It was revealed to this blogger by a source who claims that Amy Bishop was his faculty advisor, that Dr. Amy Bishop Anderson killed to protect what she considered to be her intellectual property after Bishop lost tenure and was not going to be retained by the University.
"You called it when you said you thought this happened over her invention," and referring to this bloggers first post on this matter,"When her tenure was denied, that invention became the intellectual property of the university."
The invetion Dr. Amy Bishop believed was hers and that she had rights to something Bishop created, and what was reported in this space, is a portable cell-incubator called "InQ" which won the couple an award in a state competition and won $25,000 of seed money in a business competition, money they could use to start a company around the invention.
Dr. Bishop was also working on something she called The Neuristor, also reported in this space as using neurons as we use integrated circuits in a living computer. Bishop wrote:
Neuroengineering
My laboratory's goal will be to continue in our effort to develop a neural computer, the Neuristorâ„¢, using living neurons. This computer will exploit all of the advantages of neurons. Specifically, neurons rich with the nitric oxide NO dependent learning receptor, N Methyl D Aspartate receptor NMDAR, will be utilized. These have previously been studied in the context of induced adaptive resistance to NO IAR. For the Neuristorâ„¢ we will take advantage of the IAR phenomena since it has been demonstrated that IAR neurons express more learning and memory receptors NMDAR as well as increased neurite outgrowth. The neurons that we are currently using are mammalian motor neurons. We are exploring the possibility of using neurons derived from adult stem cells, and from bony fishes provided by Bruce Stallsmith Ph.D. This laboratory has created a portable cell culture incubator, the Cell Driveâ„¢ that is an ideal support structure for the Neuristor".
Still, there are many unanswered questions in this case. Dr. Bishop could have sued the University for damages or filed a criminal theft complain. But why murder in cold blood. That question remains unanswered.
You may be the first ones that shed light on why she snapped. A terrible tragedy but the stealing of intellectual property, her and her husband's livelihood, her children's college? Could the university "own" her intellectual property if they refused tenure?
ReplyDelete