National Academies Press: OpenBook

Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century (2016)

Chapter: 10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer

« Previous: 9 Ethical, Legal, and Regulatory Framework for Human Subjects Research
Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×

10

Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer

As noted in Part 1 of this report, the National Research Council (NRC) observed in 2010 that:

Discovery, learning, and societal engagement are mutually supportive core missions of the research university. Transfer of knowledge to those in society who can make use of it for the general good contributes to each of these missions. These transfers occur through publications, training and education of students, employment of graduates, conferences, consultations, and collaboration as well as by obtaining rights to inventions and discoveries that qualify for patent protection (intellectual property) and licensing them to private enterprises. All of these means of knowledge sharing have contributed to a long history of mutually beneficial relations among U.S. public and private universities, the private sector, and society at large.1

The management of intellectual property derived from federally funded research is largely governed by the legal framework promulgated by the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-517, Patent and Trademark Act Amendments of 1980). The act fostered greater uniformity regarding the manner in which agencies treat the inventions arising from sponsored research. In most instances, research institutions are permitted to take title to inventions derived from basic research supported with federal funding, and the act encourages universities to become much more active in seeking to commercialize their faculties’ inventions.2 However, the primary goal of academic technology transfer is the dis-

___________________

1National Research Council. Managing University Intellectual Property in the Public Interest (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010), p. 1.

2Recently, as the result of litigation regarding university versus university employee ownership of inventions (see, e.g., Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.), universities have modified employment documents to indicate that university employees

Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×

semination and development of scientific inventions for the public good. The costs associated with the development and maintenance of institutional capabilities for the transfer of intellectual property are borne by universities; only in rare instances are these costs recovered from patenting and licensing income.

As the result of increased university patent and licensing activity credited to the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act, questions were raised regarding which principles should govern this type of activity in a university setting. In 2006, representatives of a dozen major research universities met to draft a set of points for consideration by universities when making decisions about technology licensing. The resulting document, entitled “Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology,”3 was subsequently endorsed by more than 100 other research universities and organizations, including a number of non-U.S. universities, the Association of American Medical Colleges and the Association of University Technology Managers. The document set expectations that:

  • “Universities should reserve the right to practice licensed inventions and…allow other non-profit and governmental organizations to do so”;
  • “Exclusive licenses should be structured in a manner that encourages technology development and use”;
  • “Universities should anticipate and help to manage technology transfer related conflicts of interest”; and
  • Universities should “be mindful of the implications of working with patent aggregators” and “consider including provisions that address unmet needs, such as those of neglected patient populations or geographic areas, giving particular attention to improved therapeutics, diagnostics and agricultural technologies for the developing world.”

The 2010 NRC report Managing University Intellectual Property in the Public Interest later examined the role and significance of the Bayh-Dole Act on technology transfer:

One purpose of the Act was to provide consistency within federal agencies with respect to inventions developed with federally funded research. The broader purpose of the Act was to ensure that publicly funded inventions should, whenever possible, enhance the public welfare through commercialization of technology to contribute to public

___________________

hereby assign to the university the rights to inventions and patents conceived or developed using university resources or facilities.

3California Institute of Technology et al., “In the Public Interest: Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology,” March 6, 2007. Available at: http://www.autm.net/AUTMMain/media/Advocacy/Documents/Points_to_Consider.pdf.

Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×

health, government missions, job creation, international competitiveness, economic growth, and other public goods.4

The 2011 Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, the first major change in U.S. patent law in more than 60 years, also has significant implications for the management of university intellectual property. The act created a “first-inventor-to-file” system that harmonizes the U.S. patent system with that of trading partners across the globe; improved patent quality by strengthening the quality management and standards processes of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; and by creating more efficient alternatives to the courts for challenging patents, allows challengers an opportunity to eliminate weak patents and strengthen patents that survive a patent challenge;5 and provided mechanisms to reduce both the backlog of patent applications and patent litigation.

Nature of Concern

While the Department of Commerce issued the regulations implementing provisions of the Bayh-Dole Act, federal research funding agencies are responsible for overseeing university management of intellectual property in accordance with the act. The act requires institutions to provide data to agency sponsors of research on inventions that result from the funded research. This reporting is accomplished through the Interagency Edison (iEdison)6 invention reporting system. iEdison was developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and allows government grantees and contractors to report via the web all federally funded subject inventions, patents, and utilization data to the agency that funded the research.

The iEdison reporting system is cumbersome to use, is not used by all agencies funding research, and the frequency and quantity of reported information is extensive.

Analysis

The iEdison system is inadequately staffed and maintained, making it difficult for universities to comply with agency requirements. Federal agencies do not uniformly use iEdison for invention reporting,7 and those that use the system

___________________

4National Research Council. Managing University Intellectual Property in the Public Interest (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010), p.16.

5Association of American Universities, Association of American Medical Colleges, American Council on Education, and Association of Public and Land-grant Universities to Association Constituencies, June 4, 2011, available at: http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Memo-on-Patent-Reform-Reminder-to-Support-the-America-Invents-Act.pdf.

6See https://era.nih.gov/iedison/iedison.cfm.

7NASA, for instance, does not utilize the system.

Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×

may require the submission of additional information beyond what is required by the Bayh-Dole Act.

Furthermore, there is a lack of clarity regarding the frequency and quantity of data required by iEdison reporting about inventions when compared with the actual reporting requirements of the Bayh-Dole Act.8 Data entry is not a onetime event, as additional data have to be provided over the lifetime of the patent.9 The requirement to report annually (for up to 20 years, the life of the patent) on the large percentage of inventions that are never successfully licensed by universities (less than half of U.S. patents issued by U.S. higher education institutions are successfully licensed, and of that, less than half generate income)10 is particularly burdensome.

Uploading documents in iEdison can be very complicated. Frequent error messages prevent successful entry of data regarding inventions. Few improvements have been made to iEdison since the system was implemented nearly 20 years ago. Staffing is inadequate to implement needed changes to system infrastructure. Those who spoke to the committee identified inadequate funding as a primary reason for the failings of the iEdison system.

Findings

The Bayh-Dole Act is successful federal legislation. The concepts enshrined in the act, wherein universities are empowered to self-govern their actions, are a model for other regulations for the oversight and management of federally funded research. As the authors of the 2010 NRC report observed, “The Bayh-Dole Act removed the inconsistencies with regard to performer rights and was followed by a surge in patenting and licensing activity as well as in universities’ capacities to undertake this activity.”11

Upgrades to the iEdison invention reporting system and uniform data reporting requirements would help expedite the entry of data by university technology transfer offices and reduce the administrative workload for university inventors and technology transfer offices. While the National Institute of Stand-

___________________

8See, e.g., Council on Governmental Relations, “Meeting Report, October 27 and 28, 2011,” (November 18, 2011), available at http://www.cogr.edu/COGR/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000000246/151875.pdf and Association of University Technology Managers, “Advanced Bayh-Dole Compliance Discussion’” (2016 Annual Meeting), available at http://www.autm.net/2016-annual-meeting/schedule/filter/track-d/d4-advanced-bayh-dole-compliance-discussion/.

9National Institutes of Health. “iEdison Reporting Timeline.” See https://era.nih.gov/iedison/invention_timeline.cfm.

10See Association of University Technology Managers, “AUTM U.S. Licensing Activity Survey: FY2014,” available at http://www.autm.net/resources-surveys/research-reports-databases/licensing-surveys/fy-2014-licensing-survey/.

11National Research Council. Managing University Intellectual Property in the Public Interest (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010), p. 3.

Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×

ards and Technology has, by statute, federal responsibility for examining, reporting on, and recommending changes to the Bayh-Dole Act and related technology transfer policies,12 the maintenance of iEdison is funded solely by NIH.

A requirement that all research funding agencies use the same patent reporting system and adhere to the same Bayh-Dole Act patent reporting requirements would reduce the administrative burden for both inventors and university technology transfer offices.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The committee recommends that:

10.1. Congress should transfer responsibility for the operation of the invention report system (currently iEdison) to the Department of Commerce and allocate appropriate resources to the department for upgrading the invention reporting system so as to create a user-friendly interface for the input of data on inventions.

10.2 The Department of Commerce, in consultation with the proposed Research Policy Board, should develop a uniform set of requirements regarding the frequency and type of data to be submitted to federal agencies regarding invention reporting, ensuring that these do not exceed what is required by the Bayh-Dole Act.

10.3 Congress should authorize the Department of Commerce to require that the invention data reporting obligations imposed on recipients of federal funding by all agencies are aligned with agreed-upon reporting requirements.

___________________

12The Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, has authority over “functions relating to the promulgation of regulations pertaining to the ownership of inventions made with federal funding, the licensing of inventions owned by the Federal Government, and the ownership of inventions made by Federal employees under Section 6(a) of the Bayh-Dole Act (35 U.S.C. 206-209) and E.O. 10096, as amended by E.O. 10930.” See http://www.osec.doc.gov/opog/dmp/doos/doo30_2a.html.

Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×
Page 171
Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×
Page 172
Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×
Page 173
Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×
Page 174
Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×
Page 175
Suggested Citation:"10 Reporting of Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
×
Page 176
Next: 11 Research with Select Agents and Toxins »
Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $65.00 Buy Ebook | $54.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Research universities are critical contributors to our national research enterprise. They are the principal source of a world-class labor force and fundamental discoveries that enhance our lives and the lives of others around the world. These institutions help to create an educated citizenry capable of making informed and crucial choices as participants in a democratic society. However many are concerned that the unintended cumulative effect of federal regulations undercuts the productivity of the research enterprise and diminishes the return on the federal investment in research.

Optimizing the Nation's Investment in Academic Research reviews the regulatory framework as it currently exists, considers specific regulations that have placed undue and often unanticipated burdens on the research enterprise, and reassesses the process by which these regulations are created, reviewed, and retired. This review is critical to strengthen the partnership between the federal government and research institutions, to maximize the creation of new knowledge and products, to provide for the effective training and education of the next generation of scholars and workers, and to optimize the return on the federal investment in research for the benefit of the American people.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!