UAEM - Licensing and patenting practices of UK research institutions 2019-2020

Sarai Keestra made this Freedom of Information request to Queen Mary University of London

Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

The request was successful.

Dear Queen Mary University of London,

We have previously sent FOI requests asking for information about the licensing practices of UK universities. This was concerning the time period 18th October 2018 to 18th October 2019. We are now looking to update the information for the following year, 19th October 2019 to 19th October 2020.
The updated request for this year is listed below, although we would still ask you to respond to the request about the year 2018-2019 which is by now long overdue.

For the purpose of clarity, please adhere to the following definitions when answering these questions:
Low and middle income country: A country that is defined as ‘low’, ‘lower-middle’ and ‘upper-middle’ income by the World Bank for the year 2018. Income status defined by GNI per capita.
Source: World bank, available online []

A patent grants an inventor the exclusive rights to his or her invention. A patent holder can stop other people from selling, manufacturing, producing, or using the invention for a certain period of time.
Source: Upcouncil, available online [

Licence: Permission for the licensee to use the intellectual property rights
Source: TaylorWessing, available online [

Exclusive Licence: A licence that allows only the named licensee to exploit the relevant IP rights, the licensor is also excluded from exploiting these IP rights.

Non-Exclusive Licence: A licence that grants any number of licensees to exploit the IP.
Source: TaylorWessing, available online [

Health Technology: ‘Health technology as defined by the WHO: “A health technology is the application of organized knowledge and skills in the form of devices, medicines, vaccines, procedures and systems developed to solve a health problem and improve quality of lives.’
Source: WHO, available online [

START FOI request:
Q1. Has the university committed to licensing its medical discoveries in ways that promote access and affordability in Low- and Middle- Income Countries? If yes, please provide a link or PDF to the relevant policy document.

Q2. Please provide an Excel spreadsheet with headings as displayed below with all the health technologies LICENSED by the university in the period 19th October 2019 to 19th October 2020 AND specify which countries they were licensed in AND specify whether they are exclusive or non-exclusive licenses.
Health Technology Licensed | Country of Licensing | Type of License (Exclusive or Non-Exclusive)

Q3. Please provide a list of patents granted to your organization in the period 19th October 2019 to 19th October 2020, listed by patent family, indicating countries/regions in which the patent has been granted.

Q4. In the period 19th October 2019 to 19th October 2020, has the university shared its best practices for promoting access to medicines through non-exclusive licensing by carrying out any of the following activities?

❏ Contributed sample clauses to the AUTM Global Health Toolkit
❏ Published an article, guidance, or other literature on access licensing practices
❏ Formally presented on access licensing practices at an academic or professional event, or at another university
❏ Informally shared or discussed access licensing practices with administrators at other universities
❏ Other
❏ None
(Tick as appropriate)

Q5. What actions has the technology transfer office (TTO) undertaken in the period 19th October 2019 to 19th October 2020 to improve access to the technologies they license in low-and middle-income settings?
END FOI request.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me by email.

Yours faithfully,

Sarai Keestra

QM FOI Enquiries, Queen Mary University of London

FOI 2020/F468


Dear Sarai Keestra,


Thank you for your email.


Please see our response here
which covers both requests from UAEM.


If you are dissatisfied with this response, you may ask QMUL to conduct a
review of this decision.  To do this, please contact the College in
writing (including by fax, letter or email), describe the original
request, explain your grounds for dissatisfaction, and include an address
for correspondence.  You have 40 working days from receipt of this
communication to submit a review request.  When the review process has
been completed, if you are still dissatisfied, you may ask the Information
Commissioner to intervene. Please see [2] for details.

Yours sincerely


Paul Smallcombe

Records & Information Compliance Manager



Visible links