Whose Research Is It Anyway?
Are students entitled to IP rights?
Dr. Robert Malone was a medical student in the late 1980s enrolled in an MD-PhD program. He chose Dr. Inder Verma, a well known molecular biology researcher at the UCSD Salk Institute as his advisor. Dr. Verma had strong research funding and a large busy lab at the Salk Institute. Dr. Verma and another researcher, Dr. Philip Felgner were investigating a process called “lipofection” in which nucleic acids such as DNA, RNA and even oligonucleotides are injected into animal hosts to see if they could direct the production of proteins as coded for by the injected nucleic acids. Dr. Felgner published a paper in 1987 in which he successfully demonstrated the DNA could be transfected by lipofection using a susbstance he created called “lipofectin”. Felgner had invented lipofection years earlier when he was working in Palo Alto and wrote that it could theortically be used to transfect RNA and even oligonucleotides.. Verma had been studying DNA and RNA for decades.
Along came Malone, a medical student who had just gotten his MS degree, to work in Dr. Verma’s lab, funded by Verma’s grant money, under Dr. Verma’s direction on the research that Verma and Felgner were pursuing, namely perfecting lipofection of RNA. Malone conducted the experiments in the lab owned by UCSD and demonstrated that Felgner’s prediction that RNA could be transfected using lipofectin was indeed correct.
Malone, the medical student, wrote the paper describing this research which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and as is customary had his name listed first before Felgner and Verma. Contrary to patent applications, the last name on a scientifc paper is usally the principal investigation. The name listed first is usually a student or the least senior member of the research team.
Then things got very interesting in San Diego. Malone claimed the research was all his idea, wrote patent applications listing his name first and accused UCSD and VICAL of making a “back door deal” to cut him out of future licensing royalties, if any. Malone then dropped out of the MD - PhD program leaving on very bad terms. He applied a few years later to be reinstated by was denied admission.
That saga has been well documented in numerous newpaper and magazine articles and Malone’s own website.
It does raise an interesting question. What are the intellectual property rights of medical students or graduate students who work in their professor’s labs?
Generally, graduate students working in a professor's lab do not automatically have rights to profit from licensing deals stemming from the research they conduct under the professor's supervision. The primary considerations typically include:
Intellectual Property (IP) Ownership: In most academic settings, intellectual property resulting from research funded by university or grant money is typically owned by the university or the entity providing the funding, not the individual researchers. This means that while the student may contribute to the research, the ownership of any resulting IP (such as patents) may belong to the institution or the grant provider.
University Policies and Agreements: Universities often have specific policies regarding IP generated by research, including ownership and commercialization rights. These policies are generally designed to protect the institution’s interests in any resulting technologies or innovations. It’s not uncommon for these policies to grant the university the right to pursue commercialization (e.g., licensing or patenting), with any profits shared according to a predetermined distribution.
Labor and Funding Agreements: The student's role in the lab, their agreement with the university or professor, and the funding sources will influence whether the student has any rights to commercialize the research. Often, students are hired as researchers, with their salaries or stipends coming from grants that the professor or university has obtained. These agreements typically do not provide the student with rights to any IP produced during their employment, unless specifically outlined in a contract.
Licensing Agreements: If a licensing deal is made based on the research, it’s typically the university that handles negotiations and rights. If the student contributed significantly to the work, they may be acknowledged or even receive a share of the licensing revenue, but this would generally be at the discretion of the university, the professor, or any specific agreements in place.
However, some institutions may have policies or agreements that provide graduate students with a share of profits from commercialized inventions, especially if the student has been deeply involved in developing the IP. These opportunities, however, are typically outlined upfront in agreements or research contracts.
In summary, unless there is a clear agreement or policy granting the student commercial rights to the research, they would not automatically be entitled to profits from licensing deals stemming from that work.