Economics and National IPR Policy of India

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pankaj Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Ipr Policy

Technology Transfer and IPR Policy for Small and Medium Firms in South‐East Asia1

Prometheus ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Macdonald ◽  
Tim Turpin
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Ipr Policy ◽  
Medium Firms

Intellectual property rights policies of higher education institutions (HEIs) in India: a cross-sectional study

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vijay Kumar Sattiraju ◽  
Ravi Pandey ◽  
Ramjee Pallela ◽  
Anindya Sircar ◽  
Virendra S. Ligade ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Innovation Practices ◽  
Ipr Policy

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess the intellectual property (IP) policy and innovation practices of higher education institutions (HEIs) and to understand the impact of national intellectual property rights (IPR) policy at the ground level. It identifies the barriers of HEIs in the generation of IP, its commercialization and technology transfer. Design/methodology/approach This cross-sectional study aims to understand the innovation practices and IP policy framework of HEIs in India. It was studied in a qualitative approach with a structured questionnaire tool deployed to the top management of HEIs (targeted respondents), using convenience sampling methods. Findings The results imply that IP policies and innovation practices of HEIs in India are evolving and need to align with the global standard as envisaged in the national IPR policy. Lack of commensurate incentives to the inventors, linkages with industries and facilities were found to be major barriers among HEIs and research institutions. Institutional IP policy shall be framed to promote industry linkages with universities resulting in successful IP generation and technology transfer. Research limitations/implications The sample size in this study is less; however, it does not have an impact on the study outcome, as it is a qualitative approach. Practical implications This study brings awareness among stakeholders of IP generation and commercialization regarding the barriers and needed changes to overcome them through policy. Social implications It helps policymakers to redesign the tools of IP and innovation policy to enable the innovation promotion at HEIs. This study identifies innovation practices and institutional barriers in the generation of IP. Originality/value This qualitative survey-based study helps in understanding the innovation practices of HEIs in India. It also aims to identify the barriers of HEIs on the generation and commercialization of IP.

Standards, Patents and Mobile Phones

2010 ◽  
pp. 235-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudi Bekkers ◽  
Joel West
Keyword(s):  
Mobile Phone ◽  
Mobile Phones ◽  
Policy Effectiveness ◽  
Firm Strategies ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Ipr Policy ◽  
The Impact

The impact of patents and patent royalties are a major concern of standards setting organisations. Here we examine the patents filed in the UMTS 3rd generation mobile phone standard, governed by the ETSI IPR policy in response to patent issues faced during the earlier GSM standardization. We contrast firm strategies and policy effectiveness between the GSM and UTMS efforts, and review the potential impact of potential changes to the ETSI IPR policy.

Interpreting and Enforcing the Voluntary FRAND Commitment

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger G. Brooks ◽  
Damien Geradin
Keyword(s):  
Public Law ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Contractual Obligation ◽  
Ipr Policy ◽  
Judicial Method

Although often debated as though it were public law, a FRAND undertaking is a private contract between a patent-holder and an SSO. Applying ordinary principles of contract interpretation to the case of ETSI IPR policy reveals that “interpretations” of FRAND advocated by some authors—including cumulative royalty limits, royalties set by counting patents, or a prohibition on capture by the patent-holder of any gains created by standardization—cannot be correct. Rather, a FRAND obligation leaves wide latitude to private parties negotiating a license. However, this does not mean that a FRAND commitment has no substance to be enforced by courts. In this paper, the authors review how, consistent with both contract principles and established judicial method, courts can enforce a contractual obligation to offer licenses on FRAND terms, without becoming IPR price regulators. Similarly, ordinary principles of contract interpretation reveal that the “non-discriminatory” portion of FRAND cannot be interpreted to be coextensive with common “most favored nations” provisions, but instead contemplates substantial latitude for private parties to negotiate terms suited to their particular situations.

An Empirical Examination of Impact

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-171
Author(s):  
Kirti Gupta ◽  
Georgios Effraimidis
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Development Organizations ◽  
Working Groups ◽  
Ieee Standards ◽  
Standards Development ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Ipr Policy ◽  
Specific Definition

In February 2015, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-Standards Association (IEEE-SA)—one of the largest standards development organizations (SDOs)—adopted highly controversial changes to its intellectual property rights (IPR) policy. It introduced a specific definition of fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) licensing terms. The aim of this article is to explore how the new patent policy has impacted different aspects of standards development within IEEE. Our analysis focuses on the IEEE 802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee (IEEE 802 LMSC), whose Working Groups have been responsible for the design and development of widely used technologies such as Wi-Fi and Ethernet. The empirical findings suggest a decline in Letters of Assurance, with several patent holders reluctant to license under the new FRAND terms. We also find that the number of new projects initiated (or Project Authorization Requests; PARs) in the intellectual property(IP)-intensive IEEE standards (namely the 802 WGs) has recently decreased, suggesting a potential slowdown of the growth rate of innovation after the policy change.

IPR Policy of the DVB Project

2011 ◽  
pp. 260-383
Author(s):  
Carter Eltzroth
Keyword(s):  
Digital Video ◽  
Digital Video Broadcasting ◽  
Common Rule ◽  
Video Broadcasting ◽  
Technical Work ◽  
Ipr Policy

The DVB Project is a European-based standards forum that for close to 15 years has been developing specifications for digital video broadcasting, many now implemented worldwide. Its IPR policy has several novel elements. These include “negative disclosure,” the obligation of each member to license IPRs essential to DVB specifications unless it gives notice of the unavailability of the IPR. This approach contrasts with the more common rule (e.g., within ANSI accredited bodies) calling for IPR disclosure and confirmation of availability on FR&ND terms. Other notable features of the IPR policy of DVB are arbitration and fostering of patent pooling. This article provides a commentary on the DVB’s IPR policy and on its application. It also describes the work of the DVB in resolving IPR “gateway” issues when the perceived dominance of technology contributors, notably through control over IPRs, risked, in the view of some members, distorting new digital markets. In two cases, DVB has created a licensing mechanism to dispel these concerns. In addition to the quality of its technical work, DVB’s success lies in its novel IPR policy and its ability to achieve consensus to resolve gateway issues.

The Roadmap for Enhancing University–Industry Research Collaboration in India

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prateek Kumar ◽  
Roopali Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Domestic Industry ◽  
Policy Paradigm ◽  
Research Collaborations ◽  
Industry Research ◽  
Development Agenda ◽  
Scientific Outputs ◽  
Ipr Policy ◽  
University Industry

In this age of technology-led development and stiff international competition over Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), developing countries, with their limited financial capabilities, face the challenge of creating appropriate environment that could facilitate the creation and commercialisation of technologies. The recognition of poor scientific outputs as a hindrance to the growth of domestic industry has brought research on the development agenda. This article focuses on university–industry research collaborations as one of the ways to kick-start innovation-led economic growth in India. It explores the evolution of relevant policy paradigm in India and presents the relevant highlights of National IPR Policy 2016. It identifies the impediments in the way of creative university–industry collaborations and offers solutions to attain optimum synergy between the academia and industry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document