Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Legal Guidelines for Documentation

Legal Guidelines for Documentation

The legal guidelines for nursing documentation are essential for ensuring accurate, professional, and ethical recording of patient care. The guidelines are discussed here:

Law of Independent Assortment

Law of Independent Assortment

While Mendel’s Law of Segregation states that the two alleles for one gene are separated into different gametes, a different question of how different genes are inherited remains. For example, is the gene for tall plants inherited with the gene for green peas? Mendel asked this question by experimenting with a dihybrid cross; a cross in which both parents are homozygous for two distinct traits resulting in an F1 generation that are heterozygous for both traits.

Probability Laws

Probability Laws

Torts III

Torts III

Types of Quasi-intentional Torts in Healthcare
Quasi-intentional torts in healthcare involve acts where intent is not directed to harm an individual but results in harm due to careless or reckless speech.

Law of Segregation

Law of Segregation

When crossing pea plants, Mendel noticed that one of the parental traits would sometimes disappear in the first generation of offspring, called the F1 generation, and could reappear in the next generation (F2). He concluded that one of the traits must be dominant over the other, thereby causing masking of one trait in the F1 generation. When he crossed the F1 plants, he found that 75% of the offspring in the F2 generation had the dominant phenotype, while 25% had the recessive phenotype.

Torts I

Torts I

Torts in nursing are wrongful acts that can harm patients and potentially lead to civil liability for the involved nurse. These wrongful acts range from unintentional errors to deliberate actions. Depending on the nature and severity of the tort, a nurse found liable may face financial penalties or disciplinary actions. Understanding the distinctions between intentional, quasi-intentional, and unintentional torts is crucial for nurses to mitigate risks and provide safe patient care.
Intentional...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

WWII and the evolution of US federal research funding.

Science (New York, N.Y.)·2026

Same author

Patents on AI-derived drugs: empirical evidence and legal challenges.

Nature biotechnology·2026

Same author

TRIPS, pharmaceutical patents, and generic competition in India.

Health affairs scholar·2026

Same author

What if NIH had been 40% smaller?

Science (New York, N.Y.)·2025

Same author

Jefferson et al. reply.

Nature biotechnology·2025

Same author

The puzzle of biologics manufacturing platform patents.

Nature biotechnology·2025

Same journal

LEGAL AND ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF CRISPR APPLICATIONS IN PSYCHIATRY.

North Carolina law review·2019

Same journal

Genetic disability: a modest proposal to modify the ADA to protect against some forms of genetic discrimination.

North Carolina law review·2006

Same journal

Patients' bill of rights: legislative cure-all or prescription for disaster?

North Carolina law review·2005

Same journal

Hospital ethics committees as the forum of last resort: an idea whose time has not come.

North Carolina law review·2003

Same journal

Arising from the dead: challenges of posthumous procreation.

North Carolina law review·1997

Same journal

Critical care research and informed consent.

North Carolina law review·1996

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Videos

University Software Ownership and Litigation: A First Examination.

Arti K Rai, John R Allison, Bhaven N Sampat

North Carolina Law Review

|June 11, 2013

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Universities increasingly hold software patents, but their patenting strategy is a "one size fits all" approach. This leads to litigation for rent extraction rather than commercialization.

Related Experiment Videos

Area of Science:

Intellectual Property Law
Technology Commercialization
Patent Litigation

Background:

Software patents and university-owned patents are controversial intellectual property (IP) areas.
Concerns exist about universities acting as "patent trolls" by asserting software patents.
No prior scholarly work systematically examined university software patent ownership and litigation.

Purpose of the Study:

To present the first systematic examination of university software patent ownership and litigation.
To analyze the determinants of university software patent holdings.
To investigate the use of university software patents in litigation.

Main Methods:

Empirical research on university patent holdings.
Analysis of factors influencing the number of software patents owned by universities.
Examination of litigation involving university software patents.

Main Results:

Software patents constitute a significant and growing portion of university patent portfolios.
University R&D expenditures do not predict software patent ownership; a general tendency to patent in other areas is the key determinant.
University software patents are sometimes used for rent extraction (holdup litigation) rather than commercialization.

Conclusions:

Universities often adopt a "one size fits all" patenting strategy, which is ill-suited for software's unique commercialization path.
The use of university software patents for holdup litigation is a notable trend.
Future trends may be influenced by Supreme Court decisions and evolving case law regarding software patent validity and liability.