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

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.

An Empirical Examination of Impact

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.

ANALISIS SITUASI HAK KEKAYAAN INTELEKTUAL BIDANG KESEHATAN DI INDONESIA

The information about intellectual property rights (IPR) related to health products in Indonesia is limited. This manuscript aims to describes the situation of health innovative researches including their products (patented and copyrights) in the last 5 years (2009-2013). This is a cross-sectional exploratory qualitative research, followed by the identifi cation of data and information related to health IPR documents retrospectively from 2009 till 2013. In-depth interviews conducted on IPR managers in 5 (fi ve) government research institutions, Indonesia Institute of Science, Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology and 7 (seven) universities in Java island. The results showed that the IPR policy is strong, because it is written in the Act, majority of institutions state that IPR is their main indicators, however, the priority of health innovative researches is low. Generally, patented products were not planned to be patented from the beginning. Not all institutions have IPR management structured and incubation unit for development and “scaling up” of researches results, so that, patented health products were potentially not to be commercialised. This shows that there is still a gap between policy and its implementation in terms of research innovation. Governments should actively promote and utilize the patented health products of Indonesia. Abstrak Informasi tentang Hak Kekayaan Intelektual (HKI) di Indonesia yang terkait dengan produk kesehatan masih sangat kurang. Tulisan ini bertujuan memaparkan situasi penelitian inovatif dan produk hasil penelitian kesehatan terkait HKI (paten dan hak cipta) dalam 5 tahun terakhir (2009-2013). Studi ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif eksplorasi potong lintang disertai identifi kasi data dan informasi pada dokumen HKI bidang kesehatan secara retrospektif dari tahun 2009 sd 2013. Wawancara mendalam dilakukan terhadap pengelola HKI di 5 (lima) lembaga litbang kementerian, Lembaga Ilmiah Pengetahuan Indonesia, Badan Pengkajian dan Penerapan Teknologi dan 7 (tujuh) universitas di pulau Jawa. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dasar kebijakan HKI Indonesia telah kuat karena sudah dituangkan kedalam Undangundang, hampir semua institusi yang disurvei menjadikan HKI sebagai indikator utama, hanya penelitian yang berorientasi HKI kesehatan masih kurang diprioritaskan. Pada umumnya hasil penelitian yang dipatenkan tidak direncanakan sejakawal. Belum semua institusi memiliki unit pengelola HKI secara terstruktur dan unit inkubasi untuk pengembangan dan scaling up hasil penelitian agar dimanfaatkan masyarakat luas sehingga produk paten kesehatan berpotensi menjadi yang tidak bisa dikomersialisasikan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa terdapat gap antara kebijakan dan implementasinya dalam hal penelitian inovasi. Pemerintah perlu secara aktif membantu mempromosikan dan memanfaatkan hasil produk kesehatan yang telah memperoleh HKI.

The Roadmap for Enhancing University–Industry Research Collaboration in India

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.

Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Development: Is Asia Different?

For decades, economic policymakers in developing countries have resisted pressure to strengthen their intellectual property rights (IPR) systems. Many of them have pointed to the success of high-tech industries in Asia as confirmation of the view that keeping IPR systems weak at certain stages of economic development can function as an infant industry policy, stimulating the growth of technologically dynamic indigenous firms. This essay reviews recent econometric evidence on how changes in the IPR policy impact industrial development, and concludes that much of that evidence suggests that stronger IPR systems accelerate industrial development. The study then examines whether the lessons of Asia economic history really contradict that econometric evidence. The view presented here is that Asia is not really different. The current challenges faced by Asian firms in technologically dynamic industries suggest that long periods of industrial development under weak IPR systems can create problems that emerge in the longer run.