history, status, and trends for technology transfer in u.s. universities & the stanford model...
Post on 26-Dec-2015
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
History, Status, and Trends for Technology Transfer in U.S.
Universities & The Stanford Model
Presentation by Jon Sandelin
Stanford University
Office of Technology Licensing
jon.sandelin@stanford.edu
http://otl.stanford.edu
Presentation Areas
Methods of Technology Transfer Evolution of University T/T in the U.S. Role of Bayh/Dole and AUTM Current Status of University T/T in U.S. Evolving Trends in the U.S. Types of Industry-University
Relationships at Stanford University
Methods of Technology Transfer
Graduated Students Publications Conferences Visiting Scholars/Industry Visitor Programs Industrial Affiliates Programs Research Sponsorship and Faculty Consulting Licensing to Established Companies and to
Start-Up Companies
Stanford Office of Technology Licensing
Our mission: to promote the transfer of Stanford technology for society's use and benefit while generating unrestricted income to support research and education
Founded in 1970; $55k Royalties 1st Yr To Date: 4,950 Invention Disclosures;
1,320 Issued Patents; 2200 Licenses; $552M in Royalties ($255M from C/B)
OTL FY2002 Results
295 Invention Disclosures $52.7M in Royalties
– high of $61.2M in FY1998– $0.4M from Sale of Equity
111 Licenses Granted; 13 Start-Ups Office Budget of $2.6M; Staff of 25 $3M for Legal Fees ($1.5M reimbursed)
OTL Start-Ups
115 to date; with 75% in last 5 years 45% Medical; 35% Software/IT; 10%
Sensors; 10% Other: Equity in 80% 9 (so far) have failed 15 (so far) Equity Sold for $22 Million
– Abrizio (PMC-Sierra) = $9.7 Million– Amati (Texas Instruments) = $8 Million– Vxtreme (Microsoft) = $0.8 Million
Stanford Policies
Ownership of Intellectual Property– With University if:
• Part of University work responsibilities; or
• More than incidental use of University Resources
Income/Equity Sharing– Royalties: 15% to OTL, then 1/3 each to
Inventors; Inventors Dept; Inventors School– Equity: 1/3 to Inventors; 2/3 to Special Fund
Start of Licensing Activity
1920s: Wisconsin Alumni Res. Fdn. 1930s: Iowa State Patents Foundation 1940s: MIT; Kansas State Res. Fdn. 1950s: University of Minnesota 1960s: University of Utah; Salk Institute; 1969: Stanford University 1970s = 15; 1980s = 82; 1990s = 73
Historical Events
1907: UC Berkeley; Cottrell Patent 1912: Research Corporation founded by
Frederick Cottrell 1925: University of Wisconsin;
Steenbock Patent; Formation of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation
More Historical Events
1927/29: Harvard University; Minot and Murphy invention; Committee Study; Decision not to patent
1951: MIT; Forrester Patent; RCA Interference; Royalties in 1960/70s
1969: Reimers launches Stanford TLO under Marketing Model; Cohen/Boyer $
Evolution of Patenting & Licensing in U.S.
Before 1980 - few U. S. Universities were involved with Patenting & Licensing
1980 - Bayh/Dole Law enacted 1980 to 1990 - SUPA/AUTM facilitates
convergence on Best Practices 1990 to 1999 - AUTM Annual Surveys
document Rapid Growth in University Licensing Results
Bayh/Dole Law of 1980
Option to Ownership of Government Sponsored Inventions (2 Years or 90 Days before Patent Bar Date)
If Option Exercised, Must Patent and Diligently Seek a Licensee
Must Share a Portion of Royalty Income with Inventors Non-Exclusive Royalty-Free License to Government Government Retains March In Rights Preference to Small Business (under 500 employees) U.S. Manufacture if Exclusive License in U.S.
Association of University Technology Managers
Formed in 1974 with 20 Members; Over 3000 Today Becoming an International Association Publications: Directory; Newsletter; Technology
Transfer Manuel (3 Volumes); Journal; Educational Series; Annual Survey
Meetings: Regional; National (Orlando in Feb, 2003); International
Courses: Fundamentals of Licensing; Advanced Topics; Start-Up Business Formation; MultiMedia
Information at: www.autm.net
2000 AUTM Survey
$1,260 Million in Royalties $60 Billion in Licensed Products Sales 400,000 new Jobs 13,032 new Invention Disclosures 6,375 new Patent filings 4,362 new Licenses (12% to Start-Up
Companies)
Invention Disclosures
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
InventionDisclosures
Patents Filed
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
Patents Filed
Licenses Granted
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
Licenses Granted
Royalty Income
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
Royalties inMillions USD
University Spin-Out Facilitation
2002 - Not a Promoted Activity at many U.S. Universities, but starting to change
Where “actively” done, typically by off-campus group e.g., ARCH; WRF; BCM Technologies, C2C -- but changing
No Generally Accepted Model as yet, but AUTM reacting: Courses; Publications
More Prevalent in Europe & Canada
Why Not Spin-Outs?
Fears of Institutional Conflict of Interest– Harvard Incident/1983 Pajaro Dunes Mtg
Labor Intensive Activity; Success in “Licensing-Friendly” Industries– Biotech; Pharmaceutical; Medical Devices
Limited Invention Disclosures with Start-Up Company Potential (but changing)
Few “Success” Stories (also changing)
Trends in the U. S.: Federal Government
Promotion of University/Industry Collaboration– 1980 Bayh/Dole, Etc.– Advanced Technology Program (ATP)– STTR (SBIR extension to include Universities)
Promotion of Federal Labs/Industry Collaboration– 1986 Federal Lab Technology Transfer Act
Tax Incentives to Entrepreneurs
Trends in the U.S.: Industry
Away from Basic Research and to Product-Connected Research
Downsizing of R&D Depts; PhD Graduates to Small Companies and Start-Ups
Acquisition as a Sourcing for New Products Growing Acceptance of Licensing
Trends in the U.S.: Universities
Industry-Influenced Research– Affiliates/Super-Affiliates Programs– Inter (or Cross) Disciplinary Research Centers– Multi-Company Research Collaborations
PhD Graduates to SME’s and Start-Ups Alliances with Overseas Universities
– MIT/Cambridge; Stanford/Edinburgh; UC/Germany
Trends in the U.S.: TLOs
Licensing of Spin-Out/Start-Up Companies– “Qualifying” Inventions for Start-Up– Networking of Angel Investors– Concept2Company and Others
Invention Enhancement Funds Licensing in the Physical Sciences
– Portfolio Licensing with Very Low or No Earned Royalties
Trends in the U.S.: TLOs (2)
Industry Donation of Patents to TLOs Marketing over InterNet New Forms of License Agreements
– Ready-to-Sign License Agreements– Hybrid Agreements
(Patent/Copyright/Trademark)– “Package” Deals (Research/License/Consulting)– Equity only License Agreements
Trends in the U.S.: TLOs (3)
More Option Agreements More Licensing of Tangible Research Products Use of “Plain Language” in Writing
Agreements Loss of Staff to Industry/Training of New Hires Time Spent on Conflict of Interest/Commitment
Issues
Types of Industry-University Relationships
Sponsorship of Research Donations and Gift Funding Interdisciplinary Centers & Collaborations Industrial Affiliate Programs Licensing of University Intellectual Property Classes for Company Employees Visiting Scholars from Industry and Company Employees
teaching at University University-managed Science Parks/Incubators Faculty Consulting
FY2002 Income from Industry
Sponsorship of Research: $42.5 Million Donations and Gifts: $34.7 Million Industrial Affiliates Programs: $17.2 Million Licensing of University I/P: $52.7 Million Classes for Company Employees: $10.4 Million Total for FY2002 is $157.5 Million
Industry Funding by Category
020406080
100120140160180200
Ind ClassesAffiliatesLicensingInd Res SponGifts
Different T/T Models
Legal Model
– Viewed as a Legal process
– Based in the University Legal Office Administrative Model
– Viewed as an Administrative process
– Based in existing administrative office Business/Marketing Model
– Viewed as a business within University
– Independent organization within University
Evolution of T/T Models
1991– Legal Model: only a few– Administrative Model: Almost all– Business/Marketing Model: very few
2003– Legal Model: None– Administrative Model: Minority– Business/ Marketing Model: Majority
Business/Marketing Model
Independent Self-Funded Unit Policies to encourage invention
disclosure and inventor involvement Hire people with entrepreneurial instincts
and business experience Empower people to make all decisions;
Cradle to Grave involvement
THE END
Thank You for your Attention!
top related