Technology ScoutingTechnology BrokerageTechnology

 Home
 About Us
 Services
o Technology services
 Technology Scouting
 Technology Brokerage
 Technology Testing
 Market potential assessment and commercial exploitation
 R&D results valorisation and IPR Strategies
o R&D Project Financing
o Innovation Policy Studies
o Technology Incubator
o Training
o Internationalization
 Our Network
 Projects & Events
 Publications
 Contact Us
SERVICES
Technology Brokerage
We help to develop industrial partnerships at national and international level creating links between research and
industry. INNOVA has gained considerable experience in the field as prime contractor of the European Space
Agency’s second Commercial Agent Network (ESA) to market and sell the use of services, resources and facilities
that ESA offered onboard the International Space Station. INNOVA is now involved in INNOVHUB (Azienda speciale
della Camera di Commercio di Milano per l’innovazione), the special Agency for Innovation of the Chamber of
Commerce of Milan (Italy) promoting Technology Transfer services to SMEs of the province of Milan.
Publications
Plan and manage a science park in the Mediterranean", a guidebook for decision makers
This guidebook provides science park decision makers with a number of tools helping them manage a park.
Read more
See all our publications
Contact us
Phone:
+ 39 06 400 40 358-9
E-mail:
info@innova-eu.net
Key Assingments

www.innova-eu.net
© Innova-EU. All right reserved.
 Legal note
 Privacy policy
created by Codivate
P.IVA 05066661009

o
o
o
o

o




o
o
o
o

o
o





o











o
o

o
o

o
o
 Home
 About Us
 Services
o Technology services
 Technology Scouting
 Technology Brokerage
 Technology Testing
 Market potential assessment and commercial exploitation

 R&D results valorisation and IPR Strategies
o R&D Project Financing
o Innovation Policy Studies
o Technology Incubator
o Training
o Internationalization
 Our Network
 Projects & Events
 Publications
 Contact Us
SERVICES
Technology Scouting
We support companies in searching for information on recent available innovations and technologies to address
specific technological needs, offer comparative analysis to evaluate the potential of an innovative idea or to
acquire awareness of similar technologies already applied and exploited in other countries and/or companies.
We run audits to identify technological innovation needs and offer technology assistance to companies to reveal
the most advanced technologies.
Publications
Plan and manage a science park in the Mediterranean", a guidebook for decision makers
This guidebook provides science park decision makers with a number of tools helping them manage a park.
Read more
See all our publications
Contact us
Phone:
+ 39 06 400 40 358-9
E-mail:
info@innova-eu.net
Key Assingments
www.innova-eu.net
© Innova-EU. All right reserved.
 Legal note
 Privacy policy
created by Codivate
P.IVA 05066661009
SlideShare. Present yourself.
Search
Upload
Login or Signup
Go PRO
Remove this ad
Technology transfer technology brokerage day 2 full en
5 months ago

 Email
 Favorite
 Download
 Embed

<div style="w idth
 Copy and paste this code into your blog or website Copy 340 x
284 425 x 355 510 x 426 595 x 497 Shortcode for WordPress.com blogs ?
[slideshare id=85
Copy
Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.
×
Update
Cancel
Technology transfer technology brokerage day 2 full en - Presentation

Transcript
1. Republika Srbija MINISTARSTVO EKONOMIJE I REGIONALNOG
RAZVOJATechnology Transfer, Technology Brokerage Beograd June 2011. godine
Intellectual Property Office Finansira Evropska unija
2. Republika Srbija MINISTARSTVO EKONOMIJE I REGIONALNOG
RAZVOJAIntroducing Workshop 2 Support to the commercialisation of academic
knowledge Andrzej Schafernaker, Team Leader SECEP Finansira Evropska unija
3. Session 1 Technology Transfer from public research organisations: developing
3rd stream activityLisa CoweyKey Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP
Finansira Evropska unija
4. 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
5. 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
6. 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
7. University spinout activity USA• ~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) Finansira Evropska
unija
8. 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
9. 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
10. Why 3rd Stream activities?It’s the economy stupid! James Carville (1992 Clinton
Presidential campaign) Finansira Evropska unija
11. Direct vs. In-direct benefitsTechnology transfer is not a large revenue generator
for the universityUK 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
12. In-direct BenefitsStanford• 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
13. Indirect benefits to the UniversitiesIncreased 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
14. Perceived Government Benefits• National industry as a whole• Related
employment prospects• Induced investment into the National technology sector
15. Legislative Drivers of InnovationLegislation: 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
16. Commercialisation of inventionsLegislation allows Universities/ Faculties/ PROs
tohold the rights to IPR (“ownership”).Once ownership of an invention has
beenunambiguously assigned then innovation can takeplace.Inventions are
commercialised though a process of“technology transfer”. Finansira Evropska unija
17. 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.
18. Realising Value: Practical routes for IP TransferTechnology 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
19. Main stages of Technology Transfer• Identification• Capture• Evaluation• Market
20. Technology Transfer Models• All generic models of Technology Transfer or
Innovation include: – General Processes – Decision Points (“Controls”) – Documentation
(“Tools”) Finansira Evropska unija
21. General processes • Disclosure • Technology Evaluation • Market Evaluation •
Legal (IPR protection) • Route to Market: Licence/Spinout modelsIn all cases, the
process will protect and then exploit IP. Finansira Evropska unija
22. 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 activities decouples the product production from
product sales• Result: Institution may build a substantial inventory of unlicensed
patent Institution may incur substantial un-reimbursed expenses. Finansira Evropska
unija
23. 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
24. Commercial Exploitation of R&D Finansira Evropska unija
25. Commercial Exploitation of R&DFinansira Evropska unija
26. Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process Disclosure General Process Evaluation
Research and Decision Marketing Discovery & Invention Document Legal Disclosure
Commercial Exploitation of R&D Post Licence IP Non-Confidential Protection Summary
and = TTAG Review Due Diligence & Marketing Strategy Commercial• Technology
Transfer Process Assessment License to Spin-out Documented External or Spin-Out
Technology Company License? Opportunity Market to Negotiate & No Licensee Yes
Potential Execute Licence Yes Further Interested? Agreement Decision to Licensees
Funding Proceed Needed? No Distribution of Licence Confidential Income Release to
No Licensee Information Researcher(s) Found Exchange Maintenance of Licence and
Patents Finansira Evropska unija
27. DocumentationThe following documents are normally required to supportthe
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
28. Stage I Invention Assessmentto 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
29. Disclosure•first signal that an invention has been made•a method of formalising
the confidentialdescription of an invention•a basis for determining patentability•the
technical information required to draft apatentAlso used to establish the rights to an
inventionthat cannot be patented but may be protected byother means e.g. copyright.
31. DisclosureThe key information required on the disclosureform 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, ifapplicable Finansira Evropska unija
32. ExamplesExamples of disclosure formsUniversity 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.shtmlSEE CD ROM
33. Premature DisclosureWhat qualifies as: “PrematureDisclosure”? Discussion
34. Premature DisclosureThe public release of information relating to aninvention
before a patent has been filed.•abstracts•poster sessions•seminars•shelved
thesesPremature disclosure usually disqualifies aninvention from being patented
35. 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
36. Assignment of Rights• 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
eachinventor “in consideration of the assignment of theinvention to the University” and
a letter of thanks! Finansira Evropska unija
37. Stage II Assessment of the Technology Opportunity•Investigation of
Patentability andmarketability.•During the assessment or evaluationperiod, an
invention may be safely disclosedoutside the institution under the protection ofa
Confidential Disclosure Agreement orCDA. Finansira Evropska unija
39. Application for IP Protection •Provisional Patent Application •Copyright
Application •Trademark Application •Design rights •Database rights •(Others) Finansira
Evropska unija
41. 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
42. LicenseLicense Agreement:•20 + page document•dense legal prose•first draft
created by the Licensor•Allows all IP Policy to be stated up-frontMultiple drafts before
agreement is reached.(Even starting a spinout may require the IPRto be licensed to the
new company) Finansira Evropska unija
43. Outcomes of the Technology Transfer Process •Invention Protection
•Commercialization •Successful Innovation •Royalties •Equity shares Finansira
Evropska unija
44. Pitanja i komentari• schafernaker@secep.rs• lisa.cowey@icip-serbia.org•
www.secep.rs• www.icip-serbia.org Finansira Evropska unija
45. Technology Transfer, Technology Brokerage Beograd June 2011. godine
46. Session 2 I Universities, Public Research Institutions and Intellectual Property
Rights. Lisa Cowey Key Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP Finansira
Evropska unija
47. 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
48. 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
49. Legal Ownership/ Rights Holding• Who can:• Sell it?• Rent it?• Develop it? Who
owns this piece of land? Finansira Evropska unija
50. “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
51. “Me too” claim to ownership of good IPNumber of people who claim “it was my
idea too!” Money (or kudos!) Finansira Evropska unija
52. Disputed ownership: Outcome? Money made by the legal profession in resolving
disputesMoney made by the inventors Cost of the dispute No. of people who claim
ownership… Finansira Evropska unija
53. “Nothing to do with me” claim to ownership of bad IPNumber of people who
claim “it was my idea too!” Legal threats from IP purchaser Finansira Evropska unija
54. 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
55. 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.
56. 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
57. “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
58. Issues to be addressed by an IP Policy1. 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.
59. 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
60. 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
61. 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
62. 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
63. 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
64. Revenue Sharing Model: Cornell Research Foundation of Cornell University
GROSS ROYALTIES Less assignable patent and licensing costs NET ROYALTY INCOME
CORNELL RESEARCH FOUNDATION INVENTOR’S SHARE Operation and unrecovered
patents and 50 %< US$100,000 marketing costs for all inventions 35 % 25 %>
US$100,000 REMAINING NET ROYALTY INCOME Shared by: Unit and Sub-unit University
Inventor’s Research Program 40 % 60% Finansira Evropska unija
65. Revenue Sharing Model: University of OxfordTangible Financial Benefits to
Scientists, Departments and UniversityLicensing Revenue sharing at Oxford University
Total net Researchers University Department Isisrevenue personally General Fund
Funds Innovationto £72k 61% 9% 0% 30%to £720k 31.5% 21% 17.5% 30%over £720k
15.75% 28% 26.25% 30% Finansira Evropska unija
66. Differences in Processes: University of Virginia Patent Foundation Finansira
Evropska unija
67. University of Reading UK Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process Disclosure
General Process EvaluationResearch and Decision Marketing Discovery & Invention
Document Legal Disclosure Post Licence IP Non-Confidential Protection Summary and
= TTAG ReviewDue Diligence & Marketing Strategy Commercial Assessment License to
Spin-out Documented External or Spin-Out Technology Company License? Opportunity
Market to Negotiate & No Licensee Yes Potential Execute Licence Yes Further
Interested? Agreement Decision to Licensees Funding Proceed Needed? No
Distribution of Licence Confidential Income Release to No Licensee
InformationResearcher(s) Found Exchange Maintenance of Licence and Patents
68. 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
69. 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
70. 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
71. 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
72. 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
73. 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
74. Issues to be addressed by an IP Policy1. 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
75. 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
76. Abdicating Control vs. Taking Control• Fear and uncertainty • IP Policy•
Disinclination to engage in Innovation activities • Conflict of Interest Policy • TTO/
Designated Commercialisation Unit Finansira Evropska unija
77. 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
79. Session 2 II Understanding Intellectual Property Rights. Mr Nataša Milojević,
Savetnik Zavod za intelektualnu svojinu/ Finansira Evropska unija
81. Session 3Technology and Market Evaluation. Lisa Cowey Key Expert
(Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP Finansira Evropska unija
82. 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
83. Appendix A: Technology Transfer Process Disclosure General Process
EvaluationResearch and Decision Marketing Discovery & Invention Document Legal
Disclosure Post Licence IP Non-Confidential Protection Summary and = TTAG
ReviewDue Diligence & Marketing Strategy Commercial Assessment License to Spin-
out Documented External or Spin-Out Technology Company License? Opportunity
Market to Negotiate & No Licensee Yes Potential Execute Licence Yes Further
Interested? Agreement Decision to Licensees Funding Proceed Needed? No
Distribution of Licence Confidential Income Release to No Licensee
InformationResearcher(s) Found Exchange Maintenance of Licence and Patents
84. 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
85. Evaluation Continuum Market Assessment Commercial Potential Protectability
Stage of Development OwnershipTechnology Assessment Time Finansira Evropska
unija
86. Tech- Assessment• to assess optimum management strategy for
commercialisation• Traffic Light system Go Proceed with caution STOP! Finansira
Evropska unija
87. Technology/ Invention Assessment6 Pillars approach1. Ownership2. Feasibility
and Scope of Protection (IPR)3. Strength of Technology4. Commercial Potential and
Value5. Stage of Development6. Commitment of InventorsIf one pillar is weak/ non
existent = see red! Finansira Evropska unija
88. Legal Ownership (Who owns this piece of land?)• Who can:• Sell it?• Rent it?•
Develop it? Finansira Evropska unija
89. 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
90. 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
91. Patenting: we can- but should we?• Use patent decision trees• See Handout
92. Patenting Decision Guide Finansira Evropska unija
93. Patenting Decision Guide SR Finansira Evropska unija
94. Factors effecting the Protection Decision• For patenting decisions – look at the
patterning decision guideHowever… also think about• The availability of funding• The
existence of other projects• The other pillars! Finansira Evropska unija
95. 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
96. 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
97. 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
98. 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
99. 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
100. 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
101. 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
102. 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
103. 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
104. 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
105. Structuring the Tech Assess Process Existing 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 inventions
potential for technology transfer.• Each area contains subtopics that weigh the
potential impact of an inventions characteristics on its potential for successful
transfer.• Demonstration. Finansira Evropska unija
106. 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
107. 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
108. 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
109. 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
110. Rating and RankingSee example handouts:• “investment_conversion_elig
ibility_form”• “investment_ranking_form” Finansira Evropska unija
111. 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
112. 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
113. SummaryGood Technology and Market Assessment Decision are:• Not the result
of crystal ball gazing!• Are: Structured and Balanced (6 pillars) Based on informed
decision and experience Consider multiple view-points Finansira Evropska unija
114. Pitanja i komentari• lisa.cowey@icip-serbia.org schafernaker@secep.rs•
www.icip-serbia.org• www.secep.rs Finansira Evropska unija
116. Session 5 Technology transfer through Licensing and Spinout. Lisa Cowey Key
Expert (Competitiveness and Innovation) ICIP Finansira Evropska unija
117. Outline of talk• Rational• Definitions• Models• International and Local Examples
119. 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)
120. 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
121. 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
122. 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
123. Spinout vs. LicensingLicensing may be most appropriate if:• it is a niche
technology• there is a single patent• the technology fits an existing companys
IP/product portfolio• licensing is a common strategy within the industry sector
124. 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 be secured by having a legal entity. Finansira
Evropska unija
125. Spinout vs. LicensingOther 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
126. Why is Licensing preferably to spinout?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!) Finansira
Evropska unija
127. University spinout activity USA•~12% of USA university inventions are
realisedthough the medium of technology transfer via a newspinout company.•These
new companies have a disproportionalsuccess with over 70% of USA start-ups
foundedsince 1980 still in operation•20% of spinouts from the Massachusetts Institute
oftechnology (MIT) going on to experience InitialPublic offering (IPO) Finansira
Evropska unija
128. Oxford University• Total external investment to date in spinouts (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
129. USA/UK spinout: Equity DivisionWhen 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
130. IK/ USA Spinout Company Creation Institute Dr Zeleni Dr Crveni 30 shares 35
shares 35 shares 30% 35% 35% IP Spinout Company 100 sharesIs the IP Licensed free
or with royalties to the spinout? Finansira Evropska unija
131. Round 1 Investment Investor Institute Dr Zeleni Dr Crveni100 shares 30 shares
35 shares 35 shares 50% 15% 17.5 % 17.5% Spinout Company 200 shares Share Dilution
for founders Finansira Evropska unija
132. Option Pool Investor Institute Dr Zeleni Dr Crveni Option Pool100 shares 30
shares 35 shares 35 shares 22 shares 45% 13.5% 15.8 % 15.8% 9.9% Spinout Company
222 shares Finansira Evropska unija
133. 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
134. Supporting and Nurturing a Spin-out• Strategy• Seed funding• Incubation•
Raising Finance• Management Team• Business Support• Future challenges Finansira
Evropska unija
135. Spin-out StrategyResearch Group New Managing Head tec hn Director int ol o er
c gy ha ng e movesSenior Scientist Research Director University New Company Support
Finance & Admin Sales & Marketing Scientists Production Scientists Finansira
Evropska unija
136. 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
137. 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
138. 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.
139. Finansira Evropska unija
140. 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
141. 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
entrepreneursOxford 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
142. Spinout: Essential Ingredients t en Ac nm ce iro ss nv to ge fin ri n an rtu ce Nu
Supportive University Finansira Evropska unija
143. Spinout in Serbia• SBAN• Novi Sad University and Technology Incubator Model
ICIP Serbia - EU funded project + Follow
161 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds

Related
 Technology transfer technology brokerage day 1 full en 189 views
 Secep icip workshop 2 innovate 184 views
 Secep#1 05-11-1 st 124 views
 Sesija 4 imp3rove upitnik 149 views
 Sesija 4 imp3rove upitnik 101 views
 Sesija 3 menadzment unapređenja inovacija uvođenje imp3r… 209

views
 Sesija 5 primena imp3rove alata kroz vašu organizaciju i … 183

views
 Sesija 5 primena imp3rove alata kroz vašu organizaciju i … 57

views
 Secep#1 05-11-2 nd 103 views
 Sesija 2 organizovana inovacija unapređivanje konkuren… 163

views
 Sesija 2 organizovana inovacija unapređivanje konkuren… 64
views
 Secep icip workshop 2 imp3rove 230 views
 Sesija 1 konkurentnost i inovacija 187 views
 Sesija 1 konkurentnost i inovacija 84 views
 Fjalori ekonomik 1581 views
 Fjalori Ekonomik 3041 views
 Fjalor Ekonomik 2408 views
More by user
 Inniovation&competitiveness support programmes assessment

242 views
 Science industry links 119 views
 Collaboration between science&industry 107 views

 Eco Innovation - Innovation in SME 320 views
 Eco-Innovation evaluation criteria 134 views
 Technology transfer technology brokerage day 1 full en 189 views
View all presentations from this user
About this presentation
USAGE RIGHTS
© All Rights Reserved
STATS
 0 Favorites
 0 Comments
 18 Downloads
 161 Views on
SlideShare
 0 Views on
Embeds
 161 Total Views
ACCESSIBILITY
View text version
ADDITIONAL DETAILS
 Uploaded via SlideShare

 Uploaded as Adobe PDF
Flag as inappropriate
File a copyright complaint
Categories
 Business & Mgmt


Tags
 technology transfer
 rights
 spinout
 evaluation
 public research organizations
 university
 market
 intelllectual property
0
1
0
Search
 LEARN ABOUT US
 About
 Careers
 Our Blog
 Press
 Contact us
 Help & Support
 USING SLIDESHARE
 SlideShare 101
 Terms of Use
 Privacy Policy
 Copyright & DMCA
 Community Guidelines
 SLIDESHARE OUTSIDE
 SlideShare Mobile
 Facebook App
 LinkedIn App
 Widgets for your blog
 PRO & MORE

 Go PRO New
 Business Solutions
 DEVELOPERS & API

 Developers Section
 Developers Group
 Engineering Blog
SlideShare is the world's largest community for sharing presentations. Upload and share on
blogs, Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn. Over 60 million people use SlideShare every month for research,
sharing ideas, connecting with others, and generating business leads. SlideShare also supports
documents, PDFs, and videos. Get an account.
Follow @SlideShare
© 2011 SlideShare Inc. All rights reserved.

Technology ScoutingTechnology BrokerageTechnology

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Technology ScoutingTechnology BrokerageTechnology

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

 Home

 Market potential assessment and commercial exploitation

 R&D results valorisation and IPR Strategies

o R&D Project Financing

o Innovation Policy Studies

 Projects & Events

See all our publications

© Innova-EU. All right reserved.

 Market potential assessment and commercial exploitation

o R&D Project Financing

o Innovation Policy Studies

 Projects & Events

the most advanced technologies.

See all our publications

© Innova-EU. All right reserved.

Technology transfer technology brokerage day 2 full en

Technology transfer technology brokerage day 2 full en - Presentation

ICIP Serbia - EU funded project + Follow

161 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds

 Technology transfer technology brokerage day 1 full en 189 views

 Secep icip workshop 2 innovate 184 views

 Secep#1 05-11-1 st 124 views

 Sesija 4 imp3rove upitnik 149 views

 Sesija 4 imp3rove upitnik 101 views

 Sesija 3 menadzment unapređenja inovacija uvođenje imp3r… 209

 Sesija 5 primena imp3rove alata kroz vašu organizaciju i … 183

 Sesija 5 primena imp3rove alata kroz vašu organizaciju i … 57

 Secep#1 05-11-2 nd 103 views

 Sesija 2 organizovana inovacija unapređivanje konkuren… 163

 Secep icip workshop 2 imp3rove 230 views

 Sesija 1 konkurentnost i inovacija 187 views

 Sesija 1 konkurentnost i inovacija 84 views

 Fjalori ekonomik 1581 views

 Fjalori Ekonomik 3041 views

 Fjalor Ekonomik 2408 views

 Inniovation&competitiveness support programmes assessment

 Science industry links 119 views

 Collaboration between science&industry 107 views

 Eco-Innovation evaluation criteria 134 views

 Technology transfer technology brokerage day 1 full en 189 views

View all presentations from this user

About this presentation

© All Rights Reserved

View text version

 Uploaded via SlideShare

 Business & Mgmt

 PRO & MORE

 DEVELOPERS & API

© 2011 SlideShare Inc. All rights reserved.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen