Image via WikipediaIndia govt. spends crores of Rupees on research funding each year and the government has been increasingly focused on how best to commercialize the results. While there are several possible approaches to doing this, the government and some universities have been focused on building patent and IP portfolios as part of a conventional commercialization strategy. The alternative could be an open access approach - encourage (or require) much of the intellectual property to be made broadly available under open licences so that multiple organizations could add value and find ways to commercialize. The universities might generate less income but would better justify the public investment in research by providing the engine for larger economic benefits.
Which approach is better? The full commercialization approach has been tried in the U.S. with legislation known as Bayh-Dole and studies (here and here) have found that patents to universities have increased, but the increase has beenaccompanied by harm to the public domain of science and relatively small gains in income.
The Indian govt. similarly places its faith in commercialization through IP Chair, portfolios and licencing, but the results are not very encouraging. While few would suggest that there is no value in the IP commercialization strategy for universities - there is surely a role for it - the emphasis on this approach as the optimal method of benefiting from crores in public funding for research has consistently failed. Rather, an effective commercialization strategy might recognize that the commercialization is better suited outside the university with funded research the engine for new innovation that is openly available to entrepreneurs without licencing barriers. The public pays for the basic research and might ultimately enjoy far more benefits than the current break-even approach by having more open access to research results.
Which approach is better? The full commercialization approach has been tried in the U.S. with legislation known as Bayh-Dole and studies (here and here) have found that patents to universities have increased, but the increase has beenaccompanied by harm to the public domain of science and relatively small gains in income.
The Indian govt. similarly places its faith in commercialization through IP Chair, portfolios and licencing, but the results are not very encouraging. While few would suggest that there is no value in the IP commercialization strategy for universities - there is surely a role for it - the emphasis on this approach as the optimal method of benefiting from crores in public funding for research has consistently failed. Rather, an effective commercialization strategy might recognize that the commercialization is better suited outside the university with funded research the engine for new innovation that is openly available to entrepreneurs without licencing barriers. The public pays for the basic research and might ultimately enjoy far more benefits than the current break-even approach by having more open access to research results.
Dr.Tabrez writes about the ever-expanding world of Intellectual Property Law,Cyberlaw,Corporate Law including burning issues of other areas of National and International Importance.
