Ask a question to Desklib · AI bot
Greenberg v. Miami Children’s Research Institute: Property Rights of an Individual
Added on -2019-09-20
This article discusses the property rights of an individual in the context of Greenberg v. Miami Children’s Research Institute. It also talks about the licensing of research conducted by Dr. Matalon and the importance of public commons.
| 4 pages
| 631 words
| 420 views
Trusted by 2+ million users,
1000+ happy students everyday
Greenberg v. Miami Children’s Research Institute
Property rights of an individualThe research conducted by Dr. Matalon at the University of Chicago with the treatment of Canavan disease is mainly done for identifying the reason of reason which afflicting the children of eastern and central European (Greenfield et al., 2006). The samples are taken by the children who are suffering from Canavan disease. So the samples of tissues which are taken by the researchers for conducting the research is an individual property which cannot be used to sell the license because it considers as the misappropriation of trade secrets and the researchers will obtain economic advantage from the tissue samples of an individual. According to the property law, the private property of an individual cannot be used for consumption and subject to the general interest. The legal person shall not be deprived of their possession unless it's of public interest and the subject to the condition which is provided by law. The researchers are also providing the license by charging royalty fee without informing patients and financial supporters which come under lack of informed consent (Oberdorfer et al., 2004). ResearchersThe human subject research is defined as the research which involves human beings. The medical research can be done by the researcher, and the similar study can be conducted by the researchers to find the distinct results so the previous study can be used as the secondary data which helps to conduct the research successfully. So the licensing of research conducted by Dr. Matalon is breaching fiduciary duty because they are not acting in the best interest of another party and they are rather working for own interest by selling the license with royalty fee. The samples taken from the patients on whom the research is conducted can be varied from one
Found this document preview useful?
You are reading a preview
Upload your documents to download
or
Become a Desklib member to get accesss
Paid Plans
Free Plan
Single Unlock
Monthly Plan
Yearly Plan