Although the PhD candidate is the author, it depends on local law and on the terms of their employment agreement whether they own the copyrights and other intellectual property rights developed in the course of their PhD work. Unpaid PhD students may in fact own everything, but many universities and PhD position sponsors assign and transfer all the IP to them. In the absence of an agreement with IP clauses, local laws may also govern to whom the PhD IP belongs.

Thank you for your "OPINION" :) (Smile).

However, no law can take away the "intellectual property" earned by a student gaining their own PhD.

Best regards

Aradhana

now im doing my PhD in intellectual property rights in Cinema

نعم كما تفضلتم جميعا يبقى طالب الدكتوراه هو المالك للحقوق الفكرية ,اما اذا كان هناك جهة راعية او مانحة للدراسة فهنا من الممكن ان يكون تخصيص للمستفيد من حقوق الملكية الفكرية لكن فقط المالية اما الأدبية فتبقى حكرا للمؤلف الى الابد وبالتالي هذه الحقوق المالية كذلك ينتهي فيها التخصيص بعد مرور فترة من الزمن تختلف من قانون الى آخر.

Aradhana is incorrect. Maurits states the correct legal position. A contract (for example, of employment or for a book publication) can over-ride the "normal" ownership rules. "No law can take away the IP of a student" is a complete misunderstanding of copyright law.

Hi Charles Oppenheim , :)

If you earned/gained your PhD through your own hard-work, did anyone else work for you to gain/earn your PhD?

Likewise, if you educate your child in Maths/English and your child is the envy of her classmates, due to her knowledge of Maths/English, can anyone else else take away the credit for you working hard to get your child to be good at Maths/English? Can any "Law" take away your hard work?

Thus, thank you for your opinion, but it is very clear, that my PhD, belongs to me and no "Law" can take away my PhD-work from me.

Best regards

Aradhana

My contribution IS the law. I am a copyright expert and consultant so please note what I have to say. Your wish for natural justice is understandable but is mistaken. You rightly refer to a teacher or parent getting credit, and in the same way, your PhD gives you credit for your work. But credit is not invariably the same as ownership of the associated intellectual property. You are confusing the two. I have written books (on copyright as it happens). I get the credit for those books, but the intellectual property in them is the publisher's.

Many universities are insisting on adding themselves as the applicant. In my opinion, this is not correct. Intellectual property belongs to individuals. If a person works in an organization, their contribution can be acknowledged as a strength. The university should recognize the individual who generated the intellectual property.IP owners should be given preference during promotions and recruitment processes. The university can benefit from its commercialization according to their intellectual property policy.Universities with intellectual property (IP) must be encouraged by state and central governments.

It emphasizes the individual effort and dedication required to earn a PhD, highlighting that despite the support and assistance from others, the ultimate ownership of the degree and its intellectual property belongs to the student who achieved it. This perspective aligns with the standard practices in academia and research where recognition is given to the individual for their scholarly accomplishments.

As a humble expert in the ASEAN region, for IP related to PHD, you need to refer to the University Regulation of IP rights and related rights therein. Issues and controversy related to the question raised have been resolved based on the University's IP Regulation for PHDs, which I believe is implemented at the respective University in compliance with local IP laws. This is ASEAN's legal position on PHD and IP rights. JEONG CHUN PHUOC

Dear Jeong Chun Phuoc , Thank you. A PhD is a "Doctrate in Philosophy" FIRST and then the subject that you have specialised in. For example, in my case, I did a PhD in "Immunology". However, even before I did my PhD in "Immunology", with a "Dorothy Hodgkin Postgraduate Award (DHPA)" scholarship, I already had a sense of philosophy. Before, doing my PhD in Immunology, I did my masters in technology in Human Resource Development and Management and thus, as much as anyone wishes to take away the IP of PhD holders, it will become and more impossible. This is because, a PhD belongs to an individual.

You wished to do your PhD, in the subject of your interest and the "intellectual property" belongs to you. Did your University have any interest in supporting you, in your PhD, when you were doing your PhD?

My PhD belongs to me and your PhD belongs to you.

What is it about my PhD, that interests you? and what is "flawed" about your PhD, that you can't bank on your PhD???????

Thank you so much.

Best regards

Aradhana

Thank you. I completed my PhD and it was approved based on the strength of IPRs. My main intention to promote the importance of IPRs to the research communities. Another point, I want to bring your kind notice. Publications are all approved by private organizations. Where as , IPRs will be granted by Government authorities world wide. But, they are not encouraged that much.Additionally, I would like to raise another point: obtaining a patent necessitates fundamental research, which is mandatory but can be complicated and time-consuming.

Hi Venkata Satyanarayana , Please clarify what is your viewpoint. You talk about IPR, but my topic was "intellectual property", what is IPR?

2. Which publication are you talking about in this sentence of yours: Publications are all approved by private organizations.

3. What is IPR and which Government authority grants what type of IPR?

4. You also have written about obtaining a patent, but my discussion topic was only about a specific student's PhD and the intellectual property of that PhD and the owner(awarded/gained) of the PhD.

Thank you so much

Kind regards

Aradhana

“IPR” stands for Intellectual Property Right”. It includes patents, copyright, trademarks and design rights, all legal types of property that are subjects of legislation such as the Copyright Act. The ownership of anY SUCH RIGHT IScovered in these Acts

The publication referred to is typically a journal article based on the students PhD. Copyright in that publication usually is assigned by the author to the publisher. Usually but not invariably

Dr. Aradhana garu, please excuse any disturbances caused, if anyone has been disappointed. My point concerns overlooking patents and other IPRs. The recognition for invention is through patent grants. They hold special significance as they are granted by governments worldwide after rigorous examination. The trend needs to change, and they (IPRs) must be given utmost importance.R&D policies must be revised accordingly. I am not criticizing publications; IPRs must be given parallel importance. However, this is not happening. Therefore, this point is being mentioned on this platform. The intention is not to hurt anyone. Please excuse any disturbances caused, if any.