WHOI-90-52

More documents

Recommendations

Info

electronics field states that he finds it "very beneficial for (his) program to work with U.S. base companies. " Industry-university symmetry. The capacity of a company to assimilate advances in resech is related to the internal tehnica capabilties of the compay. A breadown in symmetr between the tehnica capabilties of coperating compaies and universities wil inhibit the abilty of the company to trasfer innovative ideas into tehnology. Internal industr R&D is an importt component of tehnologica innovation, and industr must maitan its investments in in-house resech if it is to benefit from parcipation in collaborative progras with universities. Parcipation in such programs by industr canot be viewed as a substitute for internal industr R&D. Personal contact. All the collaborative progras view personal contact between industral and university scientists as an essential mechansm for moving resech results from universities into industr. Experience indicates that there are difficulties in achieving this, espeially when the cooperating institutions are geographicaly distat, but there is evidence of progress and a willngness to parcipate. Contract negotiations. Industr and university officials report an increase in time and effort devoted to negotiating agreements for coperative resech progras. In an attempt to decrease this effort, the Resech Roundtable and the Industral Resech Institute have just jointly published Simplifed and Standrdized Modl Agreements for University-Industry Cooperatve 28 Research. Simplified and Stadardize Agreements The Roundtable has devoted considerable effort to simplifying and stadardizing the administrtive procures for the sponsorship of university-base resech by the federal government. To address the increasing bureaucracy and red tape in industr-sponsored resech in universities, the Roundtable formed an ad hoc industral committee charged with creating a model university-industr resech agreement. The thought was to have industr, as the financial supportr of the resech, tae the lead for simplification of the procss. The intent was that such a model wil decrease the time required for negotiations and provide companies and universities new to resech alliances with a sense of what is reasonable to consider in establishing a contract. The agreement that resulte and that was published jointly by the Resech Roundtable and Industral Resech Institute must be viewed as a non-binding model that is a stang point for the discussion between university and industr pares seking to ca out cooperative resech activities. The model wil be considered succssful if modifications required to suit parcular coperative programs ca be achieved easily and. quickly. As a 28Government - U niversity- Industr Resech Roundtable, Industral Resech Institute, National Academy of Sciences, Simplifed and Standrdized Model Agreements for University- Industry Cooperatve Research.(National Academy Press 1988). 101
stang point, the model allows the players to lea about each other through dialogue, reaching agreement without having to "reinvent the wheeL." The industral committe recognize that negotiation, like courtship, is necsa for tle resulting collaborative programs to operate effectively. . University resechers have the right to publish their resech findings. Sponsors have the right to insure that inadvertnt disclosure of confidential information does not occur and have the right to assess whether the resech findings include any potentially patentable information or materials; . The university has the right to own title to all patents; . The speifics of the publication and patenting clauses wil most likely nee to be negotiate on a case by case basis. The goa of the model was to offer reaS(nable stang points; . The sponsor has first rights to license (whether exclusive or non-exclusive) since the sponsor has paid for the resech. In deciding on an exclusive or nonexclusive license, the terms must be "mutualy agree upon" by the company and the university. Thus, the university has some control over whether the license wil be exclusive or non-exclusive. The committe felt that the speific terms of a license did not have to be worked out in detal at the outset of an agreement but that they could be deat with on a case-by-case basis after the resech had progresse to a point at which it was possible to determine whether or not licensing would be appropriate; . If university and industr parcipants are unable to come to agreement on speific clauses, then no collaboration should ensue. We have recived many thoughtful comments on the model agreement and are considering the publication of a revised version sometime in 1989. Some of those comments are as follows: . Some universities feel that industry should have no say concerning publication, parcularly informal publication and seminar presentations; . Some companies prefer to own the patent themselves and not allow the university to own the patent; 102
Page 2:
-- !! -== -I" 0- ;; .- -rt õ=.. ai
Page 5 and 6:
ABSTRACT Thirteen short papers addr
Page 7 and 8:
The Status and Promise of Electroni
Page 9 and 10:
During the two yeas we have been at
Page 11 and 12:
There is currently a major debate r
Page 13 and 14:
The Inuence of Japanes Industrial T
Page 15 and 16:
profier, an ocea acoustic tomograph
Page 17 and 18:
manufacturing would predict between
Page 19 and 20:
References Advisory Committee for T
Page 21 and 22:
e both winners and losers from the
Page 23 and 24:
ecause they are major end users of
Page 25 and 26:
A final, but not insignificat, set
Page 27 and 28:
Europen Programs in Marne Science a
Page 29 and 30:
proposa included a line item speifi
Page 31 and 32:
from 12 Europe countres, has been a
Page 33 and 34:
ut other industres have been affect
Page 35 and 36:
Indee, if barers fall, the effect c
Page 37 and 38:
References Andre, M. 1987. Resech a
Page 39 and 40:
Peet, G. 1986. Techniques and metho
Page 41 and 42:
These statistics becme a reaity dur
Page 43 and 44:
should make it easier to coordinate
Page 45 and 46:
proposas submitted to SBIR and appr
Page 47 and 48:
An Overview of Technology Transfer
Page 49 and 50:
follow the fortunes of that industr
Page 51 and 52:
choosing resech paths. In general,
Page 53 and 54:
Foundation (NSF) in 1985 and 1988,
Page 55 and 56:
In the field of ocography, spin-off
Page 57 and 58: Opponunities for technology transfe
Page 59 and 60: "Strategic Allnces" as an approach
Page 61 and 62: summar then, the desired result of
Page 63 and 64: international ecnomic competitivene
Page 65 and 66: NAT LABS , .. R&D .... ... í7 I DE
Page 67 and 68: the radar were "burned in" for a pe
Page 69 and 70: Differences between ~ Defense am ~
Page 71 and 72: chemica industr's 1989 R&D.2S Bang
Page 73 and 74: We are seing a high use of facsimil
Page 75 and 76: pretty nealy global. Except for the
Page 77 and 78: Stadard-C wil disappoint some users
Page 79 and 80: Introduction The Status and Promi o
Page 81 and 82: optional feature of some systems. T
Page 83 and 84: in order to tae full advantage of t
Page 85 and 86: Fishermen and operators of workboat
Page 87 and 88: of the inherent limitations of rada
Page 89 and 90: One example is an America Petroleum
Page 91 and 92: intensification of domestic aquacul
Page 93 and 94: System Output The system output inc
Page 95 and 96: Although the geographica sce of pro
Page 97 and 98: In contrast with the heavily use wa
Page 99 and 100: "works." The tida data (Figure 2, p
Page 101 and 102: ". o ,. - LI u . '- 0 o .c 0: 0: ::
Page 103 and 104: Concluding Remarks Obviously we are
Page 105 and 106: All is not new. Commentators someti
Page 107: of academic resech is critica, both
Page 111 and 112: of exchange among the university an
Page 113 and 114: and progras. Benefits, on the other
Page 115 and 116: 14: 10 Technology Transfer and Inte
Page 117 and 118: 15:30 Where do we stad now? Gary Gl
Page 119 and 120: Dr. Allyn C. Vine Mr. Malte von Mat
Page 122: 50272.101 PAGE WHOI.90.52 REPORT DO
show all

WHOI-90-52

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?