Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Roger Cro » Sat, 02 Aug 2003 20:25:50



I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists, inventors, or
researchers towards starting a company in order to commercialise their
IP. I am completing a thesis on this subject would like some feedback
(multiple choice questions).

The survey is at the end of the below link:

http://home.freeuk.com/croftr/research.html

(Please do not laugh at the website!!!)

Cheers

Roger

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Daniel Dudle » Sat, 02 Aug 2003 22:18:47



Quote:> I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists, inventors,
> or researchers towards starting a company in order to
> commercialise their IP. I am completing a thesis on this
> subject would like some feedback (multiple choice questions).

Commercialization of products born out of academic
research by the researchers and for the economical benefit
of the researchers is appalling. First they host their pay
(mostly taxpayer's money) and then extra income based on
what they have produced with that pay. In short, it shows a
disgusting lack of m*responsibility by the persons
involved. :-(

I dare say this will (or should) kick off a hefty debate!

Quote:> The survey is at the end of the below link:

> http://www.veryComputer.com/

> (Please do not laugh at the website!!!)

Can't laugh if I don't visit the website. ;-)

Daniel

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by JXSter » Sun, 03 Aug 2003 00:03:00



Quote:>I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists, inventors, or
>researchers towards starting a company in order to commercialise their
>IP. I am completing a thesis on this subject would like some feedback
>(multiple choice questions).

>The survey is at the end of the below link:

>http://home.freeuk.com/croftr/research.html

>(Please do not laugh at the website!!!)

Well ok, but how about the questionaire itself?  Sufficient
Britishisms to keep off us colonials, and it reads as if you are only
asking graduate students and post-grads about their attitudes, not
corporate researchers, and certainly not developers, of even the most
leading-edge products.

It may even be interesting, although the people you find doing
post-doc research have already self-selected pretty strongly,
methinks.

J.

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Roger Cro » Wed, 06 Aug 2003 22:16:23


I am sorry - I did not mean to offend.

I have selected fairly strongly as the project is about
commercialising IP from Universities, and mainly in the UK.

I do not want to filter out responses, as all opinions are valid - I
would appreciate views on the subject.

Roger Croft

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Slartibartfas » Sat, 09 Aug 2003 01:16:17





> > I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists, inventors,
> > or researchers towards starting a company in order to
> > commercialise their IP. I am completing a thesis on this
> > subject would like some feedback (multiple choice questions).

> Commercialization of products born out of academic
> research by the researchers and for the economical benefit
> of the researchers is appalling. First they host their pay
> (mostly taxpayer's money) and then extra income based on
> what they have produced with that pay. In short, it shows a
> disgusting lack of m*responsibility by the persons
> involved. :-(

Hard to argue with this, but is it not the case that an academic researcher's contract will generally have a clause which assigns to
the academic establishment ownership of inventions made in the course of his or her duties. This is the norm in the commercial
world.

--
#include <stdio.h>
char*f="#include <stdio.h>char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34,10);}%c";
main(){printf(f,34,f,34,10);}

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Daniel Dudle » Sat, 09 Aug 2003 04:16:38







> > > I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists,
> > > inventors, or researchers towards starting a company
> > > in order to commercialise their IP. I am completing a
> > > thesis on this subject would like some feedback
> > > (multiple choice questions).

> > Commercialization of products born out of academic
> > research by the researchers and for the economical benefit
> > of the researchers is appalling. First they host their pay
> > (mostly taxpayer's money) and then extra income based on
> > what they have produced with that pay. In short, it shows
> > a disgusting lack of m*responsibility by the persons
> > involved. :-(

> Hard to argue with this, but is it not the case that an

< academic researcher's contract will generally have a clause

Quote:> which assigns to the academic establishment ownership of
> inventions made in the course of his or her duties. This is
> the norm in the commercial world.

Right, hence the statement: "...a disgusting lack of m*
responsibility by the persons involved."

Daniel

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Jon » Sat, 09 Aug 2003 07:29:34


On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:16:38 -0400, Daniel Dudley wrote







>>>> I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists,
>>>> inventors, or researchers towards starting a company
>>>> in order to commercialise their IP. I am completing a
>>>> thesis on this subject would like some feedback
>>>> (multiple choice questions).

>>> Commercialization of products born out of academic
>>> research by the researchers and for the economical benefit
>>> of the researchers is appalling. First they host their pay
>>> (mostly taxpayer's money) and then extra income based on
>>> what they have produced with that pay. In short, it shows
>>> a disgusting lack of m*responsibility by the persons
>>> involved. :-(

>> Hard to argue with this, but is it not the case that an
> < academic researcher's contract will generally have a clause
>> which assigns to the academic establishment ownership of
>> inventions made in the course of his or her duties. This is
>> the norm in the commercial world.

> Right, hence the statement: "...a disgusting lack of m*
> responsibility by the persons involved."

Typically, academic institutions own patents on the inventions,
and are quite interested in being able to gain income from
those patents. A good way to do that is to start a company
with the academic researcher involved in some way.  The
academic institution profits, the researcher profits,
and new jobs are created.

Patents aren't very profitable if nobody's using them,
and thus licensing them. An ideal way to turn patents
into revenue is to start companies to market products
based on the patents.

I'd be very surprised if MIT isn't going to profit in some
way from the company iRobot, which produces the
'Roomba' robotic consumer vacuum and other robotic
things. Rodney Brooks, director of MIT's AI lab, is
iRobot's Chairman and CTO.

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Daniel Dudle » Sat, 09 Aug 2003 08:42:25



> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:16:38 -0400, Daniel Dudley wrote







> >>>> I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists,
> >>>> inventors, or researchers towards starting a company
> >>>> in order to commercialise their IP. I am completing a
> >>>> thesis on this subject would like some feedback
> >>>> (multiple choice questions).

> >>> Commercialization of products born out of academic
> >>> research by the researchers and for the economical benefit
> >>> of the researchers is appalling. First they host their pay
> >>> (mostly taxpayer's money) and then extra income based on
> >>> what they have produced with that pay. In short, it shows
> >>> a disgusting lack of m*responsibility by the persons
> >>> involved. :-(

> >> Hard to argue with this, but is it not the case that an
> > < academic researcher's contract will generally have a clause
> >> which assigns to the academic establishment ownership of
> >> inventions made in the course of his or her duties. This is
> >> the norm in the commercial world.

> > Right, hence the statement: "...a disgusting lack of m*
> > responsibility by the persons involved."

> Typically, academic institutions own patents on the inventions,
> and are quite interested in being able to gain income from
> those patents. A good way to do that is to start a company
> with the academic researcher involved in some way.  The
> academic institution profits, the researcher profits,
> and new jobs are created.

Why should the researcher profit (in excess of his pay)?

Quote:> Patents aren't very profitable if nobody's using them,
> and thus licensing them. An ideal way to turn patents
> into revenue is to start companies to market products
> based on the patents.

No argument there.

Quote:> I'd be very surprised if MIT isn't going to profit in some
> way from the company iRobot, which produces the
> 'Roomba' robotic consumer vacuum and other robotic
> things. Rodney Brooks, director of MIT's AI lab, is
> iRobot's Chairman and CTO.

But does the taxpayer profit? If academic institutions are
to be run on a commercial basis, then those institutions
shouldn't have a fall-guy behind them (one that will pump
in money when there are bad times in the market). That
amounts to state subsidies, which is considered unfair
practice in the commercial and international trade world.

Just some thoughts for reflection, I certainly don't expect
to see any changes to practices that IMHO have gone on for
all too long.

Daniel

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Peter J. Kootsook » Sat, 09 Aug 2003 10:51:09



> That amounts to state subsidies, which is considered unfair practice
> in the commercial and international trade world.

Tell that to American, European and Australian farmers and see how far
you get!

Ciao,

Peter K.

--
Peter J. Kootsookos

"Na, na na na na na na, na na na na"
- 'Hey Jude', Lennon/McCartney

 
 
 

Attitudes towards comercialising Intellectual property

Post by Jon » Sat, 09 Aug 2003 12:17:36


On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:42:25 -0400, Daniel Dudley wrote



>> On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 15:16:38 -0400, Daniel Dudley wrote







>>>>>> I am very interested in the attitudes of scientists,
>>>>>> inventors, or researchers towards starting a company
>>>>>> in order to commercialise their IP. I am completing a
>>>>>> thesis on this subject would like some feedback
>>>>>> (multiple choice questions).

>>>>> Commercialization of products born out of academic
>>>>> research by the researchers and for the economical benefit
>>>>> of the researchers is appalling. First they host their pay
>>>>> (mostly taxpayer's money) and then extra income based on
>>>>> what they have produced with that pay. In short, it shows
>>>>> a disgusting lack of m*responsibility by the persons
>>>>> involved. :-(

>>>> Hard to argue with this, but is it not the case that an
>>> < academic researcher's contract will generally have a clause
>>>> which assigns to the academic establishment ownership of
>>>> inventions made in the course of his or her duties. This is
>>>> the norm in the commercial world.

>>> Right, hence the statement: "...a disgusting lack of m*
>>> responsibility by the persons involved."

>> Typically, academic institutions own patents on the inventions,
>> and are quite interested in being able to gain income from
>> those patents. A good way to do that is to start a company
>> with the academic researcher involved in some way.  The
>> academic institution profits, the researcher profits,
>> and new jobs are created.

> Why should the researcher profit (in excess of his pay)?

Because, there's a difference between doing the basic
research (in academia), and producing saleable products.

It's rare that the research product is something that
can be packaged and sold.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:>> Patents aren't very profitable if nobody's using them,
>> and thus licensing them. An ideal way to turn patents
>> into revenue is to start companies to market products
>> based on the patents.

> No argument there.

>> I'd be very surprised if MIT isn't going to profit in some
>> way from the company iRobot, which produces the
>> 'Roomba' robotic consumer vacuum and other robotic
>> things. Rodney Brooks, director of MIT's AI lab, is
>> iRobot's Chairman and CTO.

> But does the taxpayer profit? If academic institutions are
> to be run on a commercial basis, then those institutions
> shouldn't have a fall-guy behind them (one that will pump
> in money when there are bad times in the market). That
> amounts to state subsidies, which is considered unfair
> practice in the commercial and international trade world.

I don't think you can assume a given piece of research is paid
for by the government.

However, you might say the taxpayer benefits by having
products available that would not otherwise have been.
The government benefits by having things it can buy
(say, robotic mine removal equipment) that it could not
buy before at any price.

Again, it's the difference between research and the production
of marketable product. Going from research to saleable product
is a significant process. Universities don't produce
marketable products very often.

Research can go on without many of the constraints that are
necessary in the real world. You don't need to bother designing
something that's affordably manufacturable. It doesn't have
to look good. It doesn't have to be easy to use. It just needs
to meet the functional requirements

All that said, I don't think research done in-house at
government agencies should be exclusively licensed. But
someone who worked on the research certainly ought to
be able to start a spin off to make products based
on that publicly available IP.

 
 
 

1. Internet use and attitudes toward computers?

Hi there!  I'm currently working toward a degree in Information Systems
Management at USF.  Towards that end, I am putting together a research
experiment that looks at how positive attitudes towards computers in
general can be facilitated in inexperienced users by having them access the
Internet.  If you know of any related references, I'd greatly appreciate
your sharing them with me.  Please e-mail any references to me at the below
address.  I should have this project completed within the year, and will be
glad to post results to any who are interested.
Thanks very much!

Brian Day

2. doswrite command

3. U.S. troops attitudes towards firing on U.S. citizens.

4. hand scanner with Windows software

5. Communications Morality / Intellectual Property

6. navarone scanner cartridge

7. Intellectual Property Litigation Seminar

8. vic-20 release on fpgaarcade

9. Intellectual Property Rights

10. Intellectual property colloquium transcript and videotape available

11. Intellectual Vitamins & Camoflage

12. JCR Licklider: Towards a Biography (2)

13. Paper for discussion: Towards Implementing Free-will