Category Archives: Metrics

NIST’s “substantially fueled” premise for unleashing innovation

Here is a claim from the opening of a recent NIST report–1234–on “Unleashing American Innovation,” a “draft green paper”: The U.S. innovation system is substantially fueled by the discoveries and inventions arising from federally funded R&D at the Nation’s universities, … Continue reading

Posted in Innovation, Metrics, Policy | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Nine Points to Consider (with regard to AUTM’s licensing survey), 8-9

We are considering nine points with regard to AUTM’s annual licensing survey. We have got through seven points–not validated and with estimates, duplicate reporting, conflating technology and invention, activity measures giving the illusion of a process at work, no reporting … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Metrics, Policy | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Nine Points to Consider (with regard to AUTM’s licensing survey), 1-7

The Association of University Technology Managers, a front group for university licensing professionals, conducts an annual survey of the universities that its members work for. The survey asks for various metrics regarding inventions, patenting, licensing, startups, and revenue. The survey … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Metrics, Policy | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

UW Continues to Ride Fake Startup Metrics

From 2008 to 2015, the University of Washington faked its startup metrics and won itself awards and reputation for its entrepreneurial and innovative chops. (See articles discussing UW fakery here and here and here.) Senior UW administrators concocted a story … Continue reading

Posted in Bozonet, Metrics | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on UW Continues to Ride Fake Startup Metrics

Two Published Accounts of University Licensing: WARF and Stanford

Universities generally keep secret their licensing metrics. Yes, they report the number of inventions, patents, licenses, and startups in a given year–but they don’t report how those numbers relate to one another. The inventions reported in a given year have … Continue reading

Posted in Metrics | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Two Published Accounts of University Licensing: WARF and Stanford

AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 2

We are working through advice offered to NIST by various higher education associations on how to improve federal technology transfer by funding without oversight the “technology transfer” programs of non-federal institutions. If the gist is all you  need, then don’t … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Metrics, Open Source, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 2

AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 1

AAU has tweeted out its happiness with advice it and other “higher education associations” (APLU, AAMC, COGR, and ACE) have given in response to NIST’s call for public comment on ways to improve federal “technology transfer.” AAU tweets that “Bayh-Dole … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Metrics, Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 1

Even the $100K/yr drugs don’t much work

Advocates for Bayh-Dole make a great deal over the number of drugs that involve university patents that have been approved since the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act. One of their measures is the number of drugs that have been developed. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Metrics | Comments Off on Even the $100K/yr drugs don’t much work

Taking Apart APLU’s Talking Points on Bayh-Dole, 4

One more bit about Bayh-Dole in the APLU Talking Points: Before 1980, fewer than 250 patents were issued to U.S. universities annually; discoveries were rarely commercialized for the public’s benefit. By contrast, according to a recent survey by the Association … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, History, Metrics | Comments Off on Taking Apart APLU’s Talking Points on Bayh-Dole, 4

Lower drug development costs than industry reports–shock!

At the SciScip discussion group notice has been given to an article published in September 2017 in JAMA that has determined the median cost to develop a new cancer drug at $648m, much lower than the pharmaceutical industry reports for … Continue reading

Posted in Commons, Metrics, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Lower drug development costs than industry reports–shock!