Intellectual property has become a highly coveted asset that can potentially reap a financial windfall for the owner who exploits its utility. Higher education has focused on the discovery of new knowledge, which can translate into intellectual property, but legislation, higher education policy, and/or contractual engagement may dictate ownership or opportunities for ownership of intellectual property by those involved in the discovery process. The dissemination of new knowledge acquired in the discovery of intellectual property may be limited for purposes of protection of commercial development. At the same time, higher education is becoming more involved in the oversight of technology transfer, oversight that includes seeking funding for academic research by private investors, licensing of intellectual property, and serving as a liaison for economic development for local communities. Because of the investment of time and resources in the development of intellectual property, a discovery may result in conflict over ownership, which may, in turn, lead to litigation. The complexity of the overall process of academic discovery moving into commercialization is fraught with challenges and potential conflict.

The potential for legal liability involving faculty members and students in higher education settings is a topic that warrants serious attention by administrators. Specific areas identified as high risk include dismissal of a faculty member, denial of tenure, misappropriation of grant-funding, intellectual property conflicts, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) issues, sexual harassment, student suspension, disabilities, and student privacy issues. Examples of litigation in the higher-education setting are presented, along with a list of online resources for additional information. It is important for higher education administrators, faculty members, staff members, and students to recognize the currently accepted legal rights and responsibilities associated with these high-risk areas.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the USA is charged with protecting the American public from products that are adulterated, misbranded or which fit the federal definition of 'health fraud.' One company, the Standard Homeopathic Company and its Hyland's line of homeopathic remedies, has violated all three of these laws. Hyland's Teething Tablets have injured babies through toxic amounts of belladonna, and it makes numerous unsupported medical claims for nonprescription products that violate misbranding laws. Further, since the products lack any evidence of safety and efficacy, they fit the FDA definition of 'health fraud.' The FDA has attempted to force Standard Homeopathic to follow the relevant laws, but the company has not so far fully corrected the illegal acts.

No abstract