Intellectual Property - Science topic

I'm exploring strategies to optimize the impact and monetization of research by balancing publications with other intellectual property options, such as patents or trademarks. Given that high-quality manuscripts often face publication bias and may not reach top-tier journals, I am particularly interested in approaches that prioritize the inherent value of the research itself over its journal placement. Insights on effective strategies and experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Content Authenticity: Generative AI can create content that is indistinguishable from human-created content, raising concerns about authenticity. For example, deepfake technologies can create realistic videos and audio of public figures saying or doing things they never actually did, which can be used to spread misinformation.

Counterpoint: While generative AI can indeed create highly realistic content, its potential to spread misinformation can be controlled through stringent regulations, robust watermarking, and origin-tracking technologies. Rather than fearing the capability of AI to generate authentic-seeming content, emphasis should be placed on developing technologies and legal frameworks that enhance transparency and traceability. For instance, blockchain technology can be utilized to verify the authenticity of digital content and trace its origin, ensuring that generative AI's capabilities are used responsibly and ethically.

Intellectual Property Issues: Generative AI raises complex questions about creativity and ownership. If an AI generates a piece of music or a novel, who owns the copyright? This challenges traditional notions of authorship and intellectual property.

Counterpoint: Intellectual property concerns raised by generative AI challenge us to rethink and potentially expand our understanding of creativity and authorship. This can lead to new legal frameworks that recognize both human and machine contributions. Furthermore, generative AI can be viewed as a tool that extends human creativity rather than competes with it. The AI itself does not "create" in the human sense but rather processes human input and existing data to produce output. Therefore, the output could be treated similarly to how copyright laws treat works made for hire or joint authorship, attributing rights based on the original human input and intent.

Economic Impact: There is also concern about the economic impacts of generative AI, particularly its potential to replace human jobs in creative industries. This includes roles in writing, journalism, art, and more, where generative AI can produce content at scale, potentially reducing opportunities for human creators.

Counterpoint: Although there is a concern that generative AI may replace jobs in creative industries, it can also be seen as a tool that enhances productivity and allows for new forms of artistic expression and innovation. Generative AI can remove mundane and repetitive aspects of creative work, freeing human artists, writers, and creators to engage in higher-level conceptualization and complex problem-solving. Moreover, it can democratize creation, enabling individuals without traditional training in certain arts to express themselves creatively and generate new business opportunities. The net effect could be an expansion of the creative industries rather than a contraction, as more people can participate and innovate.

Generative AI (GenAI) in qualitative research raises several ethical concerns, including the potential for bias amplification, challenges with informed consent, and risks to privacy and confidentiality. It also questions the authenticity and trustworthiness of AI-generated data, as well as the transparency and accountability of AI-driven analysis. Additionally, the use of GenAI may alter the researcher-participant relationship and reduce critical engagement, while also complicating issues of intellectual property and authorship. To address these concerns, researchers must ensure ethical practices by maintaining transparency, integrity, and respect for participants.

One of my known claims to have been granted a German Patent in 23 days. Is it really possible to obtain a German Patent in such short interval of time?

PhD scholars should be particularly cautious about intellectual property (IP) violations and infringements, as their research often involves creating new knowledge or building upon existing ideas. Here are some key areas where they should be careful:

By staying informed about these issues and seeking guidance from mentors, advisors, or legal experts when needed, PhD scholars can navigate the complex landscape of intellectual property rights and avoid potential violations or infringements.

A PhD belongs to the student who has obtained their PhD. The PhD work only and only belongs to the student who worked hard towards gaining their PhD. The intellectual property rights with regards to the PhD degree obtained by a student, belongs to the student. The student used their intellectual property to gain the PhD. Colleagues, lab mates, academicians, supervisors, head of departments, school students or a stranger, may have helped with gaining the PhD, but the PhD degree and its intellectual property belongs to the student who gained their PhD.

Explore the nuanced relationship between patents and copyrights in the realm of software development, addressing challenges and opportunities for intellectual property protection. Seeking insights from experts in law and computer science on ResearchGate.

...

Can I publish my design in my research article at the time of design patent submitted to IPR?

Two weeks before I submitted my design to IPR for patent purposes, I would like to upload the research article to the journal. In that journal, I used that particular design.

Is it okay to upload that article, or is there any other alternative way?

Researcher Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at University of Colorado Denver who coined the term "predatory publishing," first published his list of predatory publishers in 2010. Beall's List was a supposedly a prominent list of predatory open-access publishers and today is the "holy grail" for universities to reject articles published in any of "Beall list of journals". Though this original list was removed in January 2017 by the author however this website continued to list more and more journals and publish their names as predatory or unethical. Like the X files these publishers however hid their identity very well and remained almost anonymous until today. Just like a black hat hacker. No one ever investigated who runs it and how. Today most of the top publishers charge exorbitant high prices yet remain untouched by Beall's list. Almost as if Beall wipes out all their competitors by blacklisting them with impunity on same grounds. Another queer fact which now is apparent is that of the top 4 countries with highest academic contributions namely China, The US, UK and then India, no Chinese journal ever appeared on the infamous Beall list. Is this possible with cost of Chinese intellectual property theft record. According to a CNBC survey, 1 in 5 corporations say China has stolen intellectual property within the previous year, while 1 in 3 said it had happened some times during the previous century.

How does one evaluate the monetary value of IP, for example on Music Rights, Sports Rights or when licensing a Film to a Broadcaster?

through the use of psychometrics, a new instrument has been finalized, which has already been validated and calibrated. Then we want to start the steps to have the intellectual property registration of this instrument. Where can we find a tutorial or manual for this process?

Hi everyone,

As I'm finishing my master and want to apply for a PhD, I'm trying to publish.

Recently I had two suspicious cases.

First, I wrote an essay for a prof. and after receiving great feedback I asked to use it as starting point for a paper. The prof. refused saying that it was not allowed for students (which turned out to be a lie, but maybe I misunderstood) and few months later he published a paper close to mine. Maybe there is no connection, but maybe he refused because he wanted to publish on the same topic or, even worse, he might have used mine.

More recently, I proposed a collaboration with someone I met at a conference, because I knew that a new methods they were about to discard had more beneficial effects then they realised due to the different field. After gathering literature and writing an outline, this person told me that they didn't know but their group already wanted to publish on the same topic with others.

Leaving aside the details of the circumstances, how can I ensure that my work is not used by others without crediting me and is not blocked by others because they're trying to publish without me?

I'm not entirely certain how this "Start a discussion" feature works, but I'll give it a shot anyways.

I can't be the only one experiencing a co-author paraphrasing all my work so that person can maintain complete control over the publishing process. Some have said this issue happens often at the graduate level but never at the undergraduate level. I'm a non-traditional 40-something year old student who has extensive experience with civil rights and so I'm particularly sensitive to people trying to pull a fast-one on me.

In this case, the professor glitched a few times which had me researching copyrights and IP laws a long time ago. However, I waited until after graduation to raise the issue because the university has a history of retaliation when people express concerns of possible civil rights violations. The corruption runs deep at this particular institution, which bases most of its decisions on their intentional lack of policies and procedures addressing fundamental rights such as free speech and intellectual property. In other words, they remain silent on key issues in order to have as much lateral discretion as possible when making critical decisions even when those decisions are inconsistent with both laws and ethics and could potentially ruin a student's entire academic career.

One of the biggest red flags I noticed early on was the professor neglected to go over the section in our textbook that addresses authorship order and publishing rights in the chapter titled "Research Ethics."

I think my mistake was taking for granted that I viewed this entire project as my own because it was based almost entirely on my research into safe consumption sites. The experimental design, methodologies, protocols, and procedures were created by myself during her class in "Research Methods" as graded assignments. It was, and always has been, my original ideas and content from the very beginning; it just never occurred to me that this professor could, or would, even try to scrub me out like this. I trusted this person and considered her a friend and mentor!

Looking back, I cannot remember even a single instance where we had this conversation despite it being a core principle of the American Psychology Association Code of Ethics. The professor is a licensed psychologist and my degree was in psychology so you'd think that would have been something we should have covered at least once. Right?

Has anyone else experienced issues similar to this? How did you handle it? What should I do, or have done, to prevent this from becoming an issue?

What is better for intellectual property: publishing it in the form of a scientific article or obtaining a patent?

I have recently applied for a postdoc position in a reputable lab. I had to provide a research proposal for my application where i explained my research idea and how can I contribute to the research line of the group..I was rejected but few weeks later, i discovered a new job advertisement from the same lab with an identical proposal that I have suggested.

I tend to hold high esteem for my collegues. I believe we are building on one another’s work and it's only right to give credit where it is due. The idea of getting research ideas “stolen”never crossed my mind. It's true that preparing a good research proposal require considerable effort and preliminary research but I'm not particularly possessive of my ideas...In the other hand, I believe that it would have been rightfull to work on a project for which I originally proposed the core idea. It's no doubt that this issue is a question of professional ethics but how can I prevent this situation from reoccuring in the future? How do you guarantee that a research proposal /idea doesn't get stollen when you discuss it with a new PI/ research group? Please share you experience or any usefull suggestion.

I am thinking about the publication of my software code in some Q1-ranked journals. But, I do not know if this is possible or not. What are the main Q1-ranked journals accepting papers about software code?

If affirmative, the next question is: Is it possible to publish my software which is previously registered as intellectual property?

There are various decision making theories (TPB, Diffusion of Innovations, etc.) available, but I seek for an opt theory that suits Intellectual property protection decision.

The theory should answer sociological and psychological reasons for why a person decides to protect his IP?

People define Ethics as the moral principles that guide the personal behaviour.

In research and academia, the American Psychological Association defined five principles, these are:

1. Discuss intellectual property frankly.

2. Be conscious of multiple roles.

3. Follow informed-consent rules.

4. Respect confidentiality and privacy.

5. Tap into ethics resources.

This subject needs discussion and explanation. Experts are welcome to comment.

For example, Attitude of producer in obtaining trademark for their company.

I'm working on Geographical Indications in India. I couldn't get enough research publications in that domain. If any sound methods are available, kindly let me know.

The plagiarism which we are checking with the help of Turnitin software counts the similarity of usual English words even helping verbs and proverbs. If the similarity of specific terminology is counted instead of the entire usual English Sentences?

What are the implications of CRISPR technology in food production? Will the technology exacerbate the polarization within consumers as it happened with GMOs? Who owns the intellectual property of CRISPR technology?

The question is to find solutions of how we can protect the intellectual property of teachers, lecturers and professors in situations where reading materials prepared by these teachers, lecturers and professors are posted on - line for free use of specific students who end up re-posting them on other platforms without acknowledging the intellectual property owners or seeking their consent to post such lesson notes.

How much time it takes to grant a patent in your country? Many countries take up to 10 years to grant a patent. This is half of the time (20 years) of exclusive right. It is really horrible. Also state your opinion.

Intellectual Property is defined both protecting to innovators and promoting access to knowledge and technology.

In green intellectual property, is possible to measure if more protection influence more access to green tech that can prevent and reduce environmental risks and/or increment energy efficiency?

Dear Fellow Researchers!

Kindly share your experience, wisdom and expert opinion in this regard.

Based on some/few flaws in one or both the double blind reviews received, can they be challenged?

Considering the fact that it's your first/initial submission?

Given one or both the reviews are challenged, what can be possible grounds?

Thanking you in advance!

IP rights are granted to encourage inventions and innovations and such inventions always emanate from upcoming individuals with little means. Granted that the IP can be valued, how can such value be positively utilised for capital growth, in terms of using it as collateral for securing loan in non-developed economy?

Sometimes start-ups are born with the purpose of developing and selling Intellectual Property. Once the firm accomplish that, the firm ends its operations. Then, is it possible to measure Corporate Sustainability in this case?

(deleted)

This question is for Principal Investigators. How long should we retain old physical laboratory notebooks from our former students, postdocs, and technicians? This is assuming that all data have been published and that there are no intellectual property concerns. I have notebooks now approaching 20 years old and would appreciate any feedback from other PIs as to how they deal with this issue. Thanks, Adam

This is about Intellectual property rights awareness campaigns at universities by different organisations i.e National Intellectual Property Management Office (NIMPO) and The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC).

Dear RG community,

I recently participated in interesting intellectual property versus peer review paper debate. My view, both topics are intriguing (produce good for society) but I question how much content is missing from sustainable smart city and advance technology bodies of knowledge because patents are more important to certain society segments. One advantage of a paper is the rigorous peer review process. In contrast, a patent overview document can be generic and may not provide many details for deeper research. I’m interested in the community perspective.

A little story of scientific struggle. I submitted a paper to an Elsevier's journal in October 2018. It took about two months to send the paper to the reviewers, a little longer than average. But that was ok, I wasn't in a hurry at the time. In May, the paper was still "under review". It took much longer than average for "Material Science". I contacted the help desk and I got a reply from a guy in India. No editor of the journal lives in India, it's just less expensive to run a "call center" there. He told me that only one of the two reviewers replied. Usually, when a reviewer is late on his job, the paper is sent to someone else, but, for unknown reasons, not in this case. He told me that he will personally make sure to contact the reviewer and that he will update me in 3 weeks. After 6 weeks, I didn't receive any updates from him. I wrote an angry letter, but he ignored most of the content and just replied that he was sorry, but the editor in charge resigned and the process was probably going to take much longer. He promised to keep me updated. So I contacted directly the editor. She did indeed resign, but in May, BEFORE I contacted Elsevier the first time. The support guy didn't even know. She offered to send a letter to the editorial board to speed things up. One month is passed, the paper is still listed under her (3 months after she left) and I didn't receive any further update. Today I wrote to the Managing Editor.

My precious work is in the hands of people with no respect for the hundreds of hours I spent in my lab for this project. No respect for the PhD students who need a publication to get their degree. No respect for our intellectual property which is currently stalled because of their internal issues. My promotion also depends on my publications, of course.

Just like a sad italian comedy from the '70s.

I have been trying to introduce my last publications and I could not enter the name of the journals, because (I guess) they were not included in your database.

Revista de Propiedad Intelectual (Pe. i.) (ISSN 1576-3366)

Revista sobre Patrimonio Cultural: Regulación, Propiedad Intelectual e Industrial (RIIPAC) (ISSN 2255-1565 )

Thank you in advance!

Do doctors own their diagnoses?

In other words, can the diagnosis of a disease be considered as a creation of mind?

Hello

In your opinion, what signs of globalization of intellectual property rights can be exemplified?

Dear colleagues,

I am reaching out to the scientific community, to safeguard the intellectual property(IP) rights of an unpublished novel proposal idea.

While published work can be claimed for plagiarism, there are no such rights available for an unpublished novel proposals, that you spend months preparing for and finally sharing it with a supervisor(SP)/host organization that promised to submit it on your behalf, but eventually pulled out of it on the very day/or close to submission day.

Needless to say that it is an abuse of the time and effort of the applicant(AP) and a sham on the name of science. While it is certainly my belief that nothing goes wasted in life and one eventually gets compensated in ways that He/She doesn't realize at that time, there has to be some organized way to safeguard the rights of aspiring scientists, that share their aspiring ideas in blind trust to the SP (in good standing mind you), only to be cut out of it at the very end.

So, is there any organization academic/industrial that is working to protect the rights of the AP?? so that the AP can claim his IP and prevent the SP or any other party for non-consensual usage of IP for funding or otherwise.

I look forward to your responses and personal experiences in this regard.

Best wishes

-When using information from a website, It will be cited in references. When should we get copyrights?

- When submitting a manuscript to a journal, is the intellectual property of the author preserved?

I am looking for material related to business models supported on exploiting and licensing intellectual property brands. Specifically, I am thinking of brands coming out of "media products" like characters, stories, etc., sometimes they are even called "franchises". Think of Marvel, Harry Potter, Hello Kitty, etc., but also any other business or brand that works with these same foundations.

I teach a Brand Management course where the Licensing business model hasn't had the deserved attention so far, would like to update it.

thank you,

Paulo L

I am looking for advice or links to information on intellectual property rights as related to a PhD in terms of student, university and funder rights.

Universities and other public research organizations are increasingly protecting their inventions – from genetic inventions to software – helping raise additional funding for research and spurring new start ups. The rise in university patenting has occurred against a broader policy framework aimed at fostering a greater interaction between public research and industry in order to increase the social and private returns from public support to R&D. The general strengthening of intellectual property protection world-wide as well as the passage of legislation aimed at improving technology transfer are additional factors that have facilitated the expansion of patenting in academia in OECD countries.

Source: http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/academic_patenting.html

I did some courses about tecnology inovation, intellectual property

and patents. I am gathering information about this subject. Someone wanna share sources of free information ? Free data of inovation or free full text articles ?

Thanks a lot !

Hi everyone,

I am trying to look at the effect of signal transduction via a particular receptor on behavior when it is microinjected into the brain. The problem is that selective antagonists for this receptor are limited and the ones that are commercially available are not efficacious, not water-soluble, or do not bind to the rat homolog of this receptor. Moreover, commercially available antagonists do not have any literature backing up in vivo use. I have located a novel compound that has high efficacy at the receptor, is efficacious in mouse/rat models (with a study that examined in vivo use), and is water-soluble, but the problem is that it is under development by a Japanese pharmaceutical company (Nippon Chemiphar). I have contacted the scientist from this company who co-authored the study who directed me toward the scientist currently in charge of the project. However, I got a response that essentially restated what I already know about the compound: that it is under development and not intended for sale or transfer under intellectual property. However, I have seen many studies (including the one in which I first became aware of this compound) in which researchers independent of the pharmaceutical company were able to obtain some of the compound and use it in their research. These studies usually involve a co-author at the pharmaceutical company or acknowledge the company for providing the compound in the acknowledgments section.

My question is the following: how can I obtain permission from the pharmaceutical company to obtain a small quantity of this compound for use in my study? I do not work for a pharmaceutical company and do not plan on profiting from the publication of my data. Is the researcher in charge of the development project the individual who I should be in contact with regarding this inquiry or should I be contacting the company's lawyers? Is there something analogous to a nondisclosure agreement that I can sign to obtain permission to obtain this compound? I've also contacted Sigma-Aldrich about a potential custom synthesis of this compound, but I have a very limited budget and a custom synthesis would undoubtedly be costly.

Thanks,

Richik

The article has the first author, co-author 1, co-author 2 and so on. The first author does the main work, such as preparations and research. One of the co-authors is also responsible for the financial side of the publication, so it is needed to specify him as a corresponding author. Does this leave intellectual property for the article after the first author?

I want to engineer a biological host to produce a desire product and create a new innovative process. For example, I have to use an enzyme that previously claimed in US 8877461 B2. How can I avoid infringing to what is claimed? Can I isolate a cDNA sequence encoding the polypeptide from the original host with a high similarity (>%98) to SEQ ID NO:1 US 8877461 B2?

Can remember reading an article about this, but can't find why developing countries prefer WIPO over GATT in Intellectual Property law? 

Most intensive partnership you know about

Conditions for efficiency and prompt answers

Independence of academics versus the eye on efficiency of companies

Communication issues or constraints and intellectual property safeguarding

References of well succeeded projects

What specific aspects of regulatory processes or procedures can regulatory agencies improve to make regulatory oversight for products of biotechnology more transparent, coordinated, predictable, and efficient while continuing their primary role(s)? What specific information can regulatory agencies, or other agencies and offices, provide to biotechnology product developers, especially small businesses, to assist in their efforts to navigate the regulatory system?

I am writing my proposal for the topic: intellectual property education in higher education in Zimbabwe and am struggling to find a theoretical framework or conceptual framework.

Does anyone know what are the steps to get an idea / application patented?

I am busy with research on IPR awareness in the video game industry.

This question is part of my research in which I am working to differentiate between Intellectual property and Intellectual Capital. In this regard it is also pertinent to mention that both these models have been criticised at a very large scale. 

I am looking forward to get some feedback from the prominent research scholars so that we could develop another model and clearly differentiate between intellectual capital and intellectual property.

The international patent classification is so broad that people will be overwhelmed by the vast extension of the classification. Being able to look through it might be cumbersome. Where are the best information sites? What would you recommend to an engineer on how to look for the best classification that suits his invention or application for an invention?

Another important aspect raised by the scholars is that Article 66.2 is not limited to the IPR-related mechanism for promoting technology transfer. Andrew Michaels viewed that “Article 66.2 does not mention IPRs specifically, so developed countries are not limited to IPR-related mechanisms for promoting ITT.

See Andrew Michaels, “International Technology Transfer and TRIPS Article 66.2: Can Global Administrative Law Help Least-Developed Countries Get What They Bargained For”, 41 Geo. J. Int’l L. 223. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 2009.

Being an inventor or budding inventor, an individual might have lots of questions in mind.. Such as..how to obtain patent for my invention? Is my invention patentable? Can I file patent by myself? etc. There must be certain basic guidelines that are already known to the patent practitioners to help the inventors. Inputs are invited  for helping the inventors and scientist how to apply and protect intellectual property.

also if some patent guides/mentors or agents are available..

I am planning to perform RCA on a pool of circular DNAs. Unfortunately, I have found very little information on the protocol to be used, maybe because of intellectual property restraints.

My question is, can I use normal PCR primers to allow binding of the phi29 polymerase to the initiation site, or do they need to be degenerate at some site to facilitate the strand displacement activity?

I am also considering random hexamers but, as my starting material is a pool of circular DNAs, I would prefer to maintain specific amplification of the DNA of interest.

General advice on the protocol to be used would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

One of the conditions of accept the patents are to disclosure the all of detail of technology. Thus we can use it's data to catch technical science and technology and use in the countries than not submitted.

I am using Twitter data for my PhD research and I wonder what Twitter specifies about using its data for research purposes. There are tones of academic papers making use of data, so I suspect that everything should be ok. But, I am looking for some policy or document which could clarify this point. There's the developer agreement https://dev.twitter.com/overview/terms/agreement-and-policy but I does not say much about storing twitter data, making use of it for academic purposes,... 

One of the constructs of my research are intellectual property governance and brand equity and i want to know that in how many dimensions they connect with each other 

how is weak copyright laws impacting music industry in India?

This right has been enshrined in Canadian Copyright Act since 1988. It has also been judicially enforced in France. Unfortunately, it still remains not applied in many cases. The main trouble, for the artists, is to deal with the owner of the support of the work.

I referred a patient to a private imaging clinic for MRI investigation. The exam was payed for. My question now is who has the IPRs for those images? Is it enough to ask the patient for his permission to publish the case or do I need the approval of the private clinic?

I want to make a microcontroller in VHDL, compatible with PIC16F877 instructions.

Is it lawful to release it under the GPL? As this is a device equivalent (in instructions) or nearly equivalent to one device with intellectual property.

I would like that people could use my code for commercial use. But releasing the new code with the GPL too. I am also planning to deliver a C compiler (GCC based) for this new PIC.

Number of publications, citation indexes and other indicators of publication activity should be of secondary importance.

A new element in the periodic table - a scientific discovery. 

The new model of known object - a scientific invention.

An improved method of solving of known problem - a scientific rationalization.

Recently I found in the IAM patent monetization yearbook 2012 an article about "Patent books as civilzed revolution in patent licensing". The concept of Patent books seems to be compelling.

With a Google search the idea of "Patent books" can only be found at the website of the IP strategy company TAEUS (http://www.taeus.com/articles/patentbooks-a-civilized-revolution-in-patent-licensing/).

Are there other / similar implementations of the "Patent book" approach? What are the shortcomings of the concept of "Patent books"?

Is there any standard procedure for selling patents?

What is the limitation of having an uniform recognition of registration of patents among major jurisdictions ? It has been major problem among the inventors and companies around the world where they have to register their patents in almost every major jurisdictions in order to enjoy such protection for their inventions. My question here is whether what is the limitation for other major jurisdiction to recognise the registration of patent in a counterpart country.

Any EDA Vendor or IC Designer that might have started working on creating hardware accelerators for Internet of Things.

I am no expert in the legal issues here, but Monsanto, Dow, Sygenta, etc. have been copyrighting genes to food crops as I understand it. However, these crops that they are utilizing, corn for example, represent an intellectual property. These are not wild, unaltered species, but species that have been transformed through thousands of years of plant breeding by indigenous peoples. It seems to me that these genes then, again say of commercial corn, should actually belong to the indigenous peoples if anyone, and more likely should belong to a creative commons. After all, we are currently only adding our own little breeding piece to a process that has taken thousands of years to undertake. Thought?

Are there any existing tools of enforcement?

Sometimes it is said that you should not publish your work before applying for a patent. Is this true? Are there any Do's and Don'ts about patents?

Various classification systems exist and most have been designed so that each technical aspect of an invention to which a patent document relates can be used for classifying as a whole. These are too general to meet the needs and demands of specific technology areas. Is it efficient to search invention only using keywords? How often are patent classification codes used for patent search?

I intend to carry out an empirical study assessing the strength of IPRs in Africa. Does anybody have any idea about recent empirical literature?

.

I have an impression that many researchers and research institutions are focused on papers and too little on all the information already published as patent or patent pending applications. Besides patents give a tendency of research and market in the industry. Navigating between the many databases online is difficult and cumbersome what I think plays an important role and makes this literature less accessible to the public and less user friendly.

Although created more than four decades ago, the so-called “three-step test" has grown in importance over the last years since it began to be used in response to the abuse of the copyright exceptions in the digital context. After being initially confined to exceptions to the reproduction right, its scope was later extended to other rights and limitations.

However, unlike other mechanisms for assessment and adequacy of rights in apparent conflict, the formula of the “three-step test” came without a prior legal reference which helps determine its shape clearly. Given this lack of substance and genealogy, the rule has come to be construed and used in a well diverse, even contradictory, way by the authorities who have made decisions regarding the legitimacy of certain exceptions in the digital context.

In recent discussions I have been repeatedly told that some research environments are 'unsafe' places to create innovative work. Has anyone got any experience of this?