↓ Skip to main content

Intellectual property rights and detached human body parts

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Ethics, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Intellectual property rights and detached human body parts
Published in
Journal of Medical Ethics, July 2012
DOI 10.1136/medethics-2012-100761
Pubmed ID
Authors

Justine Pila

Abstract

This paper responds to an invitation by the editors to consider whether the intellectual property (IP) regime suggests an appropriate model for protecting interests in detached human body parts. It begins by outlining the extent of existing IP protection for body parts in Europe, and the relevant strengths and weaknesses of the patent system in that regard. It then considers two further species of IP right of less obvious relevance. The first are the statutory rights of ownership conferred by domestic UK law in respect of employee inventions, and the second are the economic and moral rights recognised by European and international law in respect of authorial works. In the argument made, both of these species of IP right may suggest more appropriate models of sui generis protection for detached human body parts than patent rights because of their capacity better to accommodate the relevant public and private interests in respect of the same.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 43%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Philosophy 6 29%
Social Sciences 3 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 2 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2013.
All research outputs
#18,357,514
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Ethics
#3,107
of 3,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,093
of 164,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Ethics
#33
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,406 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.5. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 164,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.