Industry-University Collaborations in Canada, Japan, the UK and USA – With Emphasis on Publication Freedom and Managing the Intellectual Property Lock-Up Problem

Abstract

As industry-university collaborations are promoted to commercialize university research and foster economic growth, it is important to understand how companies benefit from these collaborations, and to ensure that resulting academic discoveries are developed for the benefit of all stakeholders: companies, universities and public. Lock up of inventions, and censoring of academic publications, should be avoided if feasible. This case-study analysis of interviews with 90 companies in Canada, Japan, the UK and USA assesses the scope of this challenge and suggests possible resolutions. The participating companies were asked to describe an important interaction with universities, and most described collaborative research. The most frequently cited tensions concerned intellectual property management and publication freedom. IP disagreements were most frequent in the context of narrowly-focused collaborations with American universities. However, in the case of exploratory research, companies accepted the IP management practices of US universities. It might make sense to let companies have an automatic exclusive license to IP from narrowly defined collaborations, but to encourage universities to manage inventions from exploratory collaborations to ensure development incentives. Although Canada, the UK and US have strong publication freedom guarantees, tensions over this issue arose frequently in focused collaborations, though were rare in exploratory collaborations. The UK Lambert Agreements give sponsors the option to control publications in return for paying the full economic cost of a project. This may offer a model for the other three countries. Uniquely among the four countries, Japan enables companies to control exclusively most collaborative inventions and to censor academic publications. Despite this high degree of control, the interviews suggest many companies do not develop university discoveries to their full potential. The steps suggested above may rebalance the situation in Japan. Overall, the interviews reveal the complexity of these issues and the need for flexibility on the part of universities and companies.

Collaboration between academics and industry in clinical trials: cross sectional study of publications and survey of lead academic authors

“…For example, previous studies have found that some trial agreements permit funders to block publication. 5 6 7 8 Furthermore, academics have reported problems with stalling of publications, restriction of publication rights, and threats to never fund their institution again owing to reporting of negative results or harms. 9 A survey of Canadian trial investigators found problems in relation to industry control over study design, ownership of and access to data, and data analysis.…”

Leveraging social capital in university-industry knowledge transfer strategies: a comparative positioning framework

“…Online survey with a sample size of 402 respondents. Kneller, Mongeon, Cope, Garner, and Ternouth (2014) To assess industry-university collaborations to understand how companies benefit from these collaborations, and to gauge how academic discoveries benefit all stakeholders: companies, universities and the public.…”

Mapping Spatial and Temporal Changes of Global Corporate Research and Development Activities by Conducting a Bibliometric Analysis

“…The volume of corporate R&D activities can be measured in different ways; for example, by counting the number of patents and/or the number of patent citations (Narin et al, 1987;Chang et al, 2012;Liu et al, 2006;Ribeiro et al, 2010;Ribeiro et al, 2014;Wang et al, 2011;Wong, Wang, 2015); by counting the amount in R&D expenditures (Granstrand, 1999;Kumar, 2001;Piergiovanni, Santarelli, 2013;Yoo, Moon, 2006); by defining the quantity and quality of research cooperation between firms and universities (Feng et al, 2015;Gao et al, 2011;Kneller et al, 2014;Ramos-Vielba et al, 2010); and by the number of scientific articles authored or coauthored by researchers within the firms (Chang, 2014;Furukawa, Goto, 2006;Hicks et al, 1994;Hicks, 1995;Hullmann, Meyer, 2003;Tijssen, 2004;Csomós, Tóth, 2016a). The latter method is confirmed by Narin et al (1987: 144), who addressed the product life cycle of corporations: "Corporate sales lead to corporate profits, which may be used in research and development to produce scientific innovations (scientific publications), which may lead to technological innovations (some of which will be patented), which is the catalyst for new products and more efficient processes, which will increase corporate profits.…”