The following is a list of the articles that appear in the May 2007 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics monthly newsletter.

Subscribe now and get access to this issue as well as access to our online archive of back issues, industry research reports, sample MTAs, legal opinions, sample forms and contracts, government documents and more!

Technology Transfer Tactics,
Vol. 1, No. 1 (pp 1-16) May 2007

• Instructional aids hold revenue potential outside biotech ‘box.’ “Millions and millions of dollars” were earned at Vanderbilt University from courseware developed in its education school, Peabody College, says Peter Rousos, senior business development executive in Vanderbilt’s Office of Technology Transfer and Business Development ………. p. 1
• Royalty stacking clauses: Hidden perils. If you get to the point of actually negotiating royalty rates for your organization’s intellectual property, you may be so happy to have an agreement that you readily agree to any royalty stacking (RS) provision that the other party puts in the contract. Big mistake, say experienced tech transfer experts and attorneys ………. p. 1
• “Rule of thumb” valuation can save dollars, speed license negotiations. Coming up with a valuation acceptable to both parties is one of the stickiest aspects of getting a licensing deal done. Try this quick and dirty approach ………. p. 2
• Tech transfer triage yields boost in disclosures, licensing income, and cost savings. Many technology transfer departments face the same challenge: how to pick the potential winners from a mountain of diverse inventions ………. p. 3
• Baseline metrics for tech transfer professionals. Use these benchmarks to gauge the performance of your tech transfer program ………. p. 3
• “Speed dating” accelerates researcher-industry matches. Introducing your academic researchers to industry scientists and venture capitalists can yield a number of benefits, such as licensees for your technologies, sponsors for research, and financial donors. Yet the traditional ways for such meetings to occur are haphazard and drawn out ………. p. 4
• Dealing with ‘tricks’ during license negotiations. A great deal of “art” factors into whether the terms of the license you sign are as favorable to your organization as possible ………. p. 4
• Heard in the Halls: AUTM 2007 Annual Meeting ………. p. 5
• Save money with MBA students as analysts, start-up managers. Why pay a consultant $10,000 for a single report to analyze an invention when you can hire bright new minds eager to produce the same research at a more reasonable price? ………. p. 10
• Coming soon: eMTAs designed to reduce paperwork, standardize transfer process. As technology transfer professionals struggle with the increasing volume of material transfer agreements (MTAs) and with the complexities involved in transferring materials to and from for-profits, a working group sponsored by the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) is developing a global, web-based secure MTA system ………. p. 12
• Legal Q&A: Do student “helpers” have the right to be named as co-inventors? ………. p. 15