Managing Intellectual Property At Universities of UK
Author: triejie
Eight years after the publication of the first version of the manual intellectual property (IP) of British universities, the Intellectual Property Office of the United Kingdom (IPO, its acronym in English) is launching a new edition of the “Intellectual Asset Management for Universities.” The document seeks to help managers improve the benefits derived from exploitation of IP created in the academic environment for faculty, researchers and students. These strategies, which must vary from case to case, must take into account the need to balance the public interest and commercial return.
The IPO has justified the importance of updating the manual due to changes in the environment of innovation since 2003, as the spread of the type of open innovation, associated with the development of new theories of innovation in the period. Universities should consider its policies three main roles of IP, and they will have different weights depending on the profile of the institution, says the document.
‘IP policy covering negotiating contracts should address not only rights for commercial gain, but also protect, as far as possible, future plans and academic research publication’ The first refers to the fact that a large part of the result provided by the PI – in the broadest sense, not just financial – it serves as support for research and teaching in the institutions of higher education (IHE). Thus, it is necessary to ensure freedom of operation of the institution in the management of IP issues that may generate differences with others, in teaching, research, consulting or services. “IP policy covering negotiating contracts should address not only rights for commercial gain, but also protect, as far as possible, future plans and publication of academic research,” says the IPO.
Second, universities must ensure the effectiveness of the process of transmission of knowledge that has immediate application in society and the economy.
According to the manual, this includes IP strategies for the solution of specific problems of companies and organizations – in order to avoid conflicts of interest by private consultancies provided by teachers, for example – and even to guarantee the PI of innovative models and teaching tools that are used in courses for Continuing Professional Development (CPD, its acronym in English). “Of course we are not just students seeking an academic degree that benefit from the knowledge of the university. CPD generated revenue of £ 500 million [U.S. $ 1.3 billion] in fiscal year 2008-2009 for the universities and means a continuous renewal and updating the knowledge base in the UK. ”
In fiscal 2009-2010, the activities related to IP generated revenues of £ 84 million [U.S. $ 217 million] to British universities Finally, the IPO highlights the importance of creating and managing the result of academic production – mainly achieved publication in scientific journals and also by other forms of public dissemination – but it should also be valued by means of patents and contracts with private companies to develop new technologies. The manual indicates the need for the IP policies pay attention to the free dissemination of knowledge – while considering the possible impact of research in the innovation system – to the emergence of conflicts in cases of sponsored research – for companies or government – to encourage entrepreneurship among students and to technology transfer.
In fiscal 2009-2010, the activities related to IP generated revenues of £ 84 million [U.S. $ 217 million] to British universities, mostly from royalties. According to the Intellectual Property Office of the United Kingdom, however, this is only “a small part of the economic impact” of the new knowledge produced in universities for job creation and innovation. “Universities must be careful not to provide realistic estimates on the profit of IP rights,” the document says, noting that the practical application of the search result “is more important than the simple measurement of the revenue generated.” The manual also stresses that “strategies for the protection of IP rights can be important even in cases where financial returns are small for the institution.”
The results of the exploitation of IP rights may be important for the institutions, although they represent a small portion of revenue from even the most successful universities, the report said. The interaction with companies from British universities and other institutions more than doubled since 2001, says the document, in fiscal year 2009-2010, it generated more than £ 3 billion [U.S. $ 7.8 billion]. Many of these interactions involve PI indirectly, and the direct transactions represent less than 3% of the total, according to the Higher Education Business and Community Interaction Survey (annual survey by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, or HEFCE), although be one of the most valued and visible indicators in the process of commercial application of research.
The IPO believes that each institution makes its own mix of IP strategies to create its own policy that is consistent with its mission, emphasizing vocations and different business models. “The challenge is to recognize how the PI can be used strategically in an individual institution,” says the document. Regardless of the economic climate, the universities that elect to transfer knowledge as a priority – and invest it – will require an appropriate return, he concludes. “This return necessarily include elements of monetary reward for both inventors and the institution, directly and indirectly benefits appropriate to the institution’s charitable status, and economic impact in the form of profits for private companies that can be measured and displayed to their public funders. “
Posted in 
Tags: