Tech Transfer Central
Industry-Sponsored Research Management

Technology Transfer Tactics, September 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, September 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the September 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 9, September 2017

  • TTOs assess many factors to make decisions on PCT conversion. Let’s say you have a promising biomedical discovery, but with the provisional patent about to expire, there is still no licensee. A decision must be made on how — or even whether — to keep patent protection on the discovery alive.
  • Moving software through the tech transfer process requires speed, finesse. Apps and software are becoming more common in TTO portfolios, but they may require a slight reworking of how you think about IP and guide it to commercialization, experts say.
  • Indiana U refocuses tech transfer on industry engagement, splits off start-ups. Indiana University is restructuring its tech transfer operations, moving most of its traditional industry-facing work out of the non-profit Indiana University Research and Technology Corp. and back under direct university control, while splitting off start-ups as the sole purview of IURTC.
  • “Commercialization Guide” makes an impact as outreach tool for Penn. The Penn Center for Innovation’s (PCI) Commercialization Guide, published in early June, is a publication designed to serve as a “one-stop-shop” for faculty and graduate students interested in learning about the key steps in the commercialization process, and is considered an important part of PCI’s outreach efforts.
  • GA Tech undergraduate entrepreneurship programs yield three successful exits. CREATE-X, an initiative comprising multiple entrepreneurship programs for undergraduates launched at Georgia Tech in 2014, has already created 81 start-ups from 26 majors, earning over $2 million in follow on investments, including three venture-funded start-ups that have been acquired by other companies. The CREATE-X founder, Raghupathy Sivakumar, professor and Wayne J. Holman Chair in the school of electrical and computer engineering, credits its success with strong support from successful alumni and curricula based on a “learn, make and launch” approach.

Posted September 19th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, August 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, August 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the August 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 8, August 2017

  • Supreme Court takes up inter partes review: Is relief in sight? The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that calls into question the very nature of inter partes review and could relieve patent holders — and TTOs — of what has become a thorn in their sides that has kept many potential licensees on the sidelines given the risk of an IPR challenge.
  • TTOs looking to deal directly with patent annuity management firms. In the classic tune “Accentuate the Positive,” composer Harold Arlen advises the listener, “Don’t mess with mister in-between.” It seems that some TTOs have taken that advice to heart when it comes to managing patent annuities.
  • Analysis of survey data makes the case for a metrics revamp. Is it time to get beyond just counting the number of disclosures, licenses, start-ups and the like to gauge technology transfer success? Arundeep Pradhan, the co-founder of APIO, a Portland, OR-based consulting firm, makes the case.
  • NYU entrepreneurship program using podcasts to promote start-ups. When thinking about social media, TTOs and other university tech transfer organizations may not often consider partnering with a radio station, but that’s exactly what NYU’s Entrepreneurial Institute has done recently, creating a series of podcasts called “Talking Startups at NYU.”
  • Maximize collisions and minimize friction for best TTO performance. TTOs can maximize their performance by adopting a model that fosters as many connections with industry as possible while making it as effortless and trouble-free as possible to license the university’s inventions, according to the experience at Boston University.
  • “Vortex” universities thrive on retaining talent to build innovation ecosystem. The right people with the right skills and ideas are such a critical resource in innovation that universities should prioritize the accumulation of “a supercritical mass of human talent” in the community, suggests a prominent tech transfer expert from the University of California.

Posted August 18th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the July 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 7, July 2017

  • Sovereign immunity growing as inter partes defense, effect on licensing terms unclear. The University of Florida’s successful use of sovereign immunity to end an inter partes challenge was no fluke, as two other schools are using the same defense and legal analysts say it will become a reliable strategy for some universities.
  • Faculty-friendly IP policy nurtures innovation, attracts industry sponsors. Without the Bayh-Dole Act, research institutions in Canada are free to develop IP policies without worrying about whether or not research is funded by government entities. This has prompted many universities there to adopt some version of a creator-owned IP policy, granting generous rights to inventors.
  • NMSU offers ‘research-only’ license to stimulate more start-ups. The TechMatch program at New Mexico State University’s Arrowhead Center offers a research-only license as an incentive to get would-be entrepreneurs interested in one of several hundred technologies just waiting for someone to turn them into start-ups. It’s a key element of the program — essentially a self-serve menu of innovations backed by a web of interlocking support services designed to push products to market — but it’s just one arrow in the quiver.
  • Silicon Valley event opens doors for U of Arizona research. Musicians dream of playing Carnegie Hall and start-ups dream of pitching in Silicon Valley. Both can be long shots, but Tech Launch Arizona, the commercialization arm of the University of Arizona in Tucson, recently held an event at which its start-ups told their stories to investors in the epicenter of innovation and entrepreneurship.
  • ‘Creative Destruction Lab’ launches successful start-ups accross Canada. If a start-up program set as its goal to have its “graduates” create a total of $50 million in equity over the first five years, and those companies instead created over $1 billion in equity in four and a half years, you’d have to say that was a pretty darn successful program.

Posted July 18th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, June 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, June 2017The following is a list of the articles that appear in the June 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 6, June 2017

  • University cozies up to patent troll and sparks more debate. University tech transfer offices usually want to stay far away from the criticism aimed at patent trolls trying to squeeze money out of companies with questionable infringement claims, so eyebrows were raised when Louisiana Tech University partnered with a company widely criticized for trolling.
  • TTOs struggle to adjust patenting, licensing strategies under the America Invents Act. As its moniker suggests, the America Invents Act (AIA) was supposed to make things better for innovators, but nearly seven years after the AIA was signed into law, reviews in the university technology transfer community are decidedly harsh.
  • Emory uses data on workload and efficiency to help manage staffing decisions. In many ways, the world of tech transfer is not unlike other industries in the U.S. when it comes to staffing challenges: to hear employees and management tell it, there is constant pressure to do more with less. Lack of resources is certainly not a new issue in technology transfer, but there can be specific instances when it really hits home.
  • UT-Austin’s start-up ‘studios’ make valuable connections for faculty innovators. The University of Texas at Austin’s Innovation Center — housed at the Cockrell School of Engineering — is hosting monthly get-togethers where faculty inventors present their discoveries, inventions and start-ups to small, informal groups of local industry experts and entrepreneurs.
  • The top 10 license agreement issues that lead to litigation, and how to avoid them. As difficult as license agreement negotiations can be, when they are not handled with utmost care they can lead to something even more challenging: Litigation. To help tech transfer professionals minimize that threat, Anne Stratman, associate general counsel at the University of Arizona, prepared the “Top Ten Most Frequently Litigated Provisions in University Agreements” for attendees at the 2017 AUTM annual meeting.

Posted June 19th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, May 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, May 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the May 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 5, May 2017

  • Lean Startup principles offer valuable insights for tech commercialization. While Lean Startup methodology, first put forward in 2008 by Eric Reis and widely disseminated by serial entrepreneur Steve Blank, has been adopted by many in industry, it has not caught on quite as quickly in technology transfer circles.
  • U of Arkansas goes where the money is for funding — to the Athletics Department. Tech transfer leaders might admit to gazing out at the football stadium on a Saturday afternoon and dreaming of seeing the massive revenues generated by college games funneled to research and innovation. Sure, universities might direct a trickle of athletic funds in that direction, but at some schools there is just so much revenue generated from football, basketball, and other sports.
  • Changing the mindset: Boosting faculty engagement still a challenge for TTOs. Quick: Name a major department at a university that has been in place for years, and yet many faculty members are not aware that it exists and/or have little idea what it does. If you said “tech transfer office” you’d be dead on, at least in the minds of several experts who participated in a panel at the AUTM 2017 annual meeting.
  • Legal Consult: Mistake by Congress in AIA puts thousands of university patents at risk.
  • Make “reverse pitch” part of your strategy for bringing technologies to marketplace. A “reverse pitch” approach to moving technologies to market — the umbrella name for any number of variations on the theme of potential partners pitching their technology needs to innovators instead of pitching technologies to potential partners — should be an arrow in every university’s commercialization quiver, its proponents stress. It focuses on technologies that companies already know they want, and moves them forward with an eye on the business realities of creating new markets.

Posted May 17th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, April 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, April 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the April 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 4, April 2017

  • With start-ups given more weight, TTOs look for new ways to gauge performance. With stakeholders pushing universities to show more results in the economic development realm, tech transfer professionals are more favorably disposed toward nurturing start-ups than ever before. However, given that traditional metrics demonstrating performance in this area can be misleading, innovative TTOs are coming up with new and different ways to not only show that their start-ups are real and sustainable, but also that their value is being compounded down the line.
  • Study suggests that university incubators may impair innovation quality. Even the authors admit they were surprised by their findings: that incubators, by draining resources from other university departments and offices, can impair the overall quality of university innovations.
  • Indiana U partners with nearby engineering school to make prototypes. A unique technology commercialization collaboration between affiliates of two universities – Indiana University Research and Technology Corp. and Rose-Hulman Ventures – is coming off its most productive year yet, and the two say the key is each institution focusing on what it does best. The partnership is giving IURTC an easy, hand-off means of creating prototypes for many of its innovations.
  • How to use peer review to guide TTO performance improvement. We’re all familiar with the warning: Be careful what you wish for. And that can certainly be true if you seek to learn the “absolute truth” about your TTO’s performance. But that is the aim of a peer review assessment process discussed in a panel session at the AUTM 2017 Annual Meeting last month.
  • Social responsibility clauses in university IP license remain rare. Social responsibility efforts seem to fit well with the TTO mission to serve the public good, but despite a number of efforts to promote IP license clauses focused on social responsibility, few deals actually contain these provisions.

Posted April 18th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, March 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, March 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the March 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 3, March 2017

  • Prioritizing customer service goals, Hopkins TTO promises quick response on disclosures. When Neil Veloso, the executive director of technology transfer at Johns Hopkins Technology Ventures in Baltimore, MD, began looking for a way to improve the TTO’s approach to reviewing invention disclosures, he had multiple goals in mind. “We wanted to be responsive to the PTO’s first-to-file model, and we wanted to provide transparency and more rigor in how we are responding to our inventors.”
  • UF’s sovereign immunity case bodes well for state schools, may offer a marketing advantage. The University of Florida’s reliance on sovereign immunity to prevail in a patent challenge could represent a new defense for state schools, but the ruling isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card.
  • TTO adopts new strategy based on ‘technology scoping and venture packaging.’ The commercialization team at Missouri University of Science & Technology set out about four years ago to tweak the school’s approach to moving innovations into the marketplace. They didn’t want to abandon the old ways, but the need to build a better mousetrap was clear.
  • Four TTOs join forces for first-ever online technology showcase. Even technology transfer itself can use a better mousetrap now and then, and commercialization staffers at four universities came together last month to produce what they’re calling the first-ever live online Technology Showcase.
  • Heard in the Halls: AUTM 2017.
  • Tech transfer veterans share best practice guidance on gap funding. Nobody said setting up and operating a gap fund was easy. If it were, there wouldn’t be an initiative like Mind the Gap.
  • Pooled mentors-in-residence assist U Michigan’s “sister” universities statewide. Universities challenged by a lack of resources (and who isn’t these days?) have often found that collaboration can be an effective way to expand their commercialization efforts.

Posted March 21st, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, February 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, February 2017 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the February 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 2, February 2017

  • Standardized processes, skilled mentorship ensure the success of new licensing managers. how do TTOs go about the task of preparing new recruits to take on the job of licensing manager?
  • TTOs standing ground on infringement, more willing to sue. Universities are increasingly finding the courage and the resources to stand up and fight when their patents are infringed, with the University of Minnesota’s lawsuit against Gilead Sciences just the latest in a series of challenges to powerful companies. The stakes are high enough for UM to risk defeat, and that calculation is likely to be the determining factor when other schools decide whether to pursue litigation.
  • Emory’s proof-of-concept funding program: A little can mean a lot. Funding for early-stage university start-ups doesn’t have to mean big money — in fact, often it’s the little bit of initial funding that gets these fledgling business over a critical early hurdle and on their way to bigger things. That’s why a growing number of universities are establishing pre-seed funding programs — many of which make only a handful of awards and award only a few thousand dollars at a time.
  • UNH addresses student IP with policy, targeted agreements, communication. With a growing number of programs helping undergrads become more active in entrepreneurship and commercialization, issues surrounding student IP ownership have taken on increased importance.
  • UNeMed’s boot camp training program brings new blood into tech transfer. The long-term health of any tech transfer office depends in large part on building the knowledge base of students and faculty across campus — getting those who have an inkling of interest to better understand and participate in university commercialization activity. Having a formal education and training program has been a big step in the right direction for UNeMed, the University of Nebraska Medical Center’s TTO.

Posted February 15th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, January 2017 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, January 2017 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the January 2017 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 11, No. 1, January 2017

  • Tech transfer leaders find pathways to change are full of obstacles and opportunities. No one escapes the process of change, and every few years, it seems, a university’s innovation engine goes through a process of realignment.
  • Universities creating more pre-seed funds to fill the gap, attract later investors. The importance of early stage financing isn’t a recent discovery, but universities across the nation are establishing — and, in many cases, continuing to pump money into — pre-seed funds designed to maximize the often scarce very early money that can make or break a promising idea.
  • Video campaign helps expand awareness of UC system innovations. A new campaign whose basic marketing vehicles are videos shot by entrepreneurs out of the University of California system has been launched to help innovators gain exposure to each other, to potential investors/partners, and to increase awareness of the depth of creativity that has been generated at UC campuses.
  • Student-led innovation center boosts start-ups, provides real-world experience. Universities go to great lengths and expense to provide the latest and greatest technology and tools for innovators, but students don’t always have easy access and they often are not encouraged to work together on multidisciplinary projects. The engineering school at New Mexico State University is addressing those issues with a peer mentoring program.
  • Discovery-based learning for undergrads feeds more campus innovation. During the 2015-16 academic year, a select group of undergraduate students at North Dakota State University had six invention disclosures, applied for one patent, had 13 grants funded, published nine journal papers, gave 32 conference presentations, received 11 awards and earned seven master’s degrees. These students were all participants in the “discovery-based learning” program at NDSU, designed to provide real-world experience in research, project planning, budget development, negotiation, collaboration and dissemination of findings.

Posted January 18th, 2017

Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the December 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 12, December 2016

  • Hopkins’ restructuring enables specialization, nets impressive commercialization results. A little over two years ago Johns Hopkins embarked on a restructuring which resulted in Johns Hopkins Technology Ventures, comprised of three distinct but interrelated arms. The Hopkins restructuring, carefully molded together over a period of study and benchmarking, could serve as a roadmap of sorts for other TTOs looking to position their commercialization efforts for future growth.
  • For early-stage start-ups, try a SAFE approach to attracting investors. Not many technology transfer offices have used a Simple Agreement for Future Equity (SAFE) to help fund a pre-income start-up, probably because it isn’t specifically a TTO-focused instrument. But it’s a tool that TTOs and their start-ups may wish to consider.
  • Departing and incoming faculty present IP challenges for TTOs. Any employee departure requires attention from the human resources department, but what if the departing employee is a university faculty member with IP interests? What if their invention is now being handled by a corporate partner? What if an incoming faculty member has interests they retain?
  • Global EIR programs help universities retain foreign start-up founders. The U.S. election and the incoming administration’s harsh immigration stance may change things moving forward, but universities seeking to boost their technology commercialization efforts can still set up global entrepreneur-in-residence programs that facilitate foreign-born innovators’ entry into the U.S.
  • Marketing Roundup: Tech transfer marketing ideas literally saved from natural disaster.
  • Despite the hype, equity crowdfunding has few takers among university start-ups. Tech transfer leaders and their university start-ups now have the option to use equity-based crowdfunding, but relatively few are using it and success stories are hard to come by.

Posted December 21st, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, November 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, November 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the November 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 11, November 2016

  • Do you practice what you preach on patent prosecution? Check your data. Many technology transfer office directors believe they have established a coherent patent prosecution strategy — but they might be surprised if they look back at their own decisions.
  • As their mission expands, TTOs adopt new metrics to showcase a broader view of contributions. Performance metrics have long been a topic of hot debate among technology transfer professionals as TTOs try to find new and better ways to document their.
  • UPenn lawsuit shows need for keeping close watch on licensees. The University of Pennsylvania’s lawsuit against biotechnology company Genentech illustrates the importance of monitoring royalty payments closely and taking action on underpayments before the situation gets out of hand.
  • Idea Champions are key in total revamp of Notre Dame’s commercialization efforts. Rising expectations have led to a total revamping of the University of Notre Dame’s commercialization structure, resulting in the recently formalized “IDEA (Innovation, Discovery and Enterprise Acceleration) Center.”
  • Pros, cons, and practical challenges of sabbaticals for faculty involved in start-ups. Universities looking to facilitate more start-up activity increasingly are eyeing sabbatical and faculty leave policies to make sure they’re as commercialization-friendly as possible.
  • University in UK creates “managed service solution” for express licensing. University TTOs seeking to become involved with express licensing have, depending upon their resources, several different options. They can create a new agreement and employ their internal IT department to integrate it into their system; they can work with an outside consulting firm to do the same; or they can invest in the use of a platform that, while being used by a number of other TTOs, can be customized for their marketing and licensing purposes.

Posted November 21st, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, October 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, October 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the October 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 10, October 2016

  • Expert blasts standardized equity share agreements for university start-ups. The equity shares required by many universities in their standard license agreements with faculty start-ups cause such agreements to ultimately be unfair to one of the parties, according to Scott Shane, PhD, the A. Malachi Mixon III Professor of Entrepreneurial Studies and professor of economics at Case Western University.
  • TTOs largely silent about new effort pressuring universities to cut ties with patent trolls. Do university TTOs do too much business with patent assertion entities, also referred to as patent trolls? The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a donor-funded nonprofit that advocates for civil liberties in the digital world, certainly thinks so.
  • New quick license does not include equity share element. A new quick license model, introduced about a year ago by Kansas University, differs from many that have preceded it in at least one important area: It does not require an equity share from the start-up.
  • Easy Access IP model still gaining users as option in TTO licensing toolkit. The Easy Access IP model continues to attract adherents and interest from universities hoping the approach will spur interest in IP that otherwise might go unlicensed and undeveloped.
  • How industry-sponsored research can dovetail with funding for faculty start-ups. The twin mandates to produce more start-ups and at the same time generate more industry sponsorship can be aligned by better bridging the two disciplines, according to several tech transfer leaders.
  • ‘Physicianeers’ to spur innovation in novel medical/engineering school. It sounds like a dream come true for tech transfer professionals — a physician inventor who understands the engineering every bit as much as the clinical side of the innovation. It might sound unlikely, but finding that unique combination of talents could become more common when Texas A&M University opens its new medical school for physician engineers.

Posted October 17th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, September 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, September 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the September 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 9, September 2016

  • Mayo tech transfer team uses “reverse pitch” strategy to attract more entrepreneurs. Mayo Clinic’s “Think Big Challenge” is not brand new; this month will see the second annual iteration of the event. However, what will be new is an element that appears to flip the traditional approach of “pitching” on its head.
  • Industry-sponsored research deals getting more attention, coming in more varieties. Examples of innovative arrangements between university researchers and corporate product development are increasingly common. One veteran tech transfer executive says that’s at least in part a function of the corporate side of the equation improving its input into the collaborations.
  • NC State’s “IP Free Zones” help define policy, attract student innovators. The term “IP Free Zone” is so relatively new that there is not common agreement as to exactly what it means – and a number of leading tech transfer executives are totally unfamiliar with the term.
  • ‘Startup-in-a-box’ program goes the extra mile to help faculty launch companies. The Indiana University Research & Technology Corporation in Indianapolis has found success with a program called “Spin Up” that devotes an extra measure of assistance to university start-ups.
  • More TTOs work with non-university IP to spur regional economic development. More technology transfer offices are working with non-university IP. In many cases, it’s part of an overhaul of the commercialization ecosystem — often to better integrate the school’s efforts with the economy of the surrounding community.
  • Cambridge Enterprise outreach effort extends to non-technology departments. At Cambridge Enterprise at the University of Cambridge, would-be entrepreneurs in departments not traditionally associated with commercialization have a unique resource in the form of a program called Enterprise Champions.

Posted September 16th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, August 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, August 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the August 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 8, August 2016

  • Patience, creativity required to find top CEO talent for university start-ups. People involved in nurturing university start-ups will tell you the toughest challenge they face is finding capable talent to come in and take the reins from the scientific founders. Such a move is almost always essential to giving these ventures the kind of launch that brings in investors and gives the fledgling companies a shot at success, they maintain. However, successfully building a business based on new technology requires a specific skill set that is especially hard to find.
  • Harvard’s proactive PR in justifying patent litigation called best practice for tech transfer. As university tech transfer officials begin to see litigation as a more viable option when their patents are infringed, some are also seeing the need to explain themselves better to the public. Most people know little about tech transfer and intellectual property rights, but litigation has a bad reputation and critical media reports are sure to explain the idea of a “patent troll” to readers.
  • Pre-accelerators offer critical early-stage guidance and a bridge to start-up creation. University and investor efforts to support technology commercialization at the earliest possible stage have created entities termed “pre-accelerators,” whose name pretty well explains where they fit in the tech transfer process. But what some call “a trend” others call “business as usual.” Many universities, it turns out, already perform or support the functions of a pre-accelerator without actually calling it by that trendy name.
  • U Denver’s Project X-ITE offers lessons in building an integrated model of innovation. It’s no secret that Denver, Colorado is experiencing an entrepreneurial renaissance, and a novel new initiative at the University of Denver (DU) aims to centralize and drive innovation both within the institution and throughout the city’s booming start-up scene.
  • Licensing Law Roundup: Cases address arbitration in IP license agreements.

Posted August 16th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the July 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 7, July 2016

  • TTOs hunt for investors, new commercialization opportunities in overseas markets. Virtually every TTO is under constant pressure to find more partnerships and sign more deals that are far from easy to secure. But what if you expanded your territory — and your potential chances for success — by setting up shop on the other side of the globe? That’s the thinking behind a growing number of international initiatives TTOs are spearheading in the hopes that they can eventually leverage new ties overseas into benefits with lasting impact at home.
  • Standardized four-phase process leads to influx of industry partnerships. This past June, the Office of Innovation and Industry Alliances at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, FL, announced a three-year deal with Incyte Corp. in Wilmington, DE, to fund three new oncology research programs. This latest agreement caps off a roughly two-year span where the Innovation Office has reaped some $35 million in funding from industry partnerships.
  • NIH, AUTM warn about lax Bayh-Dole compliance among TTOs. Tech transfer programs may need to reassess their Bayh-Dole compliance program after recent warnings from the National Institutes of Health and the Association of University Technology Managers, which both say universities are risking the rights to their inventions if they get complacent.
  • Yissum maximizes IP marketing efforts by harnessing social networks. As the effectiveness of social networking in tech transfer has become increasingly apparent, more and more TTO leaders have engaged with a number of social networks to enhance their marketing efforts. But while many have enjoyed some level of success from their endeavors, it is unlikely that few, if any, can match the nearly 40,000 LinkedIn connections and impressive business achievements achieved by Tamir Huberman, MSc, BSc, vice president of business development for computer science and IT director at Yissum Research Development Company of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem Ltd.

Posted July 18th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, June 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, June 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the June 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 6, June 2016

  • TTO’s focus on service, business metrics wins over faculty and boosts commercialization output. Additional resources will help any technology transfer operation improve its performance, but what if you also set new expectations and metrics that are specifically aimed at catering to the needs of faculty and researchers? Would such an approach have an appreciable impact on commercialization output? That’s what new leadership at Morgantown, WV-based West Virginia University wanted to know.
  • $25 million settlement with Apple puts NPE licensing strategy back in spotlight. A $24.9 million settlement is noteworthy for the value alone, but how Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute came to that agreement offers insight to tech transfer programs about working with non-practicing entities and challenging big players like Apple. The strategy can work, and it may be more common than you think.
  • What is the “right” royalty share for faculty inventors? Would your university be signing more licensing deals if it would just give its faculty a bigger slice of the royalty pie?
  • Arizona State’s California outpost leads to unique EdTech partnership with west coast VC. They say that few “overnight sensations” really happen overnight, and that is true as well for commercialization partnerships — even though there may often be a dash of good fortune in the recipe. That certainly seems to apply to the recent announcement of The ASU Draper GSV Accelerator.
  • Licensing law roundup. Each year at the AUTM Annual Meeting, Russell E. Levine, a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, gives a talk on the Top 10 Court Cases Affecting Licensing, and a key message from the past year’s crop is this: There are few bright lines around what to do and what not to do. Courts still struggle to balance the many moving parts of license agreement negotiation and contracting, often leaving university TTOs to use their best judgment in crafting documents. Here’s what Levine has to say about the latest patent licensing lawsuits and what TTOs need to know about them.

Posted June 20th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, May 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, May 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the May 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 5, May 2016

  • To grow more valuable start-ups, focus on scaling up from day one. With all the work, resources, and expertise required to form a start-up, it can be easy to forget that you haven’t crossed the finish line and really have only begun the race.
  • New model of industry collaboration relies on systematic start-up creation. A new model of industry-academia collaboration being applied by a pharmaceutical giant is very rapidly turning university innovations into start-up companies — and in many cases just as quickly shutting the start-up down if the technology fails to reach early milestones.
  • Tech Launch Arizona brings SBIR/STTR assistance under its wing. Tapping into a rich pool of nondilutive funding for university start-ups seems like the perfect job for tech transfer offices, but many TTOs are letting some of that money slip away.
  • Pitt runs successful crowdfunding campaign to boost its student accelerator. Crowdfunding is a relatively new tool in the TTO arsenal for raising start-up funding, but as the University of Pittsburgh has now demonstrated, it can also be a fantastic means of attracting dollars for tech transfer initiatives.
  • University angel networks joining forces to boost start-up funding. “. . . And Duke passes the ball to UNC, who in turn passes it to NC State . . .” You’d never hear those words during the broadcast of an athletic event, and yet universities well-known for their athletic rivalries have proven once again that “competition” is a tricky word when it comes to commercialization of research.
  • Ohio Attorney General boosting tech transfer with unique statewide resource. Technology transfer offices in Ohio are benefitting from an unconventional resource provided through the State Attorney General’s Office: a dedicated Intellectual Property Counsel who supports entrepreneurship throughout the state with best practice information, legal guidance, and an online commercialization reference portal.

Posted May 19th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, April 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, April 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the April 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 4, April 2016

  • Student IP policies under scrutiny as universities seek balance, but pitfalls persist. It has always been a challenge to make sure that an ever-revolving roster of faculty researchers fully understands an institution’s IP policies. However, in recent years, as undergraduate students have become increasingly engaged in entrepreneurial activities, this challenge has intensified.
  • Special Focus: Start-up strategies for rural universities Technology transfer offices in “flyover” states and more rural areas rarely have easy access to start-up essentials like investors and seasoned entrepreneurs. However, the lack of a ready-made entrepreneurial ecosystem doesn’t mean that universities outside of urban tech corridors can’t launch viable start-ups that contribute to regional economic development.
    • Finding money for start-ups: No easy answers for rural TTOs.
    • Case study 1: University of Wisconsin-Madison.
    • Case study 2: Iowa State University.
    • Case study 3: Oregon State University.
  • UCLA’s blockbuster Xtandi deal shows value of royalty monetization. A hot property can put tech transfer leaders in the position of having to decide whether to bank on future royalties or take the money and run, and the recent blockbuster deal the University of California, Los Angeles made for its cancer drug Xtandi shows just how important that decision can be.
  • Experts share top strategies for creating sustainable proof-of-concept centers. Establishing a proof of concept (POC) center can give a tremendous lift to university tech transfer efforts, but based on a panel of presenters discussing POC best practices at the recent AUTM annual conference in San Diego, not everyone agrees on how and where POC programs work best.

Posted April 20th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, March 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, March 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the March 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 3, March 2016

  • Establish rigor, system of regular review to optimally manage IP assets. Granted, there is no quick-and-easy way to manage a patent portfolio, but letting things slide is certainly not the answer. Not unless you like the public scorn that often accompanies financial mismanagement.
  • Bring in outside CEO at the right time, when founders are no longer enough. The most successful start-ups have founders who are passionate about the company and eager to lead it into the next stage, but in most cases the faculty founder is not going to be the right person to serve as CEO in the long run. Helping researcher-entrepreneurs understand that and make the transition requires some finesse from tech transfer leaders.
  • U Minnesota unveils royalty-free option in its MN-IP program. Listening to your customers is a key to success in virtually any field, and it is clear that the operators of the University of Minnesota’s MN-IP licensing program have put that principle to good use. While their initial standardized licensing options in the program have proven very successful, the university recently introduced a third option.
  • How to enhance integration between TTOs and sponsored research. Technology transfer, sponsored research and corporate engagement offices must work more closely together than ever, but as activity in each accelerates, finding common ground can be difficult.
  • Heard in the Halls: AUTM 2016.
  • University start-ups benefiting from event scholarship program. What if university tech transfer offices could reduce or eliminate barriers to entrepreneurship by providing business-minded, but financially strapped, students with the funds needed to attend start-up events such as pitch competitions and venture fairs? That’s precisely what’s happening at a select handful of universities, thanks to a campus-based entrepreneurship program called Blackstone LaunchPad.

Posted March 18th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, February 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, February 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the February 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 2, February 2016

  • New program gives faculty the time and space to test out promising technologies. Proof-of-concept funding is great, but what if faculty innovators also have the gift of time to prove out the viability of their discoveries, the guidance of successful entrepreneurs, and the ability to take students along on the ride? This is the thinking behind the new Faculty Entrepreneurial Fellows program in the College of Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  • Navigate carefully around duty-to-enforce clauses in license agreements. Duty-to-enforce clauses in IP licenses are often tricky, since TTOs and their licensees are typically at polar opposites. Licensees want the university to commit to enforcement, and universities want no part of it. Something’s gotta give.
  • TTO’s online platform offers easy access to low value technology. Every university has technology that may be promising for commercial development but not in a way that has buyers rushing to offer huge sums of money, and those projects often are neglected in favor of technology that promises a bigger return. The technology transfer office at the University College Dublin in Ireland has developed an online platform that increases the exposure of lower-value technology and offers a streamlined, cost efficient way to sell it.
  • WSU’s peer mentoring program aims to build on tech transfer successes. Success breeds more success, and that’s exactly the rationale behind a new peer-to-peer faculty mentoring program launched at Washington State University.
  • Best Practice Spotlight: A successful strategic partnership between a business school and a TTO.
  • Non-profit start-up aims to get more Purdue drug candidates across Death Valley. Only a small fraction of drug candidates ever make it out of the lab to the commercial marketplace, and in many cases – tragically – it’s not because the drugs fail, it’s because the money to bring the drugs forward fails to materialize.

Posted February 19th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, January 2016 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, January 2016 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the January 2016 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2016

  • New APLU report recommends including tech transfer work in P&T decisions. With pressure to contribute more on the economic development front, universities appear to be slowly coming to the realization that important changes are needed in the way faculty are recognized and rewarded in decisions regarding promotion and tenure.
  • UChicagoTech unveils new ‘one size fits all’ express license. They may not be the first to do so, but the University of Chicago’s Center for Technology Development & Ventures believes it has benefitted from the experiences of others, benchmarking existing express license programs to help develop its own, called the UCGO! Startup License.
  • Contingency fee deals for universities remove key barrier to patent enforcement. The cost of enforcing a patent in court may lead some TTOs to shy away from litigation, but with an increasing number of contingency-based law firms looking to work with university patent owners, cost should no longer be a deciding factor.
  • WARF’s big infringement win over Apple offers lessons for universities. The recent jury verdict and $234 million award in favor of the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation over tech juggernaut Apple Inc. is the latest victory for university licensors over well-heeled corporate giants, and it offers some lessons for TTOs.
  • Guest Column: 8 lessons learned from the Model IIA project. A diverse group of research institutions from across the U.S. created a Model Inter-Institutional Agreement (IIA) as a common starting point to streamline the IIA process. This article discusses some of the important lessons learned from the project.
  • In ‘Buy Blue’ program, U of Toronto becomes early customer of its own start-ups. Universities often talk about supporting their faculty and student start-ups, offering everything from space to mentorship. But at the University of Toronto, that support is now also coming in the form of a major customer — the university itself — thanks to a new initiative called “Buy Blue.”

Posted January 19th, 2016

Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2015 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the December 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 12, December 2015

  • Universities getting more attention as new models of early-stage investing emerge. As universities continue to push for more commercialization of their valuable research, venture capital firms are taking notice like never before, finding new ways to lock in access to these technologies at just the right time.
  • Purdue launches express license, adds more start-up support. That Purdue University has simultaneously launched two initiatives aimed at increasing entrepreneurial activity in Indiana is not a coincidence; while each is an independent program, one will likely not succeed without the other.
  • Universities revising IP policies in response to evolution of tech transfer. The world of tech transfer is no more static than the industries it serves, and some universities are realizing that their intellectual property policies are out of date or just need clarification for today’s challenges.
  • TTO at U New Hampshire takes charge of trademark licensing. The licensing of trademarks, especially at large universities with prominent Division I teams, has typically been handled by athletic departments. Even at smaller institutions, such as the University of New Hampshire, athletic directors have had a lead role — either for the entire trademark licensing effort, or at least when it came to athletics trademarks. But at UNH the situation has changed significantly.
  • VC partnership models highlight importance of early stress-testing. As university technology transfer offices strive to expand commercialization, an increasing number of them are turning to the services of venture capital firms to manage and maximize early-stage development of their start-up companies.
  • TTOs devise creative partnerships to help their start-ups grow. University TTOs are expanding their partnership efforts in new ways, looking to expand their services and impact by linking up efficiently with outside entities in a variety of creative ways.

Posted December 16th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, November 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, November 2015 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the November 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 11, November 2015

  • What makes a great university start-up accelerator? Whoever coined the term “accelerator” knew what they were doing. After all, what TTO or university would not want to accelerate the rate at which license agreements were signed, start-ups were successfully launched, or the entrepreneurial ecosystem was strengthened?
  • Free legal clinics offer needed expertise to cash-starved university start-ups. It’s no secret that technology-based university start-ups are generally starved for cash, and that makes it tough to access the legal assistance that budding entrepreneurs need to establish the right kind of structure and negotiate around potential speed bumps.
  • Wake Forest Baptist partners with investment firm for tech development. Tech transfer programs are finding that partnerships with commercial interests can open up possibilities for faculty and student researchers at early stages in the development of a technology.
  • U Buffalo’s TTO revamps logo for greater clarity, linkage with economic development. The University at Buffalo’s Office of Science, Technology Transfer and Economic Outreach has completed a redesign of it signature mark to serve a dual purpose: to more clearly communicate its mission, while at the same time establishing a design linkage with other economic development units.
  • Guest Commentary: Consider outsourcing options when faced with production and scale-up challenges.
  • Alliances become critical as framework for building innovation ecosystems. For innovations from any one organization to have a meaningful impact on a region, it has become clear to most in the research commercialization arena that a vibrant ecosystem is a critical overarching need. Bringing research, funding, mentorship, executive talent, industry, and other resources together is becoming part and parcel of the tech transfer mission as it expands to include not only protecting and licensing university IP, but also supporting economic development and job creation.

Posted November 17th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, October 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, October 2015 coverThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the October 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 10, October 2015

  • Researcher merry-go-round: Best practices for handling departing faculty. This summer, a legal battle between the University of California at San Diego and the University of Southern California in Los Angeles highlighted just how contentious disputes over research and other intellectual property can become when a faculty member departs one university for another institution.
  • Target reluctant deans, department heads to remove barriers to tech transfer. Are your tech transfer efforts being sabotaged? That may seem like a silly question more appropriate for a Hollywood script, but in fact many TTOs have experienced a subtle form of sabotage from their own deans and department heads who eschew innovation efforts in favor of more traditional tenure-focused activity.
  • “Affinity” alumni funds can bring new investments to university technologies. Flying your school’s colors or invoking its spunky mascot in efforts to find investors among alumni can give a big shot in the arm to university-based technologies, whether the investment vehicle is a function of the university itself or that of an outside organization focused exclusively on opportunities emanating from the investors’ alma mater. Just make sure the institution’s administration is fully on board and that the traditional technology transfer office has a seat at the planning and execution table, advise those who’ve launched successful alumni funds.
  • Radio series offers valuable PR, exposure for tech transfer at Ohio U. What university TTO wouldn’t want to see its faculty inventors, start-ups, and other innovation leaders in its region featured on a wide-ranging radio series with the potential of reaching audiences nationwide? The beneficiary of just such an opportunity is Ohio University. The series, called “Innovation Conversations,” will initially include 15 interviews, and because of its early success it will be expanded even further, touting technology commercialization and entrepreneurship both at the university and in the region of southeastern Ohio.

Posted October 20th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, September 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2015 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the September 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 9, September 2015

  • Don’t let disputes over royalty splits, inventorship spoil TTO relationships. It can take many years for a discovery to make it to the marketplace, so it is always a great day when the royalties start rolling in. But when an innovation has many fathers, perhaps from multiple institutions, disputes can arise over how to divide up the earnings. This can and does happen despite what it may say in contracts or agreements, and even though the matter may have been “settled” years earlier. And long, expensive court battles can certainly put a dent on those royalties.
  • As IPO market booms, should universities be managing their equity stakes? Technology transfer offices eyeing the IPO market may wish they could stay involved with more of their start-ups through the initial public offering phase and beyond — and thereby reap far greater financial benefits than they do by simply selling off equity at the first opportunity.
  • Research tools are great licensing opportunity — if you do it right. Licensing research tools presents enormous opportunity for tech transfer offices, potentially bringing in needed revenue while you wait for a long-term technology to mature, suggests a university leader experienced with this strategy.
  • Third-party firms seek to assist resource-starved TTOs. One of the most common complaints heard from TTO executives is that they suffer from inadequate resources, be it budget, financing for startups, staffing – you name it. Recognizing these needs, a number of new companies have sprung up with the goal of providing some or all of the services most TTOs are not able to fund in-house. TTT spotlights three such firms: Apervita, which has chosen to tightly focus on health analytics and data; Market Square IP Ltd., which is willing to take on the challenge of marketing IP that TTOs have decided to abandon; and IN-PART, which seeks to strengthen universities’ ties with industry by locating the precise individual in each company best suited to respond as a potential partner.

Posted September 16th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, August 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2015 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the August 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 8, August 2015

  • In move to boost economic development, ASU’s TTO offers services outside the university. In a move signaling the increasing importance of regional economic development to TTOs, Arizona State University has launched the “Startup Mill,” offering the university’s commercialization services and resources on a fee-for-service basis to non-university entrepreneurs and start-ups.
  • In wake of painful state audit, new review charts a course for Utah tech transfer efforts. When a high-profile, multifaceted commercialization effort runs aground, how do you turn things around? It certainly isn’t easy, especially when there are several stakeholders involved. However, this is precisely what administrators of the Utah Science Technology and Research (USTAR) initiative intend to do.
  • UNC-Chapel Hill cancer center hastens medical innovation with “speed dating” event. The UNC-Chapel Hill Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center recently hosted a “speed dating” forum and medical technology competition in an effort to boost innovation and solve real-world clinical problems. The event matched surgeons with engineers – two groups who, despite working in the same university system, don’t often have a chance to interact.
  • Accelerator programs for health technologies fill gaps in funding and expertise. There are ways to successfully navigate the “valley of death” in health-related technology commercialization, but it takes the right connections to make it happen.
  • Lessons learned from university crowdfunding: Don’t expect too much. Crowdfunding has gained in popularity among tech transfer offices and university research labs, but some also are learning that raising money this way isn’t simple or guaranteed. Those who have been through the process a few times say they learned lessons along the way that can make any crowdfunding effort more successful.

Posted August 18th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, July 2015 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the July 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 7, July 2015

  • U Washington TTO relaunches as CoMotion and expands focus to ‘innovation transfer.’ By any measure, the University of Washington (UW) in Seattle has seen some significant successes in the realm of technology transfer. However, this past January UW embarked on a three-year plan to rebrand and relaunch its former TTO (the Center for Commercialization) as CoMotion, a collaborative, entrepreneurial hub for what the university is calling “innovation transfer.”
  • MIT lab’s Translational Fellows Program injects a needed dose of entrepreneurship. An MIT professor and lab director has devised a way to help assess promising technologies while also encouraging post-docs to get involved in entrepreneurship by putting budding scientists to work on what has typically been a tech transfer professional’s job – doing what amounts to customer discovery as part of invention analysis.
  • As negatives rise, PAEs become less attractive to TTOs. Many TTO directors have long been wary of working with patent assertion entities (PAEs), but have been tempted nonetheless by the prospect of someone else doing the work of patent enforcement and the university receiving part of the revenue.
  • LLCs offer advantages for university start-ups, but beware of tax implications. The acronym “LLC” has become an easily recognizable term in the business community, but while these entities certainly have come into favor among entrepreneurs, limited liability companies have not yet become a staple in tech transfer.
  • Wichita State promotes local economic development with new job creation program. Wichita State University (WSU) is pursuing its goals of fostering local economic development and enhancing student experiential learning through a new self-funded organization called Ennovar. The unique partnership not only creates new jobs for university grads, it also generates revenue for the school in the form of company stock for every new hire culled from the campus.

Posted July 20th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, June 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2014 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the June 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 6, June 2015

  • Avoid post-grant reviews with defensive prep, but know when to settle. It used to be that getting a patent was the big hurdle for commercializing your IP, and after that you could focus on getting it to market without worrying too much about protecting your rights. That is changing dramatically with the advent of patent challenges in the form of post-grant reviews at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
  • TTO creates roadmap to recovery from nightmare of financial disarray. It’s the stuff of nightmares for tech transfer professionals, but for MSU Technologies it was a living disaster.
  • Universities in high-stakes battle over CRISPR patents advised to settle. The potentially billion-dollar battle over gene splicing technology under way between the University of California and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was probably unavoidable, given the proximity of the closely related discoveries made at both institutions. But the combatants in this case, if they’re smart, will end up sharing the financial benefits after the dust settles — and may well have an agreement in place already to do just that.
  • Cases illustrate importance of both oversight and outreach on ethics, conflict-of-interest. With research institutions pushing harder than ever for faculty to commercialize IP and test their entrepreneurial prowess, conflict-of-interest issues have become more complicated — indeed, some would say treacherous — than ever. But tempting as it may be to simply relegate ethics and COI rules to thick faculty manuals, the evidence is quite strong that this will hardly suffice.
  • A win-win: Business students get great experience, TTOs get extra manpower. Two prominent research universities have established innovative arrangements that give business students valuable real-world experience by providing opportunities to perform due diligence and other commercialization activities, which in turn contribute to the market advancement of institutional discoveries.

Posted June 17th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, May 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2014 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the May 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 5, May 2015

  • Realizing potential: Keys to nurturing female-led innovation. Female participation in innovation and technology transfer activities is becoming a spotlight issue at many universities, thanks in part to the forward-thinking women leaders participating in the Association of University Technology Managers’ Women Inventors Committee.
  • Don’t accept equity dilution as inevitable with university start-ups. Dilution of the university’s equity is sometimes seen as an unfortunate but inevitable part of the start-up process, with any efforts to mitigate the dilution bringing their own risks of scaring away investors. That’s not the only way to look at preserving your equity, however, and some TTOs are taking a more proactive approach to keeping their share of promising companies.
  • Engage in customer discovery process to ensure innovations have a ready market. Ensuring that your TTO’s innovations have a market to sell into is one of the most critical challenges in managing your IP portfolio. Getting assurance that a product or start-up will find enough customers — or alternatively finding that a ready source of eager customers does not exist — helps ensure you’re putting your eggs in the right basket.
  • Washington U puts women innovators on the fast track. The Office of Technology Management (OTM) at Washington University in St. Louis just completed its second annual Women in Innovation and Entrepreneurship (WIE) event, an education and networking series that builds the commercialization knowledge and skills of women, who are traditional innovation underperformers at universities nationwide.
  • New Reg A+ rules from the SEC broaden access to capital. At last, the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued rules for Regulation A+ under Title IV of the JOBS Act — a long-awaited move that will enable companies to seek investment from both accredited and unaccredited investors in what could be called small-scale initial public offerings of up to $50 million within a 12-month period.

Posted May 19th, 2015

Technology Transfer Tactics, April 2015 Issue


Technology Transfer Tactics, December 2014 IssueThe following is a list of the articles that appear in the April 2015 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter. If you are already a current subscriber click here to log in and access your issue. Not a subscriber already? Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics
Vol. 9, No. 4, April 2015

  • Streamlined approach to faculty-owned start-ups eliminates haggling, up-front expenses. A top-tier university in terms of research productivity should be brimming with opportunities for innovation and entrepreneurship, but bureaucracy and other obstacles can certainly get in the way, and that is precisely what has been going on at Washington University in St. Louis.
  • When licensees go belly up: Here’s what TTOs need to know. In the world of early-stage technology, bankruptcy is an unfortunate fact of life.
  • TTOs urged to move ‘at the speed of business’ and increase deal flow. Veteran technology transfer executive Lee M. Taylor, JD, MBA, who’s now Vice President of Technology Sourcing at Edison National Medical, Charlotte, NC, has this to say about negotiating license agreements: “Negotiating for royalty rates is an almost complete waste of time.” While the wording of his assertion is, he acknowledges, intentionally provocative, his point is not.
  • Emory OTT celebrates staff achievement with unique teambuilding activities. Staff in Emory University’s OTT are treated to clever and amusing diversions such as monthly contests and celebratory bell-ringing to encourage and reward achievements.
  • U of Arizona creates a full menu of opportunities to attract student innovators. If your TTO’s outreach and support efforts are focused solely or primarily on faculty, there’s a very high likelihood that you’re not capturing potentially blockbuster IP and high-growth start-ups.
  • Early X Foundation does deep dive on latent IP to find new markets and applications. Early intervention is proving to be one of the strongest drivers for commercialization of IP.
  • Lines blur between tech transfer, economic development as schools focus on impact. As pressure continues to mount on universities to demonstrate the impact of commercialization efforts, the lines between tech transfer and economic development functions are blurring.

Posted April 17th, 2015