The Abertay Code Bar – unlocking access to university-generated computer games intellectual poperty

Progress report on a digital platform and dual licensing model developed to unlock access to a University repository of new and legacy computer games based Intellectual Property (IP) assets for educational and commercial use. The digital creative industries have been identified by a number of governments as a priority area in delivering sustainable economic growth. Code Bar is an innovation that allows digital products to be commercially successful beyond the end of the Dare competition or coursework submission. To be selected for Code Bar, game products must be well designed for both player and market; technically robust (i.e. operating consistently and reliably on a single/multiple platforms), and be free from ambiguity around 3rd party IP. We describe various technical, pedagogic and legal challenges in developing the digital platform, licensing model and packaging of computer games products for release through the platform. The model is extendable beyond computer games to other software products

CREATe 2012-2016: Impact on society, industry and policy through research excellence and knowledge exchange

On the eve of the CREATe Festival May 2016, the Centre published this legacy report (edited by Kerry Patterson & Sukhpreet Singh with contributions from consortium researchers)

A typology of technology market intermediaries

Technology Market Intermediaries (TMI) are currently emerging on the markets for technologies attempting to realize business opportunities and facilitate the technology and IP transactions supporting firms and other markets actors (e.g. universities). They aim to support open innovation, respectively facilitate more economically technology and particularly IP transactions. However, our understanding of TMIs and their roles needs to be considered incomplete. In this paper I provide evidence on the growing number of TMIs and derived a conceptual basis for a further understanding of TMIs. The inherent difficulties of intellectual property monetization present a challenge for technology based enterprises and business opportunities for IP firms. Following a literature review, I develop a typology for TMIs. Having carried out a review of the literature I compiled a mix of primary and secondary data on about 70 TMIs. Applying the 'nine business model building blocks' from Osterwalder (2004) I identify 12 different TMI types which I then consolidate into six TMI archetypes using the framework for 'business models archetypes' of Herman and Malone (2003). --typology,type,Technology Market Intermediaries

Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software

Open innovation is a powerful framework encompassing the generation, capture, and employment of intellectual property at the firm level. We identify three fundamental challenges for firms in applying the concept of open innovation: finding creative ways to exploit internal innovation, incorporating external innovation into internal development, and motivating outsiders to supply an ongoing stream of external innovations. This latter challenge involves a paradox, why would firms spend money on R&D efforts if the results of these efforts are available to rival firms? To explore these challenges, we examine the activity of firms in opensource software to support their innovation strategies. Firms involved in open-source software often make investments that will be shared with real and potential rivals. We identify four strategies firms employ – pooled R&D/product development, spinouts, selling complements and attracting donated complements – and discuss how they address the three key challenges of open innovation. We conclude with suggestions for how similar strategies may apply in other industries and offer some possible avenues for future research on open innovation

Intermediaries and Innovation: Why they emerge and how they facilitate IP transactions on the markets for technology

With this paper we aim to contribute to the discussion about the difficulties that occur when trading technical knowledge and particularly patents. Currently one can observe that markets for technology have been sizable growing, transaction obstacles are still immanent and technology market intermediaries (TMI) emerge that develop new models aiming to facilitate Intellectual Property (IP) transactions. Why TMIs emerge and how they attempt to facilitate IP transactions however is not yet sufficiently understood. We propose theoretical explanations for these two questions building primarily on the contributions of Stigler (1951) and Williamson (1979). We argue that the growing markets for technologies on the one hand and immanent transaction obstacles on the other hand lead to further division of labor and thus foster the emergence of TMIs. Following Williamson (1979) we propose that the new transaction models developed by TMIs attempt to implement more standardized governance structures in order to diminish transaction costs. However it remains to be seen which of the newly developed models (or those to come) will survive and actually deliver more economic transactions. --

The Impacts of the Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law on IP Commercialization in China & General Strategies for Technology-Driven Companies and Future Regulators

After thirteen years of discussion and three revisions, China\u27s Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) was promulgated on August 30, 2007 and has come into effect on August 1, 2008. It is the first anti-monopoly law in China and has been viewed as an economic constitution and a milestone of the country’s efforts in promoting a fair competition market and cracking down on monopoly activities. However, the wording of some provisions of the AML, including the sections dealing with Intellectual Property (IP) protection, is not very clear. And juridical interpretations and more specific implementing regulations on the AML have not yet appeared. This has led to a lot of uncertainty for the operations of foreign enterprises, particularly IP related enterprises in China. This iBrief will provide an overview of possible impacts of the AML on the IP protection and commercialization in China. First, it will provide a brief overview of the AML, including both major compliments and criticism. Second, it will examine both opportunities and potential legal risks of foreign IP holders and investors when operating in China, particularly focusing on the impacts of Article 55, the IP-related provision. Thirdly, it will provide some practical suggestions and strategies for foreign IP holders and technology-driven companies to operate in China, such as some useful defenses for potential IP lawsuits. Finally, it will provide some suggestions for future interpretation and implementation of Article 55 in the AML by drawing on lessons from the experiences of the United States and the European Union

CHORUS Deliverable 3.4: Vision Document

The goal of the CHORUS Vision Document is to create a high level vision on audio-visual search engines in order to give guidance to the future R&D work in this area and to highlight trends and challenges in this domain. The vision of CHORUS is strongly connected to the CHORUS Roadmap Document (D2.3). A concise document integrating the outcomes of the two deliverables will be prepared for the end of the project (NEM Summit)

Maximizing Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets: Case Studies in Intangible Asset Finance

As innovative companies struggle to raise funds, intellectual property and intangible assets are providing alternative ways of financing innovation. But greater awareness of them as an asset class is needed. Raising that awareness is the focus of a new report from Athena Alliance, Maximizing Intellectual Property and Intangible Assets: Case Studies in Intangible Asset Finance by Ian Ellis, a former U.S. Department of Commerce official specializing in intellectual property and international trade. The report outlines increasing, but still nascent, means of financing innovation based on these assets in public, private and venture capital markets. As industry has invested capital in research and development to develop new technology and advance other creative activities, intellectual capital has become a valuable asset class, according to the paper. In response, firms specializing in intangible-based financing are springing up, using them to raise capital for the next round of innovation.The paper details equity, equity-debt, debt, and sale-leaseback transactions, both private and public, that have helped companies raise capital, based on careful, rigorous analysis and conservative underwriting standards. For example, the author notes that in 2000, there were two public deals using royalty securitization, raising $145 million. In 2007-08,$3.3 billion was raised in 19 deals.Unlike some of the exotic financial vehicles, however, the financial products discussed in this paper are some of the most basic financing mechanisms in business. The innovation is in recognizing the value of intangible assets for corporate finance. These new financial firms are using traditional financial techniques in new ways to help innovative companies.But more should be done.One important step would be developing sound, industry-wide, underwriting standards, according to the report. For example, Small Business Administration (SBA) rules permit its loans to be used for acquisition of intangible assets when buying on-going businesses. Rules are unclear on whether those assets can be used as collateral. The paper recommends that SBA work with commercial lenders to develop standards for using intangible assets as collateral.The report builds on earlier Athena Alliance papers, notably Intangible Asset Monetization: The Promise and the Reality

Intellectual Property Management in Health and Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook of Best Practices, Vol. 1

Prepared by and for policy-makers, leaders of public sector research establishments, technology transfer professionals, licensing executives, and scientists, this online resource offers up-to-date information and strategies for utilizing the power of both intellectual property and the public domain. Emphasis is placed on advancing innovation in health and agriculture, though many of the principles outlined here are broadly applicable across technology fields. Eschewing ideological debates and general proclamations, the authors always keep their eye on the practical side of IP management. The site is based on a comprehensive Handbook and Executive Guide that provide substantive discussions and analysis of the opportunities awaiting anyone in the field who wants to put intellectual property to work. This multi-volume work contains 153 chapters on a full range of IP topics and over 50 case studies, composed by over 200 authors from North, South, East, and West. If you are a policymaker, a senior administrator, a technology transfer manager, or a scientist, we invite you to use the companion site guide available at http://www.iphandbook.org/index.html The site guide distills the key points of each IP topic covered by the Handbook into simple language and places it in the context of evolving best practices specific to your professional role within the overall picture of IP management

Intellectual Property and Innovation: Changing Perspectives in the Indian IT Industry

Indian government has undertaken significant modifications in the IP regime of the country. This will lead to a realignment of business strategies by firms in several sectors. Similarly, with liberalization and globalization, new opportunities for IP creation may emerge for Indian firms. In this context, the paper attempts to document the emerging perspectives vis-�-vis IPRs in the Indian IT industry and explore factors that are driving the change in perspectives. Large IT firms and firms in high-end niche areas are proactively seeking IP based growth strategies. While they typically seek IP protection in Western nations and not so much in India, this has led them to perceive restrictive IP regimes more positively. IP regimes in the West are more relevant for IP creating Indian IT firms today but this may change in the near future as Indian market expands. Significant IP creation by MNC subsidiaries in India is also contributing to this change in perception. Survey data show that an average IT firm in India also perceives IP protection as an important appropriability mechanism, but access to markets and relevant complementary assets continue to be more important for appropriating profits from their economic activity. A positive view of the restrictive IP regimes also gets reflected in the demands of Indian industry associations for changes in the Indian law. Broadly, these changes in perceptions seem to be linked to the evolving global production networks, changing activity profile of Indian IT firms, emerging business opportunities and changes in the competitive scenario. The understanding of Indian IT firms of the complexities of IP regimes remains rudimentary and they will need significant preparation to deal with these IP related challenges.