While there are unique circumstances that lead to any S&T agreement, in most cases, one or more of the four motivations described above contribute to U.S. participation. The following examples highlight these motivations and address the role that other differentiating factors – such as existing research capacity, joint committee meetings and resource commitment – can play in the implementation of agreements. We assume that few patentable inventions are likely to result from these research projects, although some (such as methods of analysis or calculation) are quite possible. We therefore recommend that you discuss this section carefully with your employers. As part of our own review of the document, we considered how this requirement might have affected our work if we had been allowed to access it under the Social Science One framework. While we are strict, we are confident that we can comply with the terms of the agreement and protect intellectual property rights by documenting the intellectual property created either before accessing Facebook`s confidential information or for the same period of time and reduced to practice in a separate project without using Facebook`s confidential information. Nevertheless, each researcher must understand what impact this provision may have on their own work. The information contained in this report was gathered through numerous face-to-face and telephone interviews with current and former U.S.
government employees, including technical agencies and the U.S. Department of State, as well as with scientific advisors, academics, and NGO employees at the Foreign Embassy (January to June 2012). Recognizing that international cooperation in the field of science and technology will strengthen the bonds of friendship and understanding among their peoples and advance the state of science and technology of the two countries and of mankind; While the potential availability of funds was a motivating factor in the S&T deal, the drivers of the S&T commitment were much broader. At that time, the Indo-U.S. relations matured rapidly: the U.S. lifted sanctions; India has tightened its patent laws; and President Bush launched the “Next Steps in Strategic Partnership” initiative to expand cooperation in high-tech trade, civil nuclear energy and civil space exploration. The enthusiasm for the bilateral partnership was great and led the process of formalizing the W&T relationship in a way that had previously been thwarted by sanctions and disputes over intellectual property rights. One area that should be highlighted is the document`s so-called “open science” provision, which requires researchers to agree not to seek patent protection for inventions resulting from access to Facebook`s confidential information. Facebook`s purpose for this provision is to ensure that research results resulting from access to Facebook`s confidential information can be made available to others for future research, and that researchers cannot use Facebook`s data as part of this research program to patent technologies that could limit benefits to the research community or limit Facebook`s ability.
to do business. During the negotiation of this agreement, we consulted with lawyers from the general counsel`s offices, sponsored research and technological development offices at our universities and half a dozen others, in addition to our own independent legal counsel. The unprecedented nature of this partnership and the special access to data that researchers will receive have led to the addition of some unusually restrictive provisions that researchers may never have encountered before. If you have access to the data, we recommend talking to your university`s lawyers to better understand this and make an informed decision, but here`s a summary of some of the key provisions and what we think about them. .
Teilen Sie den Post: