Greetings from Anaheim, California, where Fuentek’s Danielle McCulloch, Julie Markoski, and I are attending the annual meeting of the Association of University Technology Managers®. The conference has barely started, and we’re already very busy at this great meeting! AUTM 2012 began yesterday with a joint session with the Licensing Executives Society, which had its Winter Meeting here in the first half of the week. (And, no, it’s not coincidence that the LES and AUTM meetings are aligned like this. This was just one of several efforts this year in AUTM’s Strategic Alliances.) The two associations hosted a pair of sessions together on Wednesday. The first was called… Continue reading →
A few months ago, the IP Marketing Blog discussed the OpenUlster program at the University of Ulster in Ireland and its evaluation license. It caught my attention for its efforts to streamline licensing and help mitigate the risks that potential licensees may feel when contemplating a new technology. Here’s how the blogger described it: ‘To take out an evaluation license, which costs just one Pound, the visitor just clicks on the link to download the documents, fill out two forms and return them both to Ulster. “When the license is countersigned by one of our commercialization team, the firm has exclusivity to evaluate that technology,” says [technology commercialization manager Dr. John] MacRae… At the end of the evaluation period… the evaluation license can be converted into a full commercial license.”’ 
There have been a lot of articles recently about universities giving away IP rights for free. The specifics of each vary, and most seem to have advantages that will help accelerate the transfer of technology. But some go further than others. 
Last week I gave a presentation at a tech transfer workshop for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). This workshop was well timed, given President Obama’s recent memorandum announcing a new directive requiring all federal research labs to bolster and streamline technology transfer efforts to increase the likelihood and efficiency of getting research results to market. Attendees at the DoD meeting discussed the memo as well as possible solutions, as each agency has been tasked with presenting a plan back to the President on how they will achieve his goals. Possible solutions have been at the top of my mind recently as well…. 
As you might have noticed from Fuentek’s news feed or on R&D Magazine‘s Web site, NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center has signed a licensing deal with 4DSP. I for one am pretty excited about this tech transfer success because Fuentek has supported Dryden in this effort. Long-time readers of our blog might remember our post about Dryden’s fiber optic shape sensors technology. But our support of Dryden didn’t begin there. We actually started off with a market-based assessment of the technology’s suite of innovations. 
Patents have been getting some pretty bad press lately. Between stories about patent trolls in The Economist and on NPR’s This American Life and the patent wars raging between Apple, Google, Microsoft, HTC, Samsung, etc., tech transfer professionals are probably finding their cocktail party conversations getting a bit more interesting… and not in a good way. As the public hears more, some question why we have patents at all. They think that if patents are causing this much trouble, they must be bad. This misconception is a problem that technology transfer offices (TTOs) can and should proactively work to overcome. 
Recent experience with a Sponsored Research Agreement (SRA) has underscored the potential miscommunication that often keeps universities and corporations from peacefully coming to successful negotiations. So, I’d like to take some time to weed through what each party can (and cannot do) and why, in an effort to clear up some misconceptions and potential frustrations. 
