I will follow my colleague, Len Paplauskas, from the University of
Connecticut Health Center with another, "Is this happening to you
question?"
As, I am sure, has been the case with many research universities,
companies, specially the larger ones, used to farm out to
universities some of their "basic" research. Negotiations over
intellectual property on such projects tended to be somewhat
theoretical, as, frequetly, there was little realistic expectation
that anything truly novel would emerge. At times, of course, it was
otherwise and negotations could be lengthy and tough, since, clearly,
the  very nature of basic research is such that no one knows what will happen.

Today, we are seeing a clear shift. Funding "basic" research seems to
have become a luxury, even for the larger companies. Companies of all
sizes, in particular the mid-size ones, seem to be interested in
universities doing about the same kinds of "jobs" that, let's say, an
engineering firm could do. Universities are very attractive because
they have great interdisciplinay expertise and unique capabilities that may not
be
found anywhere else. This, however, leads to problems in negotiating
intellectual property dispopsition. That is, the sponsor views this
as "contract" research and expects all results delivered like any
other puchased service. The University views this as any other research project
 and expects to have intellectual property disposition negotiated like on any ot
her
contract.
 The companies argue that at a time when state governments
seem to be urging ever greater interaction between universities and
private companies, such university positions are discouraging these
relationships are driving away sponsors. We, however, operate under
the same regulations and policies that have been in place all along
and can not just "give away", for the price of sponsoring a project,
all potentially emerging intellectual property.
Any words of wisdom out there? I am fresh out. Thanks.

Ilze Krisst, PhD
Research Foundation
University of Connecticut