I had a bit of a problem with my WordPress installation after an update of MySQL. I repaired a couple of tables, and things appear to be back on line.
Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
The University Conversion Experience, Part 2
In Part I of “The University Conversion Experience” I described the problems faced when an organization supported by a university becomes trapped in claims by the university administration that the university owns the organization for having supported it. In Part II, we look at the nature of informal organizations, and get at why it is that university administrators could do much better at getting things right–and doing the right thing.
Informal Organizations
An informal organization is one that is formed without incorporation or registration. As such, it does not have certain “formal” characteristics provided by law–though it may be construed as a legally recognized organization (such as a partnership).
The nature of informal organizations has been discussed in connection with internet activities such as “co-blogging.” What happens when two or more individuals contribute to a web site’s materials and activities? A discussion of the law by Eric Goldman is here. A broader discussion of informal groups is here. One upshot is that if a group of individuals works together on a web site such as a blog and makes some money doing so (such as from ads or a “tip jar”), then they may be construed as having formed an implied general partnership–each of them is responsible for the acts of any and all of them. That sounds like a demotivator caption. Individuals can also enter into “co-blogging” agreements that describe what they are doing, who is responsible, and the like, and use these agreements to preclude a finding of an implied partnership, leaving them a semi-formal group–one with some arrangements but lacking a corporate legal structure. Continue reading
The University Conversion Experience, Part 1
The second “pillar” of university innovation is the formation of “projects.” But just what is a project, and why are projects so important? To get into this subject, let’s start with some particulars and work out. Consider, first, the problem of a theater group hosted by, captured, and “converted” by a university.
Shutting Down the Bard
The University of California, Santa Cruz announced in August 2013 that it will “cease production” of Shakespeare Santa Cruz, a theater company and festival that ran for over thirty years. And that is what has happened. But the situation is not so simple and the outcome rather odd. The upshot is that Shakespeare Santa Cruz is not shut down, but rather its personnel have had to start a new organization, with a new name remarkably like the old name, while the university takes possession of assets of the old organization. More is up than simply closing down a program. Continue reading
Dystopia, Imagination, Innovation
Linda McGovern, in a web article from 1999, points out the following passage:
Some of my youthful readers are developing wonderful imaginations. This pleases me. Imagination has brought mankind through the Dark Ages to its present state of civilization. Imagination led Columbus to discover America. Imagination led Franklin to discover electricity. Imagination has given us the steam engine, the telephone, the talking-machine and the automobile, for these things had to be dreamed of before they became realities. So I believe that dreams — day dreams, you know, with your eyes wide open and your brain-machinery whizzing — are likely to lead to the betterment of the world. The imaginative child will become the imaginative man or woman most apt to create, to invent, and therefore to foster civilization. A prominent educator tells me that fairy tales are of untold value in developing imagination in the young. I believe it.
L. Frank Baum, the author of the Wizard of Oz books, wrote the above in his introduction to The Lost Princess of Oz. Day dreams, with your brain-machinery whizzing, might better the world.
Imagination guides innovation. Innovation disrupts the status quo with change the status quo didn’t do for itself. Baum does not argue that by imagining a utopia we can find a way to create one, but that by imagining generally, we find ways to improve what we have got. That’s a distinction to keep in mind. Continue reading
Posted in Innovation, Literature, Policy
Tagged dystopia, Frank Baum, humanism, Neal Stephenson, Pico, Wizard of Oz
Comments Off on Dystopia, Imagination, Innovation
Seeking that "Oh, Ass" Moment
The Oh, Ass Moment
In The First Men in the Moon by H.G. Wells, the narrator, Bedford, a would-be businessman partnered with Cavor, an inventive genius with no social aspirations, finds himself in a bit of a pickle on the moon, having lost the direction back to the spaceship, and worse, which I won’t go into. In a moment of despair, Bedford regrets the vision of wealth that led him to assist Cavor to find a material “opaque” to all forms of radiation, including gravity:
“Ass! I said; “oh, ass, unutterable ass…. I seem to exist only to go about doing preposterous things. Why did we ever leave the thing? … Hopping about looking for patents and concessions in the craters of the moon!…
The “thing” is the spaceship, a sphere with shutters that when closed block out gravity “radiation” coming in the direction of the closed shutters, thus causing the sphere to be attracted by gravity from objects (such as the moon) in other directions. (The sphere figures, as well, in Contact, a sci-fi movie that draws on material from many other we-meet-aliens movies.)
Bedford’s observation on being an “ass” is directed at his own selfish motives. Once on the moon, he and Cavor start “hopping about,” looking for things that might reward them for their trip to the moon. That does not work out so well, and thus this lamentation with regard to the hope for patents and companies–and the wealth that might come from these. Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Freedom, Innovation, Policy, Technology Transfer
Tagged Bedford, duty, graphene, RAND, wells
Comments Off on Seeking that "Oh, Ass" Moment
Graphene, or 7300 patents waiting for commercialization
The BBC is running a cluster of stories today on graphene, a material consisting of a single layer of carbon atoms. The UK angle is that graphene was invented in Britain, but Chinese and American organizations have flooded the area with patents. What are the Brits doing to catch up? How about paying for a $100m research building. One might think that the Brits would, say, file a heck of a lot more patents, or acquire some that are floating around.
There is another way to look at all this. If there are 7,300+ graphene patents now, exactly how is anyone going to have a clear path to develop any product? Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Graphene, or 7300 patents waiting for commercialization
Radical Conceptual Innovation
In After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre points out an argument made by Karl Popper–that new technology cannot be predicted with any specificity:
Some time in the Stone Age you and I are discussing the future and I predict that within the next ten years someone will invent the wheel. “Wheel?” you ask. “What is that?” I then describe the wheel to you, finding words, doubtless with some difficulty, for the very first time to say what a rim, spokes, a hub and perhaps an axle will be. Then I pause, aghast. “But no one can be going to invent the wheel, for I have just invented it.”
MacIntyre sums up: “The notion of the prediction of radical conceptual innovation is itself conceptually incoherent” (93). Continue reading
Posted in Innovation
Tagged imagination, invention, limits
Comments Off on Radical Conceptual Innovation
Building Pillar One: Freedom To Innovate
Of the seven pillars of university new innovation practice, freedom to innovate is the most important. University policies on research and invention were at one time liberal. That is, faculty and students had the freedom to publish, experiment, discuss, collaborate, and commercialize as they chose. University administrations did not demand ownership of inventions unless someone was expressly hired to invent on behalf of the institution. Faculty generally were not, and are not, hired to invent on behalf of the institution.
Equitable Sharing Rather Than Compulsory Ownership
The default premise of university invention management once was “equitable sharing.” If a university administration put in extraordinary resources to support a faculty member’s efforts to develop an invention, then the faculty (generally) were to decide whether and how much and by what means the university’s support should be recognized. That recognition might take the form of acknowledgement, repayment, a financial interest, a shop right, a license to practice, an equity interest, a co-ownership position, or assignment of ownership, depending on the arrangements that had been negotiated. Continue reading
Posted in Freedom, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Building Pillar One: Freedom To Innovate
The Future is Uncertain, and the Exit is not Always Near
Pitchbook is out with figures for private equity exits in 2013. It is well worth the effort to download a copy of the report from Pitchbook.
Highlights include–it’s taking longer to get to a private equity exit, but Q4 of 2013 was “stellar” with $59b on 192 exits. The ratio of the number of private equity investments to the number of exits is 2.3, well below the pre-2008 meltdown figures. Pitchbook points out that the lower ratio means there are more investors looking to exit companies and fewer looking to place new money, relatively speaking.
Acquisition of startups by companies has slowed and IPOs have picked up. Hold times are pushing five years or more for all forms of exit. The median exit size for acquisitions, the typical target for university startups, is north of $75m. Good money if you can get it, but then your company has to be playing with valuations in that space, too. Continue reading
Posted in Innovation, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on The Future is Uncertain, and the Exit is not Always Near
The Seven Pillars of New University Innovation Practice
Here are the Seven Pillars of the New University Innovation Practice. Freedom to innovate is not new–it is the form of practice that university faculty developed over the course of 75 years, and was the source of “successes” that were used to champion the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act. Then administrators dismantled that system and replaced it with a more expensive, slower, complicated, compulsory, and less effective system that looked good on paper but in practice has not only been terrible for placing inventions but also has degraded many of the strengths that universities once had.
Given what we have learned about IP management in university settings, and how IP has changed over the past thirty years, and the introduction of new things, such as the internet, freedom to innovate can take on a new aspect, and give universities a chance once again to shine in the promotion of discovery and practical application of new ideas and technology. Continue reading
Posted in IP, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on The Seven Pillars of New University Innovation Practice