![Datos de Stanford de 2008 ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],( http://www.stanford.edu/home/stanford/facts/ ) 2]()
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Presentación de Ximena Ares en la I Jornada del Ciclo OPORTUNIDADES DE NEGOCIO EN SECTORES EMERGENTES. UNA VISIÓN DESDE SILICON VALLEY
Similar to Presentación de Ximena Ares en la I Jornada del Ciclo OPORTUNIDADES DE NEGOCIO EN SECTORES EMERGENTES. UNA VISIÓN DESDE SILICON VALLEY (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Presentación de Ximena Ares en la I Jornada del Ciclo OPORTUNIDADES DE NEGOCIO EN SECTORES EMERGENTES. UNA VISIÓN DESDE SILICON VALLEY
- 1. La Transferencia de tecnología e innovación de academia a empresa. Noviembre 11, 2009 Ximena Ares, Ph.D. Licensing Liaison Stanford University - OTL
- 3. Licenciamiento: inventos a productos 3 Financiación para Investigación adicional La compañía paga regalías a la universidad OTL decide protección intelectual para el invento OTL licencia el invento a la compañía La compañía manifactura nuevos productos Investigador descubre un nuevo invento y entrega un disclosure Dinero federal e industrial para la investigacion
- 6. Inventos notables de Stanford 1970 – se funda OTL 1971 – Síntesis del sonido FM ($22.9M) 1974 – ADN recombinante ($255M) 1981 – Ficobiliproteínas ($38.9M), amplificador de fibra óptica ($26.5M), MINOS ($3.2M) 1982 – Amplificación de genes ($18.5M) 1984 – Anticuerpos funcionales ($61M) 1986 – Electroforesis CHEF ($2M) 1990-1992 – DSL ($17.9M) 1996 – Mejoramiento de búsquedas en hipertexto (Google TM ) 2009 – El próximo invento revolucionario ??? 6
Editor's Notes
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005 Good Evening, my name is Sara Nakashima and I’m a Licensing Associate in Stanford University’s Office of Technology Licensing. I handle a portfolio of about 200 life science inventions at Stanford and I’ve been part of the office for 6 years. Please feel free to ask questions during the presentation. We’ll start with an overview of the presentation. [Slide]
- OTL Overview June 2007
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005 This is a diagram of the licensing cycle. Research money comes in from gov’t and companies (90% federal funds, 10% companies) Researchers discover a new invention and contact OTL OTL evaluates inventions and decides on the IP protection We’re looking at the licensability of an invention, not just whether it’s patentable. We want the invention to be able to bring in considerable income ($100K) if we’re going to patent it (an issued US patent typically costs between $25K-$35K). We also consider whether we can license it without patent protection, which is very pricey -copyright protection for software -TRP or material licenses, e.g. mice, antibodies, cell lines OTL markets the invention and hopefully finds licensees (20%-25% of the disclosures are licensed) The company, or licensee, makes a product and pays royalties to the university. Money goes to fund more research and education. Overall, the licensing money is very little compared to the sponsored research funds that come into the university, but it is unrestricted. (look at OTL annual report for ICO numbers)
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005 2 fold mission statement Transferring technology for the public’s benefit Generating royalties
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005
- OTL Overview June 2007
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005 Stanford OTL started in 1969 -marketing, not legal, focus Stanford philosophy: -we see companies as potential partners to help develop a Stanford technology, rather than a potential infringer of our claims (although we are willing to enforce our patents) -do no harm to basic academic principles (e.g. never delay publication) Licensing is a relationship business, but it requires good technology too. -We will enforce our patents and we’re beginning to audit regularly.
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005
- Tech Transfer in the US and Stanford March 2005