Publications:
ISAAA Briefs
No.
20 - 2000
The
Intellectual and Technical Property Components of pro-Vitamin A
Rice (GoldenRiceTM): A Preliminary Freedom-To-Operate
Review
|
R.
David Kryder, Stanley P. Kowalski and Anatole F. Krattiger
Director (IP/TT Initiative), Management Consultant,
and Executive Director (ISAAA), respectively
download
Published
by: |
The
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications
(ISAAA). Ithaca, New York |
Copyright: |
(2000)
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications
(ISAAA) |
|
Reproduction
of this publication for educational or other noncommercial purposes
is authorized without prior permission from the copyright holder,
provided the source is properly acknowledged. |
|
Reproduction
for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without the
prior written permission from the copyright holder. |
Correct
Citation: |
Kryder,
R. David, Stanley P. Kowalski, and Anatole F. Krattiger. 2000. The
Intellectual and Technical Property Components of pro-Vitamin A Rice
(GoldenRiceTM ): A Preliminary Freedom-To-Operate Review.
ISAAA Briefs No. 20. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY. 56 p. |
ISBN: |
1-892456-24-9 |
Publication
Orders: |
Please
contact the ISAAA SEAsiaCenter, write to publications@isaaa.org,
or order online.
ISAAA
SEAsiaCenter
c/o IRRI
DAPO Box 7777
Metro Manila, The Philippines |
Contents
Executive
Summary
List
of Tables, Figures and Appendices
1.
Background and Introduction
1.1
Rice Consumption and Vitamin A Deficiency in Asia
1.2
Biotechnology Research and the Development of ifpro-Vitamin A Ricel.
(GoldenRiceTM)
1.3
The Institutional Context of GoldenRiceTM
2.
Objectives, Limitations and Methodology of the Freedom-to-Operate
Review
2.1
Objectives and Purpose
2.2
Limitations
2.3
Methodology
3.
Biotechnology Product Management: The Role of Freedom-to-Operate
Reviews
3.1
Why Biotechnology Product Management is Important
3.2
What is a Freedom-to-Operate Review and How is it Done ?
4.
Deconstruction of the GoldenRiceTM Product
4.1
Overview
4.2
Movement of Tangible Property
4.3
Intellectual Property Analysis: Deconstruction of the Components
4.3.1
Plant/Seed Source
4.3.2
Gene Constructs (cloning vectors)
4.3.2.1
The plant transformation vector, pBin19Hpc
4.3.2.2
The plant transformation vector, pZPsc
4.3.2.3
The plant transformation vector, pZLcyH
4.3.3
Transformation vectors, techniques, and plant regeneration
4.4
Discussion of Special Cases
4.4.1
The nptII gene
4.4.2
Method of Plant Transformation
4.4.3
Overlapping Patent Claims in Carotenoid Biosynthetic Option Genes
4.4.4
Interpreting Patent Claims: From Greater to Lesser Uncertainty.
4.4.5
Pea Rubisco Small Subunit Transit Peptide.
5.
IP Management Implications
5.1
Introduction
5.2
Potentially Applicable Patents (or IP) to the Current Form of GoldenRiceTM
5.3
Product vs. Process vs. Use Claims
5.4
The Important Distinction between IP and TP
5.5
IP Management Options or Strategies
5.5.1
OPTION 1: Invent Around Current Patents
5.5.2
OPTION 2: Re-design Constructs
5.5.3
OPTION 3: IP/TP Owners to Relinquish Claims
5.5.4
OPTION 4: Ignore all IP and TP
5.5.5
OPTION 5: Seek Licenses for all IP and TP
5.5.6
OPTION 6: Mix of all Options (1 to 5)
5.6
Practical Considerations on Where the Final Product is Developed
6.
Conclusions: Implementing IP/TP Management Systems
6.1
Major Options on the Management of IP associated with GoldenRiceTM
6.1.1
Complete and Regular Updates to the FTO
6.1.2
Strategic Science Plan
6.1.3
Strategic Distribution Plan
6.1.4
Cost/Benefit Analysis
6.2
Outlook
References
Acknowledgements
Appendices
Executive
Summary
Introduction
Rice is
a staple food for millions of people, predominantly in Asia, but lacks
essential nutritional components such as Vitamin A. This is very important
for over 180 million children and women of child bearing age who suffer
from Vitamin A deficiency in Asia alone. For this reason, an improvement
was made under an effort led by Profs. Ingo Potrykus and Peter Beyer
by inserting several genes into rice to produce an improved product
called "GoldenRiceTM". (on the trademark, see
Note on Trademark and Domain Names below). Because GoldenRiceTM has
the potential to be easily integrated into the farming systems of the
world's poorer regions, the advent of GoldenRiceTM promises
to go a long way towards solving Asia's Vitamin A deficiency problem
in an effective, inexpensive, and sustainable way.
Objectives,
Limitations and Definitions
As a result
of the increasing complexity of the intellectual property (IP) framework
under which the international agricultural development community operates,
the Rockefeller Foundation funded an ISAAA project to conduct a selective
Freedom-To- Operate (FTO) analysis of GoldenRiceTM with the objectives
of:
-
reviewing
the IP and Technical Property (TP; or tangible property) components
associated with GoldenRiceTM;
-
providing
institutions interested in distributing GoldenRiceTM with
the information needed to develop strategic options for handling
the proprietary science embedded in the product; and
-
developing
possible alternative strategies on how the IP/TP constraints could
be managed effectively.
Any FTO
opinion is a risk management opinion and its results vary on a country-by-
country basis. It is a dynamic opinion; never a definitive answer.
Hence the present document serves as an analytical framework that can
serve as the basis of a legal FTO review. While it contains information
on ownership and statutory protection issues, it is not intended to
be a final legal opinion.
In addition,
this report is not aimed at commenting on any institution's current
IP/TP strategy, but on providing relevant information to make sound
policy and strategy decisions. Neither is this study intended to promulgate
any particular approach about how to overcome the IP and TP challenges
while dealing with the proprietary science of agriculture and plant
breeding.
Proprietary
Property, or proprietary science, as used throughout this document,
is comprised of: ·
-
IP
or Intellectual Property, which
has been taken to mean, without limitation, intellectual
property rights, including patent rights, plant variety protection
certificates, unpublished patent applications, and any inventions,
improvements, and/or discoveries that may or may not be legally
protectable, including all know-how, trade secrets, research
plans and priorities, research results and related reports,
statistical models and computer programs and related reports,
and market interests and product ideas; and ·
-
TP
or Technical Property, which
has been taken to mean, without limitation, tangible property
such as computer software, germplasm and the biological materials
and derivatives thereof, and related information.
Results
of the Deconstruction of GoldenRice TM
Under the
product deconstruction process of GoldenRiceTM, we reviewed
plant/seed source; gene constructs (TP and IP) of cloning vectors pBin19hpc,
pZPsC and pZLcyH; transformation, plant regeneration, and other techniques;
and DNA amplification technologies.
Technical
Property
At least
fifteen TP components went into the three different genetic constructs;
many of which were acquired by ETH-Zürich under Material Transfer Agreements
or by use licenses. Some of this complexity stems from the product
being a multi-transformant, in which three genes/enzymes (phytoene
synthase, phytoene desaturase, and lycopene cyclase) were introduced
in the carotenoid biosynthetic pathway (Figure 1 shows the flow chart
of the elements that went into one of the three constructs or plasmids).
This required three transformation vectors and the application and
use of many other processes and components. For reasons related to
the confidentiality embedded in these agreements, we are not providing
details of these agreements nor our interpretation of them in this
published version of the FTO. Determining what entity has the right
to grant licenses or sub-licenses is a relatively tedious process,
one which continually evolves as companies re-structure, sell or assign
patents, or grant licenses with or without the right to sub-license.
Hence at this stage we only identified the patents according to the
original assignee and have not determined which entity would have to
be approached for licensing the various components.
Intellectual
Property
Depending
on the country where the current form of GoldenRiceTM would
be used we identified between zero and 44 patents which applied to
the product. In the USA and most countries of the European Union, around
40 patents apply. In the 10 top rice producing countries, many fewer
patents apply, namely: China (11), India (5), Indonesia (6), Bangladesh
(0), Vietnam (9), Thailand (0), Myanmar (0), Japan (21), the Philippines
(1) and Brazil (10). Similarly, in the top ten rice importing
countries, relatively few patents apply: Iran (0), Brazil (10), Nigeria
(0), the Philippines (1), Iraq (0), Saudi Arabia (0), Malaysia (0),
South Africa (5), Japan (21) and Côte d'Ivoire (10).
Recognizing
that patent claims may be granted for different kinds of inventions,
claims may be worded to cover products per se, products-by- process,
uses, or processes. Whereas the first three types of claims generally
extend to the products that embed the new discoveries, "process" claims
or claims for the claimed technical procedures do not extend to the
products that are produced by the claimed processes. What is of great
importance for "process" claims is the country in which the
process is applied. If the product is made in a country where those "process" claims
have not been issued, then a license for such claimed processes are
not required.
A total
of 26 of the approximately 70 patents identified in this study contain
primarily process claims thus reducing somewhat the number of applicable
patents which could inhibit FTO in a given country. A detailed analysis
on a country-by-country basis may reduce the complexity of the IP landscape.
Discussion
on Alternative IP/TP Management Strategies
Transfer
and use of GoldenRiceTM , depending on the country in which
it is to be deployed, would, at a minimum, require agreements from
a dozen or so entities (public and private) for the TP transfer and
use. In addition, again depending on the country of use, between zero
and 40 licenses for IP rights would be required, from a dozen or so
entities. In total, negotiations with 12 to 20 entities might be required,
again depending on the country of release. Noteworthy is that if a
regional or international organization, such as the International Rice
Research Institute (IRRI), wishes to obtain FTO, say for national use
in all developing countries in Asia, licenses for around 30-40 patents
would need to be obtained (in addition to the resolution of TP).
All in all,
the widespread release of the current version of GoldenRiceTM will
require significant licensing activity if it is to legitimately become
available to the world, either commercially or for humanitarian purposes.
We identify
and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of six alternative strategies
on how to gain FTO for GoldenRiceTM , namely:
-
Invent
around current patents: Research
alternative ways to develop pro- Vitamin A rice, generating
new inventions. This
option, which is a science and research based approach, leads
to less reliance on other institution's patents but is likely
to be very costly and time consuming (if at all feasible).
It would arguably not constitute a wise use of development
funds.
-
Re-design
constructs: Re-design
each construct to reduce number of applicable patents, whenever
possible synthesize own genes to reduce reliance on TP of others. This
strategy, which is a product development based approach, is
a likely one as it may be necessary for scientific reasons
to re-design the product. It is an effective way to reduce
other institution's IP and particularly efficient if an FTO
analysis is done prior to initiation of the research. This
approach would almost certainly be the approach favored by
any company as the TP issues are potentially the most difficult
ones to resolve.
-
IP/TP
owners to relinquish claims: All
FTO issues for all GoldenRiceTM related activities,
commercial or otherwise, are eliminated through public (or
private) statements and related activities by the certified
owners/assignees of each set of IP/TP rights for making, having
made, using, having used, importing, exporting, selling, and
having sold all GoldenRiceTM plants, plant parts,
and all related products and processes. This humanitarian strategy
focuses on public perception. Some
companies (e.g. Zeneca and Monsanto) already publicly declared
that they will make their technologies available for GoldenRiceTM.
This will greatly simplify licensing negotiations although
a royalty- free license may still need to be negotiated, at
least for liability/indemnity reasons.
-
Ignore
all IP and TP: All
FTO issues for all GoldenRiceTM related activities,
commercial or otherwise, are ignored, and research and product
development as well as plans for general distribution proceed. This
approach is a strategy that certainly has the lowest near-term
costs but may lead to long terms costs, especially if a lawsuit
ensues, and may lead to the longest delay in product dissemination.
-
Seek
Licenses for all IP and TP: All
FTO issues are resolved by the process of any party (individually
or through consortia) acquiring an appropriate (commercial
or other) license from the certified owners/assignees for each
set of IP/TP rights for the GoldenRiceTM related
activities that are of interest to the licensee. This license
may be commercial in nature (a grant to make, have made, use,
have used, import, export, sell, or have sold all GoldenRiceTM plants
and plant parts and all related products and processes) or
a more restrictive one as the licensee and licensor mutually
determine to be required. This
licensing approach is complex and costly, but may lead to stronger
public- private relationships whereby corporations are also
willing to transfer know-how and future biotechnology inventions.
It is also the safest route and ensures good relations with
IP owners (be they from the public or private sectors).
-
Mix
of all Options (1 to 5): While research
and development plans are made to optimize the product, re-design
of constructs and acquisition on TP is planned to minimize
IP and TP conflicts (OPTION 2); selected FTO issues are removed
through public (or private) rescinding of rights by selected
holders of certain IP/TP rights (OPTION 3); this i)moral high
ground ld is used to leverage additional rights holders to
either rescind their claims (OPTION 3) or to reduce their demands
within the context of license negotiations (OPTION 5). In the
end all remaining unrescinded IP/TP rights can be either licensed
(OPTION 5) or ignored (OPTION 4). This strategy is again complex
from the perspective of IP/TP management but seems to be the
most pragmatic and realistic. It capitalizes on the upsides
of most of the other options while reducing the risks of future
complications.
Discussion
on Risk Management Strategies
Developing
a sound IP management strategy is, in many ways, primarily a matter
of risk management. No one ever definitively knows who has rights to
do what with all IP, because new patents are continually being issued,
older patents expire and patent-related court settlements take place
around the world. All that any organization can do is try to comply
with the FTO opinions that they commission, establish protocols to
defend (or proactively fight) themselves, and seek whatever licenses
they believe that they need to reach their goals.
For international
institutions, licensing issues are further clouded because their donors
and clients are from many different nations. Thereby the statutory
protection laws required for full FTO are as varied as their client
list. This leaves such institutions, particularly the centers of the
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) with
the challenge as to whether or not to distribute improved germplasm
with full FTO or to pass this responsibility for obtaining FTO along
with their improved germplasm, on to the client nation with a caveat
regarding these matters.
For the
present FTO, we also had to make strategic decisions on how wide a
net to cast in terms of listing certain patents where it is not entirely
clear whether or not they apply to GoldenRiceTM, and whether
or not to include patent applications or only issued patents. We opted
to cast a wide net so as to provide those institutions who wish to
further develop and distribute GoldenRiceTM with a broad
base of information to make sound risk management decisions. ISAAA,
through the Global IP/TT Initiative, can be assisting institutions
in developing appropriate and pragmatic IP management options or strategies.
Conclusions
Regardless
of which option discussed above or which scenario is chosen, there
are a series of tasks that should be completed in order to adequately
manage the IP/TP. These are:
- Complete
and regularly update the present FTO analysis, preferably on
a country-by- country basis.
- Develop
a scientific strategic plan (who manages, what is to be done, which
biotech and germplasm components are to be used, where is the research
to be done, who is to do the research, what are the timelines for
completion) for finalizing the current scientific initiative.
- Draft
and negotiate a strategic plan for distribution (who manages, what
must be licensed, list of licensors/licensees, acceptable terms,
timelines) of the finished product(s).
- Complete
a cost/benefit analysis for the preferred options. It will be for
the developing countries, which wish to benefit from GoldenRiceTM and
for the organizations whose mandate is to assist these countries
to make choices on the best options to follow. The dominating consideration
must be the impact of GoldenRiceTM on the health and
well being of rice producing and consuming populations. These and
related factors will condition the speed and configuration of the
eventual broad release of GoldenRiceTM.
National
Agricultural Research Services, once they obtain access to GoldenRiceTM,
may still wish to conduct their own FTO review in order to confirm
which IP issues and TP issues are covered in their country. This is
particularly true if the recipient country foresees an export market
for its GoldenRiceTM. Additionally, any country to which
they export their GoldenRiceTM will likely present a different
IP/ TP landscape.
List
of Tables
Table
1 |
Product
Clearance Profile: Possible Required Licenses and/or Agreements for
GoldenRiceTM |
Table
2 |
MTAs,
Licenses, Documents and Agreements Relevant to GoldenRice TM |
Table
3 |
Product
Clearance Spreadsheet for GoldenRice TM |
Table
4 |
Major
Rice Producing, Exporting and Importing Countries (FAO 1997) and the
Number of Applicable Patents to GoldenRice TM in its Current
Form |
Table
5 |
Patents
containing essentially Process Claims |
Table
6 |
Alternative
and/or Complementary IP/TP Management Options to Obtaining Freedom-to-Operate
for GoldenRiceTM |
List
of Figures
Figure
1 |
Flow
chart of Tangible Property Transfers for pZPsC |
Figure
2 |
Flow
chart of Tangible Property Transfers for pBin19hpc |
Figure
3 |
Flow
chart of Tangible Property Transfers for pZLcyH |
List
of Appendices
Figure
1 |
Flow
chart of Tangible Property Transfers for pZPsC |
Figure
2 |
Flow
chart of Tangible Property Transfers for pBin19hpc |
Figure
3 |
Flow
chart of Tangible Property Transfers for pZLcyH |
|