Protection and ownership of research results

Introduction.This article aims to present the rules concerning the protection and ownership of the results of scientific research and development works and related know-how, including those jointly generated in multicentre research projects. Material and methods.The analysis focuses on the identification of types of medical research results and the possibility of protecting them under intellectual property law, including copyright, patent and unfair competition law. It also con­siders regulations providing provisions on the ownership and commercialisation of R&D results acquired under research programmes, projects and sponsored research, including clinical trials. Results.The lack of protection of research results as such by intellectual property rights, the different nature of those results, as well as potential conflicts of interests that arise from the exploitation of data which has both scientific and market value, may in practice cause problems in regard to who is entitled to them and what are the rules for their use and publication. Situations of conflict may arise at the interface between the interests of the different actors involved in conducting and financing research (researchers, research centres, sponsors). Conclusion.Effective management of research and development results requires identification of the appropriate regime (statutory, project or contractual) under which they were obtained and are going to be exploited. Although the rules in force for the acquisition of rights can only be modified contractually to a certain extent, it is strongly recommended to supplement them with detailed contractual provisions specifying the rules for the co-ownership of results, the rights and obligations of the entities involved in the research, as well as ensuring confidentiality and restrictions on their disclosure with and/or without the consent of co-authors and sponsors financing research

An entity entitled to rights to intellectual creations generated at universities

Celem artykułu jest analiza i usystematyzowanie normatywnych podstaw określenia podmiotu uprawnionego z tytułu praw własności intelektualnej do wytworów intelektualnych tworzonych na uczelniach. Przedstawione w nim zostały zasady nabycia praw autorskich oraz praw własności przemysłowej przewidziane w obowiązujących, ogólnych regulacjach z tego zakresu, z uwzględnieniem szczególnych zasad określających tryb nabycia praw i komercjalizacji wyników badań naukowych i prac rozwojowych oraz know-how związanego z tymi wynikami, przewidzianych we wprowadzonych nowelizacją z 2014 r. przepisach ustawy – Prawo o szkolnictwie wyższym.The aim of the article is to analyse and review legal grounds for determining an entity owning intellectual property rights to intellectual creations performed at universities. The article presents rules for acquiring copyrights and industrial property rights provided in binding IP regulations, with a special consideration to specifi c rules applying to results of research and developments works, provided in the amendment of 2014 of the Law of the higher education

The authorship of research results and scientific publications in medical sciences

Introduction. The article aims to present the rules for determining the authorship of research results and scientific pu­blications under intellectual property law and the applicable standards. Materials and methods. The study is based on copyright law, national and international codes of ethical conduct in research and scientific publications, including the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity and the guidelines for publication in medical journals of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Results and discussion. The standards for the attribution of authorship to scientific results under intellectual property law, the applicable guidelines and customs are not consistent. Strict rules for determining the status of an author based on their creative contribution within the meaning of copyright law do not correspond in full extent to the needs of the sciences, where almost every contribution to research, clinical trials, and the preparation of publications is appreciated. In practice, this may create conflicting situations as to the proper identification and indication of authorship and co-authors. Conclusions. Among the standards for recognizing authorship, copyright standards prevail. A compromise solution be­tween the restrictive approach for attributing authorship (co-authorship) of works under copyright and the non-binding recommendation of the ethical codes, is to distinguish between the ‘authors’ and other ‘non-authors’ who contributed to the creation of work, thereby protecting the interests of all parties involved