IP is a way of describing what the people in your organization know and are capable of doing (the collected knowledge, work product + people skills knowledge management
BUSINESS or NonProfit
What to do with the IP in their possession?Limited choices with copyrighted materialHow about unique ancient manuscripts to which copyright no longer appliesOption1: Do nothing – preserve in a climate controlled environment. Show it occasionally to patrons.Option 2: Capitalizing on the digital era. Invest in the digitization of the manuscript using cameras and cradles – with not much risk to the manuscript. Can be used as a backup in case original is harmed, stolen, or lost to fire. Or it can shared with researchers .
: company valuation, selling/buying business, loansIP is an unstable asset on your balance sheet -> affected by law, rulings, regulations (Eli Lilly share price)– unlike property as in real estate or fleets of trucks. The cost of a software program is the same if 1 person uses it versus 1 million.IP gains in value the more people use it– a flaw in the whole exclusion concept that companies sometimes adopt (facebook & twitter, museums -> people using digital images - > raises profile and creates more visitors + grant funds ) - MIT sharing its coursesIP is applied to a particular innovative service or productIP do not have to be exclusive! They can be shared in ways that profit multiple parties and benefit consumers. Within a single institution, IP can be exploited in many ways. Apple -> give exampleAUC-> (revenue from info; royalties, licensing, brand) + typical (tuition, alumni donations, research grants)Mixed approach -> great value creation
Do it yourself: Develop on your own (page rank algorithm by google) -> computing, publishing, advertisingThe tricky part: how you protect your IP? Which IP you choose to exploitDevelop with others: Nice note I have about partnerships in my article (front and backend), creativity is a collaboration exercise (Nike + Apple example)Joint venture is an under utilized mode of partnership – it shouldn’t be.You can bring two or more IP portfolios and teams of developers together to innovate in ways that go beyond what you could do within your own organization only - > enhance your existing IP portfolio.License from others: McDonald’s & Disney. You design metal boxes but license kids characters to market the solution (Sesame Street, Disney).From university’s TTO -> licenses technology to private sector (UW heavy in this)
Build on what others are doing when they offer it up broadly – freely offer the opportunity to develop systems that build on and can be integrated with their IP.
Online real estate database that appraises property values using publically available data (e.g., property tax valuation, historic sales data, recent sales, market comparison info, per-square-foot cost data).
Same for universities (some freebee for evaluation purposes, others premium model ….e.g., create YouTube channel or iTunes)MIT and Harvard -> made their journal articles pubic online -> dissemination -> knowledge -> citationsThere are associated worries: reduced revenue for editors, devalue the university experience. MIT benefited from this!Licensing of scientific advancement to the private sector (exclusive or nonexclusive basis -> depends on the mission and decision of univ. royalties can be less for nonexclusive, but higher value to society)Absolutely conceivable that a more open approach to IP licensing could lead to better research, on and off campus, if the ability to make use of the scientific advancements were more broadly and openly licensed.