View
988
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Republika SrbijaMINISTARSTVO EKONOMIJEI REGIONALNOG RAZVOJA
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology Transfer, Technology Brokerage
Beograd June 2011. godineIntellectual Property Office
Republika SrbijaMINISTARSTVO EKONOMIJEI REGIONALNOG RAZVOJA
Finansira Evropska unija
Introducing Workshop 2Support to the commercialisation of academic knowledge
Andrzej Schafernaker, Team Leader SECEP
Finansira Evropska unija
Session 1Technology Transfer from public research organisations: developing 3rd stream activity
Lisa Cowey Key Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP
Finansira Evropska unija
Outline of talk
• Economic, Political and Legislative Drivers of Innovation from PROs.
• Direct and indirect benefits of 3rd stream activity.
• Models of Technology Transfer.• Technology Transfer Processes
Finansira Evropska unija
Innovation from Public Research Organisations (PROs)
PRO Mission:• Teaching • Research • Innovation (3rd Stream)• Why are Universities and Research
Institutes being encouraged to get involved in technology transfer…?
Finansira Evropska unija
Economic And Political Drivers of Innovation
University-Industry technology transfer plays an acknowledged role in economic growth and technological advance.
University licensing activity USA (1999)generated 270,000 jobs, $5 billion in tax revenues$40 billion in total economic activity
Finansira Evropska unija
• ~12% of USA university inventions are realised though the medium of technology transfer via a new spinout company.
• These new companies have a disproportional success with over 70% of USA start-ups founded since 1980 still in operation
• 20% of spinouts from the Massachusetts Institute of technology (MIT) going on to experience Initial Public offering (IPO)
University spinout activity USA
Finansira Evropska unija
UK University Activity (2001-2002)
• turnover of spin-off companies increased from £212m to £289m
• number of people employed by spin-offs increased from 10,500 to 12,000.
• number of new patents filed rose 8 %, from 896 to 967.
• Income from IP increased 83 %, up from £18m to £33m
Finansira Evropska unija
Economic And Political Drivers of Innovation
• University innovation as commercialisation of an invention, is thus considered an important mechanism for economic activity.
Finansira Evropska unija
Why 3rd Stream activities?
It’s the economy stupid!James Carville
(1992 Clinton Presidential campaign)
Finansira Evropska unija
Direct vs. In-direct benefits
Technology transfer is not a large revenue generator for the university
UK Lambert Review of 2003 –• unrealistic for universities to seek large financial returns.• public funding for technology transfer offices at
universities is to “enable universities to maximise the wider impact of their research”.
Stanford University (USA):• primary reason for engaging in technology transfer is to
“create the greatest possible economic and social benefits, whether or not they accrue to the university.
Finansira Evropska unija
In-direct Benefits
Stanford
• remains a leader in technology transfer• has generated more start ups than any other
USA university. • remains a model for many other universities
both nationally and internationally.
Finansira Evropska unija
Indirect benefits to the Universities
Increased potential for :• participating in interesting and well resourced
collaborative projects• generating publishing opportunities• enhancing the reputation of the university and
research group • attracting high calibre students• improving the chances of long term survival of
the research group.
Finansira Evropska unija
Perceived Government Benefits
• National industry as a whole• Related employment prospects• Induced investment into the National
technology sector
Finansira Evropska unija
Legislative Drivers of Innovation
Legislation: considered to be one of the driving forces of university technology transfer.
Who owns the IPR?• 1981 USA Bayh-Dole Act• 1985 UK Devolution of IPR rights from British Technology Group
to Universities• Legislation has made it possible for R&D institutes and universities
to develop their own IPR policies.
How can you exploit your IPR?• Legal transfer of ownership rights.How can you protect your IPR?• Increasingly, universities are using legislation to fight infringement.
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercialisation of inventions
Legislation allows Universities/ Faculties/ PROs to hold the rights to IPR (“ownership”).
Once ownership of an invention has been unambiguously assigned then innovation can take place.
Inventions are commercialised though a process of “technology transfer”.
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology Transfer
• Definition• Technology Transfer - “the process whereby
inventions or intellectual property from academic research is licensed or conveyed through use of rights to industry” (Association of University Technology Managers 1998)
• Intellectual property - A product of the intellect that has commercial value.
Finansira Evropska unija
Realising Value: Practical routes for IP Transfer
Technology can be transferred and knowledge can be exchange through one of the following methods:• royalties and fees from licensed IPRs based on staff
innovations and inventions;• university owned companies and joint ventures;• consultancy services;• research contracts;• sponsored research.
Finansira Evropska unija
Main stages of Technology Transfer
• Identification• Capture• Evaluation• Market
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology Transfer Models
• All generic models of Technology Transfer or Innovation include:– General Processes– Decision Points (“Controls”)– Documentation (“Tools”)
Finansira Evropska unija
General processes
• Disclosure• Technology Evaluation • Market Evaluation • Legal (IPR protection)• Route to Market: Licence/Spinout models
In all cases, the process will protect and then exploit IP.
Finansira Evropska unija
Models of Technology TransferDeal Based Model (Just in Time)• rate of production of IP = expected rate of transfer/
licensing.• prime goal to keep inventory low = minimise un-
reimbursed patent expenses.• Result:
Institution may lose potential innovations because they have to be abandoned.
Inventory Model• does not link the decision to patent to the IP marketing
activitiesdecouples the product production from product sales
• Result: Institution may build a substantial inventory of unlicensed patentInstitution may incur substantial un-reimbursed expenses.
Finansira Evropska unija
Deal based vs. Inventory?
• The processes, controls and human resources required for efficient implementation of technology transfer will depend on which of the two models predominates.
• The AUTM 2000 Annual Survey suggests that a licensing professional can manage approximately twenty-one new inventions a year and produce about seven licensing deals per year.
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
• Technology Transfer Process
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
DocumentationThe following documents are normally required to support the Innovation process.
• Disclosure• Assignment of Rights• Initial Assessment of the Technology Opportunity• Application for IP Protection:
•Patent•Trademark•Copyright•Registered designs
• Tech- Assessment to assess route to market• License Templates/ Spinout business plan
Finansira Evropska unija
Stage I Invention Assessment
to assess optimum management strategy for commercialisation
• Claims to Ownership (due diligence)• Feasibility and Scope of Protection• Strength of the technology• Commercial Potential and Value• Stage of Development (EUROs?)• Commitment of inventor (s)
Finansira Evropska unija
Disclosure
•first signal that an invention has been made •a method of formalising the confidential description of an invention •a basis for determining patentability•the technical information required to draft a patent
Also used to establish the rights to an invention that cannot be patented but may be protected by other means e.g. copyright.
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
• Technology Transfer Process
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
The key information required on the disclosure form should include:•Title of the invention •Name(s) of the inventor(s)•Design date and date put into practice•Sponsorships where relevant•A description of the invention•Publication dates, existing or projected, if applicable
Disclosure
Finansira Evropska unija
Examples of disclosure forms
University of Stanford: http://otl.stanford.edu/inventors/resources/disclosure.pdfMIT:http://web.mit.edu/tlo/www/downloads/doc/techdisclosureelectronicfrmdoc.docUniversity of Chicago: http://uctech.uchicago.edu/inventors/inventiondisclosure.shtml
SEE CD ROM
Examples
Finansira Evropska unija
What qualifies as: “Premature Disclosure”?
Discussion
Premature Disclosure
Finansira Evropska unija
The public release of information relating to an invention before a patent has been filed. •abstracts •poster sessions •seminars•shelved theses
Premature disclosure usually disqualifies an invention from being patented
Premature Disclosure
Finansira Evropska unija
Non-Disclosure Agreements
• Examples of CDAs• Stanford University see:• http://otl.stanford.edu/pdf/cda.pdf
• MIT see:• web.mit.edu/tlo/www/downloads/pdf/ONE_WAY.IN_1998
-03-03.pdf • web.mit.edu/tlo/www/downloads/pdf/TWO_WAY_1998-
03-02.pdf• web.mit.edu/deshpandecenter/downloads/NDA_Deshpa
nde_Center_2005.pdf
Finansira Evropska unija
• Inventor Assignment of Invention Form •transfers ownership of the invention to the University of Institute
• University or Institute Assignment of Invention•permits the University or Institute Technology Transfer Office to patent and license the invention.
The University of Virginia send a one dollar coin to each inventor “in consideration of the assignment of the invention to the University” and a letter of thanks!
Assignment of Rights
Finansira Evropska unija
Stage II Assessment of the Technology Opportunity
•Investigation of Patentability and marketability.
•During the assessment or evaluation period, an invention may be safely disclosed outside the institution under the protection of a Confidential Disclosure Agreement or CDA.
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
• Technology Transfer Process
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
Application for IP Protection
•Provisional Patent Application•Copyright Application•Trademark Application•Design rights•Database rights•(Others)
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
• Technology Transfer Process
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
Market Assessment
• Market for invention• Number of potential market sectors• Total Market size• Market Profile • Competitive Market Structure• Economic benefits of invention.• Market inertia to change• Estimated Royalty rates• Anticipated life-span of market• Estimated payback period
Finansira Evropska unija
License
License Agreement:•20 + page document•dense legal prose•first draft created by the Licensor•Allows all IP Policy to be stated up-front
Multiple drafts before agreement is reached.
(Even starting a spinout may require the IPR to be licensed to the new company)
Finansira Evropska unija
Outcomes of the Technology Transfer Process
•Invention Protection•Commercialization •Successful Innovation
•Royalties•Equity shares
Finansira Evropska unija
Pitanja i komentari
• [email protected]• [email protected]
• www.secep.rs• www.icip-serbia.org
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology Transfer, Technology Brokerage
Beograd June 2011. godineIntellectual Property Office
Finansira Evropska unija
Session 2 IUniversities, Public Research Institutions and Intellectual Property Rights.
Lisa Cowey Key Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP
Finansira Evropska unija
Outline of talk
• What is a PRO IP Policy?• Why are they important?• Situational examples.• What should an IP Policy cover?• What should an IP Policy achieve?• Examples of IPRs for Universities and
research groups.
Finansira Evropska unija
What is “IP Policy”?
• Legal Ownership of “IP” (Rights Holder)• Coverage of the IPRs• Commercialization rights and
responsibilities• Commercialization process• Benefit sharing• Other issues including “conflict of interest”
Finansira Evropska unija
Legal Ownership/ Rights Holding
• Who can:• Sell it?• Rent it?• Develop it?
Who owns this piece of land?
Finansira Evropska unija
“Why do we need IP Policy anyway?”
• Gatorad!
• Invented in 1965 by researchers at the University of Florida and named in honour of the University’s football team.
• When an idea makes a lot of money then the number of people who claim to have been involved increases exponentially
Finansira Evropska unija
“Me too” claim to ownership of good IP
Money (or kudos!)
Number of people who claim “it was my idea too!”
Finansira Evropska unija
Disputed ownership: Outcome?
Money made by the inventorsMoney made by the legal profession in resolving disputes
Cost of the dispute
No. of people who claim ownership…
Finansira Evropska unija
“Nothing to do with me” claim to ownership of bad IP
Legal threats from IP purchaser
Number of people who claim “it was my idea too!”
Finansira Evropska unija
Who is responsible when Bad IP is sold?
The Oxford Sugar Beat and Crop Dryers Ltd• Established:1926• Patents: Yes • Ownership?
– Unclear - University or Founder?• Patent Claims?
– LOTS!
Finansira Evropska unija
What does the Patent Promise?
• GB344080 - 3rd May 1931• Inventor: BRYNAR JAMES
OWEN (M.A., iD.Sc., M.Eng., Director of the Institute of Agricultural Engineering, University of Oxford, Oxford)
• An improved apparatus for drying crops artificially.
Finansira Evropska unija
Who is responsible when Bad IP is sold?
• Outcome: Litigation• University was sued in 1931 for £750,000• This was greater than the governments total annual
grant to the University!
• Direct outcome: Company settled for 10% of claim, mainly paid by the Ministry of Agriculture UK
• Indirect outcome: Oxford University wanted nothing to do with Innovation, commercialisation and spinout companies for a long, long time!
• Who is “responsible” for a result that emerges from a University Research Laboratory? (who is responsible for side effects!?)
Finansira Evropska unija
“Clean” IP
• Ownership is clear• Undisputed• Smoothes the path of technology transfer • Keeps Universities out of the Law courts• Underpinned by a good IP Policy
Finansira Evropska unija
Issues to be addressed by an IP Policy
1. coverage of intellectual property policy;2. ownership of intellectual property;3. disclosure of intellectual property;4. marketing, commercialization and licensing of
patents;5. distribution of income;6. rights and obligations of an inventor and the
institution;7. other pertinent issues.
Finansira Evropska unija
Do all IP Policies look the same?
• No!– Effective IP Policy reflects local conditions –
they may not transfer successfully. – read and reflect but do not borrow
indiscriminately• All IP Policies address the same issues.
– How they deal with them differs.– Examples?
Finansira Evropska unija
Oxford University
• The University takes ownership and responsibility for commercialisation of IP through the TTO “Isis Innovation”.
• Benefits are shared with inventors according to a published “revenue and benefits sharing scheme”.
• The University reserves the right to take an equity stake in a spinout company.– Lots of licensing deals– The Oxfordshire area has many “spinouts”.
Finansira Evropska unija
Cambridge University
• For many years the University had a policy of giving legal ownership of IP to the inventors.
• The University “waived all rights” to ownership and benefits.– Few University licensing deals– The Cambridgeshire area has many “start-ups”. (“The
Cambridge phenomenon”) – Was the area of science influential?
• Policy is being reversed
Finansira Evropska unija
Oxford vs. Imperial
• Oxford IP policy includes undergraduate students
• Imperial College London IP Policy excludes undergraduate students– Same “issue” (who is included?)– Different decision
Finansira Evropska unija
Oxford University vs. Oxford Brookes University
• Oxford University commercialises though a wholly owned legal company “Isis Innovation Ltd”
• Oxford Brookes University commercialises through an internal University department “The RBDO”.– Same issue: who is responsible for
commercialisation?– Different decision regarding the “vehicles”
Finansira Evropska unija
GROSS ROYALTIES
Less assignable patent and licensing costs
NET ROYALTY INCOME
INVENTOR’S SHARE50 %< US$100,00025 %> US$100,000
CORNELL RESEARCH FOUNDATIONOperation and unrecovered patents and marketing costs for all inventions 35 %
REMAINING NET ROYALTY INCOME
Shared by:Unit and Sub-unitInventor’s Research Program
60%
University40 %
Revenue Sharing Model: Cornell Research Foundation of Cornell University
Finansira Evropska unija
Total net Researchers University Department Isis revenue personally General Fund Funds Innovation
to £72k 61% 9% 0% 30%
to £720k 31.5% 21% 17.5% 30%over £720k 15.75% 28% 26.25% 30%
Tangible Financial Benefits to Scientists, Departments and University
Licensing Revenue sharing at Oxford University
Revenue Sharing Model: University of Oxford
Finansira Evropska unija
Differences in Processes: University of Virginia Patent Foundation
Finansira Evropska unija
University of Reading UK
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential
Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
Why do these differences occur?Ownership/ Right Holders
• Reasons are often highly practical• Who has the resources (time, money and
inclination) to undertake commercialisation?• Inventors at Cambridge may have felt that it was
“their idea” but they lacked the resources to commercialise.
• A dedicated TTO and a fair benefit sharing scheme can be the solution.
Finansira Evropska unija
TTO a department or a separate Unit?
• Internal department – an extension of the University -more acceptable to researchers? (University Zagreb)
Vs.• Legal advantages of separate legal entity (sue
the TTO and not the University) (Rudjer Innovations)
And• Cultural differences of a “business unit” (the
need to sit mid-way between 2 environments)
Finansira Evropska unija
Regional Examples (Croatia)• University Zagreb (Rectorate Unit)• (Medical School Faculty TTO)
• Rudjer Boskovic Institute• (RI doo)
• University of Rijeka (Rectorate Unit + STeP doo)
• University Osijek: Medical School TTO + strategic relationship with Ceder Sinai Medical Hospital , Los Angeles SAD
Finansira Evropska unija
Undergraduates included or excluded
• Is the value of undergraduate IP worth the effort to commercialise? – Leave then outside the system
vs.• Is there a long term benefit in encouraging
and supporting undergraduates to become more entrepreneurial?– Draw them into the system
Finansira Evropska unija
Process Difference
• USA vs. European – First to Patent (Europe)– First to Publish (USA)
• Internal vs. External IP Evaluation committee
• Transfer of ownership vs. transfer of rights to commercialise
Finansira Evropska unija
Deal with the Issues YOUR way
• To summarise• All IP Policies deal with the same set of
issues• HOW they deal with them reflects
– Country– Local Laws (National and by-laws)– Resources– Stakeholder preference
Finansira Evropska unija
Issues to be addressed by an IP Policy
1. coverage of intellectual property policy;2. ownership of intellectual property (rights
holding);3. disclosure of intellectual property;4. marketing, commercialization and licensing of
patents;5. distribution of income;6. rights and obligations of an inventor and the
institution;7. other pertinent issues.
Finansira Evropska unija
IP Policy: ObjectivesAn Intellectual Property Policy should help to achieve the
following objectives:1. Public Benefit2. Protection of Academic Freedom3. Fair Distribution4. Timely and Efficient Technology and Knowledge
Transfer5. Promotion not inhibition6. Establish standards7. Promote mutually beneficial rewards8. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations9. Ensure awareness of differing IP systems10. Conflict Resolution
Finansira Evropska unija
Abdicating Control vs. Taking Control
• Fear and uncertainty• Disinclination to engage in
Innovation activities• IP Policy• Conflict of Interest Policy• TTO/ Designated
Commercialisation Unit
Finansira Evropska unija
Useful Resource
• World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO): Guidelines on Developing IP Policy for Universities and R&D Organizations.
• http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/uipc/en/guidelines/pdf/ip_policy.pdf
• Regional Examples of IP Policies and TTO Operation on CD ROM
Finansira Evropska unija
Pitanja i komentari
• [email protected]• [email protected]
• www.secep.rs• www.icip-serbia.org
Finansira Evropska unija
Session 2 IIUnderstanding Intellectual Property Rights.
Mr Nataša Milojević, SavetnikZavod za intelektualnu svojinu/
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology Transfer, Technology Brokerage
Beograd June 2011. godineIntellectual Property Office
Finansira Evropska unija
Session 3Technology and Market Evaluation.
Lisa Cowey Key Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP
Finansira Evropska unija
Overview
• Evaluation as part of the TT processes• Decision making aids (established
methods, processes and procedures) • Use of decision trees and rating and
ranking methods.
Finansira Evropska unija
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology transfer models
• Inventory based– Patent those discoveries that look promising, market and license
later.– Institution may build a substantial inventory of unlicensed patents– Institution may incur substantial un-reimbursed expenses.
• Deal based– Market first, only patent if deal is found. – Rate of production of IP = expected rate of transfer/ licensing– Inventory kept low, minimising un-reimbursed patent costs
Finansira Evropska unija
Evaluation Continuum
TimeTechnology Assessment
Market Assessment
Ownership
Stage of Development
Commercial Potential
Protectability
Finansira Evropska unija
Tech- Assessment
• to assess optimum management strategy for commercialisation
• Traffic Light systemGoProceed with cautionSTOP!
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology/ Invention Assessment
6 Pillars approach1. Ownership2. Feasibility and Scope of Protection (IPR)3. Strength of Technology4. Commercial Potential and Value 5. Stage of Development6. Commitment of Inventors
If one pillar is weak/ non existent = see red!
Finansira Evropska unija
Legal Ownership(Who owns this piece of land?)
• Who can:• Sell it?• Rent it?• Develop it?
Finansira Evropska unija
1. Ownership
• Assignment– Have rights to this technology been pre-assigned to a third
party?• Joint Inventorship
– Number of co-owner institutions• Funding (Source of funding)
– e.g., corporate, state, etc.• Other Agreements
– Material Transfer Agreements, Memorandums of Understanding, etc.
• Inventorship– Number of inventors/authors
Finansira Evropska unija
2: Feasibility and Scope of Protection• Timing
– Publications exist or are planned• Strength
– Ability to work around patent• Enforcement
– Infringement detection • Security
– Ability to exclude others from practicing
• Challenge– Aggressive area of US or Worldwide Patent/Copyright activity
• Reach– Worldwide protection
Finansira Evropska unija
Patenting: we can- but should we?
• Use patent decision trees• See Handout
Finansira Evropska unija
Patenting Decision Guide
Finansira Evropska unija
Patenting Decision Guide SR
Finansira Evropska unija
Factors effecting the Protection Decision
• For patenting decisions – look at the patterning decision guide
However… also think about• The availability of funding• The existence of other projects• The other pillars!
Finansira Evropska unija
3. Strength of Technology
• Uniqueness of the invention• Emerging alternatives• Novelty of the invention• Breadth/ Edge of technology• Applicability of technology (integration)• Legislative issues• Standards• Environmental Impact
You may need impartial experts to address these issues
Finansira Evropska unija
4. Commercial Potential and Value• Ability to identify market need• Potential market size• Availability of market contacts• Feedback from industry contacts• Market Location• Market Place Competition• Ability to compete in the market place• Time to Market• Regulations• Significance• Licensing Barriers• Timeliness… etc….etc
Do not fall in to the trap of analysis paralysis!
Finansira Evropska unija
5. Stage of Development• Understanding
– Ability to understand the IP• Reduction
– Simulation/Experimentation has been done• Trial History (Medical/ Health Sciences)
– certain information required by the regulatory processes has been compiled.• Prototypes
– The technology demonstration has occurred• Production
– Amount of scale up needed• Financial
– Investment needed for development– Investment needed for use
Link strongly to 6: Commitment of the inventors
Finansira Evropska unija
6. Commitment/ Experience of inventors
• Lead Inventor Profile• Scientific reputation of Group.• Existence of a Project “Champion”• Level of support available.• Existing commercial Links
The importance of this issue is often underestimated
Finansira Evropska unija
Starting Point: The Invention Disclosure Form
• What do you think your invention is?• How and why does it work?• How does your invention improve on the
present situation and what is new about it?• Are there any other uses of the invention?• Do you know of any published literature
relevant to your invention? Have you done any searching for published literature, and if so where?
• Has the invention been tested in the laboratory or has it been used? If so please give results.
Finansira Evropska unija
Invention Disclosure Form
• In which markets do you think this invention or design will find most success?
• List three key commercial benefits of the invention/ design.
• Name any commercial contact who my be interested in this invention.
• Attach any relevant sketches.
Finansira Evropska unija
Invention Disclosure Form
• The completed form should be treated as confidential information
• The Invention Record Should Be Signed And Dated By All Named Researchers.
Finansira Evropska unija
Availability of Disclosure Forms
• Often available for download from the organisation web-site– http://otl.stanford.edu/inventors/resources/di
sclosure.pdf
• Becoming available on-line– http://otl.stanford.edu/inventors/disclosures.
html• Generic (EN/SR) Example of Disclosure form on CD ROM
Finansira Evropska unija
Following Disclosure
• Assessment Process usually begins with an interview with the inventor to gain a better understanding of :– the scientific merit and– to determine if there are any commercial partners
already in the inventors mind.• The Assessment Process includes a due
diligence process to establish whether the invention can be protected.
• Due Diligence takes place very early in the Assessment Process.
Finansira Evropska unija
Due diligence process
• Many Universities have developed Disclosure Forms that will also permit full Due Diligence to commence– http://www.isis-innovation.com/researchers/IP-1.pdf
• Some have Disclosure and Due Diligence in a single booklet which covers all aspects of the University IP Policy– www.brookes.ac.uk/res/policies/ip_policy.pdf
Finansira Evropska unija
Structuring the Tech Assess ProcessExisting Methodologies
• The Texas TechAssess™ Scorecard • An assessment tool used to organize and
communicate the various business aspects that affect the ability to successfully transfer technology.
• Offers an organized method to study areas of strength and weakness in an invention's potential for technology transfer.
• Each area contains subtopics that weigh the potential impact of an invention's characteristics on its potential for successful transfer.
• Demonstration.
Finansira Evropska unija
Translation
• A process developed to fit a model.• This is a useful example…..• Be critical!• Think about adaptation and
localisation for your own use.• Do not blindly apply without
thought.
Finansira Evropska unija
WARNING: Numerical evaluation sheets
• TOOLS.• It help us to avoiding missing something we
should consider. (useful check lists )• BUT do not rely just on a number to take a
decision!
• 49% out?• 50% in?
• Use spreadsheet analysis to inform not replace decision making.
Finansira Evropska unija
Who takes the Decision to protect?
• The has the authority? (Rector? Dean? Head of Institute?)
• Who recommends? (IP Advisory Group)
• Who briefs? (UTT, Consultants, Experts)
Finansira Evropska unija
How is the decision taken?
• In a fair, timely and transparent manner!• Rating and ranking may help.
Inventions are awarded points (rating)Inventions are compared (ranking)Permits optimum use of limited funds
The TechAssess ScoreCard™ is a "Rating/Ranking" approach to the assessment of technologies.
Finansira Evropska unija
Rating and Ranking
See example handouts:
• “investment_conversion_eligibility_form”
• “investment_ranking_form”
Finansira Evropska unija
Return of Rights
• If the PRO decides to waive its rights to the invention, then the invention may be re-assigned to the inventor(s).– free to commercialise it at their own
risk and cost.
Finansira Evropska unija
Confidentiality
• An invention and associated information must remain confidential prior to any IP protection.
• The University usually encourages publication, provided that the implications for possible commercial exploitation and existing confidentiality obligations are considered first.
• If you wish to publish or make any public disclosure concerning a possible invention you should first seek advice on the most appropriate form of action.
• USE “CDA” and “NDA”.
Finansira Evropska unija
Summary
Good Technology and Market Assessment Decision are:
• Not the result of crystal ball gazing!• Are:
Structured and Balanced (6 pillars)Based on informed decision and experienceConsider multiple view-points
Finansira Evropska unija
Pitanja i komentari
• [email protected]@secep.rs
• www.icip-serbia.org• www.secep.rs
Finansira Evropska unija
Technology Transfer, Technology Brokerage
Beograd June 2011. godineIntellectual Property Office
Finansira Evropska unija
Session 5Technology transfer through Licensing and Spinout.
Lisa Cowey Key Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP
Finansira Evropska unija
Outline of talk
• Rational• Definitions• Models• International and Local Examples
Finansira Evropska unija
Commercial Exploitation of R&D
• Technology Transfer Process
Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process
Yes Further FundingNeeded?
No
IP Protection
Decision to Proceed
Negotiate & Execute Licence
Agreement
Release to Researcher(s)
No Licensee Found
Distribution of Licence Income
Maintenance of Licence and Patents
YesLicenseeInterested?
Disclosure
Evaluation
Marketing
Legal
Post Licence
TTAG Review=
No
DocumentedTechnologyOpportunity
General Process
Decision
Document
Non-ConfidentialSummary and
Marketing Strategy
Market toPotential Licensees
Confidential Information Exchange
Spin-out or
License?
Research and Discovery &
InventionDisclosure
Due Diligence &CommercialAssessment
License to ExternalCompany
Spin-Out
Finansira Evropska unija
The need for commercialisation
• A Patent is a bill– Total cost of a sample European Patent ~€32 000– Total cost of a sample Euro-PCT Patent ~€47 000
• A license is a revenue stream– In 1995 the University of California system earned $58.5
million in licensing income (fees and royalties)
• Successful marketing ensures the conversion from money out to money in
Technology Transfer = ROI (Return On Investment)
Finansira Evropska unija
From IP strategy to marketing strategy
Key to marketing strategy:Deciding on best Route to Market to
commercialise invention:license it to established company
or spin out (form a new company)
Finansira Evropska unija
A spinout company
Definition of “spinout company”
• “the term used to describe a limited company set up to develop and exploit intellectual property
(IP) commercially.”
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout vs. Startup?
• Spinout: in UK/ USA a term usually reserved for companies in which the university has an equity stake.
• Start-up: the university does not have equity, but licenses IP to the company in exchange for monetary royalties only.
• Spinoff (but not out..): company still embedded in the Research Organisation. Has not fully transferred knowledge and technology.
Terms are often used loosely and interchangeably
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout vs. Licensing
Licensing may be most appropriate if:• it is a niche technology • there is a single patent • the technology fits an existing company's
IP/product portfolio • licensing is a common strategy within the
industry sector
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout vs. LicensingSpin-outs originating from research institutions are usually set up when:• Licensing is not possible!
– there is no existing business to approach about a significant breakthrough in a field of work.
• Strength of then IP sufficient to warrant extra effort, risk, infrastructure and delay in receiving revenue.– the work has clear possibilities to generate many products and
applications and so potentially could be extremely valuable. – “platform opportunities” or “disruptive technologies”.
• Further investment is required in the technology and associated infrastructure in order to reach the market and this can only besecured by having a legal entity.
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout vs. Licensing
Other considerations prior to starting a spinout:• entry to the market by a new company is
relatively easy with few significant barriers • the marketplace is fragmented with a lot of small
companies • there is a group of founders motivated to start a
company • it is likely that investment funds can be raised for
a company • there is a financial exit route for investors,
including the University
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout is more complicated than licensing• Spinouts require more Infrastructure that a
license deal (people, money, buildings, manufacturing facilities etc…)
they are thus more risky• It will take longer than licensing to realise a
revenue stream back to the inventors and University.
• But, the long term gains may be greater (and they can be fun and fulfilling!)
Why is Licensing preferably to spinout?
Finansira Evropska unija
•~12% of USA university inventions are realised though the medium of technology transfer via a new spinout company.
•These new companies have a disproportional success with over 70% of USA start-ups founded since 1980 still in operation
•20% of spinouts from the Massachusetts Institute of technology (MIT) going on to experience Initial Public offering (IPO)
University spinout activity USA
Finansira Evropska unija
Oxford University
• Total external investment to date in spin-outs (post 1997): £336m
• £36m Seed/Business Angels &• £300m Venture/Institution Capital stock
exchange listing• Six AIM Listed companies combined
market capitalisation (value) of £280m
Finansira Evropska unija
USA/UK spinout: Equity Division
When a spinout company is created then the stakeholders may hold equity shares in the new venture.
Typically at creation:• 33% academic founders• 33% department• 33% the universityOr• 50% academic founders• 50% the university
Finansira Evropska unija
Institute30 shares
30%
Dr Zeleni35 shares
35%
Dr Crveni35 shares
35%
Spinout Company
100 shares
IK/ USA Spinout Company Creation
Is the IP Licensed free or with royalties to the spinout?
IP
Finansira Evropska unija
Institute30 shares
15%
Dr Zeleni35 shares
17.5 %
Dr Crveni35 shares
17.5%
Spinout Company
200 shares
Investor100 shares
50%
Round 1 Investment
Share Dilution for founders
Finansira Evropska unija
Option Pool
Institute30 shares
13.5%
Dr Zeleni35 shares
15.8 %
Dr Crveni35 shares
15.8%
Spinout Company
222 shares
Investor100 shares
45%
Option Pool22 shares
9.9%
Finansira Evropska unija
Control and Value
•Dilution reduces control•100% Full control•<50% Shared control
•Value of shares should increase“its better to have a small piece of something
than all of nothing
Oxford Catalysts (December 2005) Market Capitalisation: £65M
Finansira Evropska unija
Supporting and Nurturing a Spin-out
• Strategy• Seed funding• Incubation• Raising Finance• Management Team• Business Support• Future challenges
Finansira Evropska unija
Spin-out Strategy
University
Research Director
New Company
Support
Scientists
Finance & Admin
Sales & Marketing
Production
Scientists
moves
New ManagingDirector
Senior Scientist
Research Group Head technology
interchange
Finansira Evropska unija
Oxford University Challenge Seed Fund
• Launched in 1999 – £4 million– Development projects, spin-out seed equity– University £1m, Treasury, Wellcome & Gatsby £3m– Deployed into a total of 68 projects
• £4m investment has resulted in Equity stakes in 21 spin-outs, 4 completed licensing deals & 35 active technology projects
• These 21 spin-outs have attracted £40m seed/venture investment
Finansira Evropska unija
Incubation: Reducing Risk
• Begbroke Science & Business Park
• Owned & operated by Oxford University
• University research labs• Business Incubator &
premises for new companies
• Central meeting room and café
Finansira Evropska unija
Raising FinanceThe commercialisation of an invention can be lengthy and
expensive. The venture will pass though a number of stages:
• R&D• Patent• Prototype• First Product• Market Entry• Trade Sale/ IPO• Post IPO
• All these stages will require finance.• There is a risk and a value associated with each part
of this process.
Finansira Evropska unija
Finansira Evropska unija
Funding – Bridging the “Equity Gap
• Start-ups:– Bank– FFF (Friends, Family, “Fools”!)
• Spinouts:– University Seed Funds– Private equity, (Business Angels, Specialists
investors, VCs).– ROI (Return on Investment)
• Bank Rate: 4%• Angel (Risk) Investment : 25%
Finansira Evropska unija
Oxford Spinout in ContextOxford University• 1 patent per week, 8 new companies per year (average)• Own Seed Capital Fund and Business Angel Network• 3 Local Business Angel Networks• Very significant incubator and Science Park Investment• A lot of ‘re-cycling’ of spinout managers and academic entrepreneurs
Oxford University• 3,700 researchers• 5,000 doctoral students• Most Powerful UK Research University
– Research Fortnight Most Innovative UK University – Cross Atlantic Capital Competition Highest Research Spend in UK – £264 million (2004/2005)
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout: Essential Ingredients
Access to finance
Supportive University
Nurtu
ring
envir
onm
ent
Finansira Evropska unija
Spinout in Serbia
• SBAN• Novi Sad University and Technology
Incubator Model
Finansira Evropska unija
Pitanja i komentari
• [email protected]• [email protected]
• www.secep.rs• www.icip-serbia.org