not much concerned about its commercial value or end use of the inventions. The creation of IP cell which is expected to provide support in this regard may not be of much help keeping in view the absence of proper training on IP management. IP is but one way of incentivizing innovation and too much of IP may prove to be fatal.
Too much of IP may skew the balance in favor of patent holder and may lead to monopoly. Alternative ways need to be sought after to incentivize innovation .
Concerns have also been raised about the effectiveness of compulsory licensing as safeguard measure. The government has hardly used this provision earlier in the interest of public use.
It is anticipated that the bill will provide a fillip to R&D sector of the Pharmaceutical industry in India. While the industry will benefit with this association as it would give it an opportunity to leapfrog on the numerous inventions made at University level, it will also offer an opportunity to the Universities who in itself do not have the capacity to take their inventions to the stage where it can be made available for public use12. Industries can act as a missing link here to foster the creation of new products and services from research that might otherwise remain in either early-stage or undeveloped. it can be made available for public use.

Advantages:

It is expected to galavanize innovation i Public funded research enhance awareness about intellectual property and ensure acess to innovation by all Stakeholder. It even promises enhanced financial incentive for innovations.
IP Patenting Can Make Institution Self- finanacing.
Promote the Protection of IP and thereby Leading to optimal utilization of public investment on R & D.
Encourge innovation in small and medium enterprises.
Encourge University-Industry Patnership to commercilize IP and Make Patents avialable for public use.
While the industry will Benifit with association as it would give it in opportunity leapfrog o the numeriou inventions made at University Level, it will also offer an opportunity to the Universities Who do not have the capacity to take their inventions to the stage where it can be made available for public. Industries can act as a missing link here to foster the creation of new product and services from research mightotherwise remain in either early-stage or undeveloped.

Disadvantage:

Inventor forwards everything everything to institutes IP panel. The committee sends it
to govt to decide wheather or not to file for patent. Will involve huge paper work patenting expensive and as every IP is not worth it, getting useless patents will be a drain on exchequer
If company products high, people will end up paying twice through taxpayer funding
research and then for the product
Shariing of scientific Knowledge and research atomosphere will be adversely affected
while the industry works on the principal of profit making and operates in an enviorment f competition, the industry academic association might deviate the latter from the path of knowledge dissemination to revenge generation.

Group on Public Health, Intellectual Property & Innovation

As per the grapevine, the bill has already been approved by various ministries and is now with Cabinet for further refinement. It has also received recommendation from National Knowledge Commission, a government advisory body. The bill is scheduled to be tabled in Parliament soon. The government plans to share the bill in public after it is introduced in Parliament. But the question is how hassle-free and swift would be the procedure to make amendments in the bill when the slip-ups are spotted?
Rather than going for a policy or act having narrow approach of merely commercializing the inventions, the Ministry of Science & Technology should strive for alternative mechanisms recommended globally for encouraging innovation and transfer of technology which are more in favour of public interest.