Chemical Engineering October 2014 - 19

Newsfront
Rethinking
intellectual
PRoPeRty Policies
Shifts in university policies surrounding IP in industry-funded research mean
expanded opportunities for CPI companies
A
philosophical shift in the way
universities treat intellectual
property (IP) resulting from
industry-sponsored research
could mean substantial benefits to
companies in the chemical process
industries (CPI). Specifically, large
research universities in the U.S. are
adopting, developing or considering
policies designed to streamline
the process of establishing research
agreements and to transfer ownership
of the IP resulting from industry-funded
research to the sponsor.
Industry-funded research often
involves complicated research contracts
and protracted negotiations
over the terms related to IP that result
from the research. Universities
and companies alike have long been
frustrated by the often time- and
labor-intensive process.
Now that is changing. The more
flexible attitude toward IP and the
simplification of research agreements
are likely to increase the
number of industry-university partnerships
and offer significant new
opportunities for companies that
may not have considered academic
partnerships before. At least two examples
of universities that have already
adopted re-modeled IP policy
are demonstrating positive results.
" The adoption rate [for flexible IP
policy] is undoubtedly on the rise "
among U.S. universities, agrees Jay
Schrankler, director of the Office for
Technology Commercialization at
the University of Minnesota (Minneapolis;
www.umn.edu).
Companies are taking notice. " At
Dow, we absolutely anticipate benefits
from the changes in the U.S.
in how IP is handled [in university-industry
partnerships], " says
Gretchen Baier, associate R&D director
for external technology at
The Dow Chemical Co. (Midland,
Mich.; www.dow.com). Overall, it
appears that the situation with IP
ownership is improving, Baier says,
and that a " critical mass " of universities
is starting to re-evaluate their
policies in this area.
Factors driving change
Several factors have combined to
create an environment for the development
and adoption of new IP
approaches. Among them is a growing
realization on the part of universities
that strict control over the
IP coming out of academic research
has not generated the revenue that
was envisioned when the original
IP policies were set up 30 years ago
following the passage of the BayhDole
Act (see sidebar, p. 20). The
law transferred the IP rights of federally
funded academic research to
the universities, which then set up
offices to manage the IP. The BayhDole
Act does not apply to research
supported by companies, but most
universities have applied the same
practices of retaining IP ownership
in company-sponsored research
anyway, hoping to derive revenue
from licensing the technology to
companies for commercialization.
Except for a handful of exceptional
cases, mostly in pharmaceutical research,
substantial revenue has not
materialized. Universities report
that revenue from industry-sponsored
research has been lower -
sometimes significantly - than the
expenditures for protecting IP and
establishing licensing agreements.
Low licensing revenues, coupled
with a renewed focus on how best to
drive the transfer of technology from
the laboratory to commercial use,
has sharpened the push for reform
in industry-supported research.
" Every school has a unique culture
and different core values, so there is
not a universal approach to IP management
that will work for all universities, "
remarks Tony Boccanfuso,
executive director of the UniversityIndustry
Development Partnership
(UIDP), an initiative of the National
Academies (Washington, D.C.; www.
nationalacademies.org), " but it is
in the interest of all universities to
evaluate how they handle external
agreements [with industry], spinoffs
and licensing of IP. "
The UIDP, which counts several
major chemical companies among
its 125 members, aims to improve
collaboration between universities
and companies by trying new approaches
to working together, explains
Boccanfuso. UIDP recently
ChemiCal engineering www.Chemengonline.Com oCtober 2014 19
http://www.umn.edu http://www.dow.com http://www.nationalacademies.org http://www.Chemengonline.Com
Chemical Engineering October 2014

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Chemical Engineering October 2014
