Download PDF - 2.5 MB
Table of Contents
- Opening Remarks to the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science
By Teri F. Willey
- Plant Intellectual Property
Transfer Mechanisms at Universities
By Steven C. Price and Bryan Z. Renk
- Federally Registered Trademarks
Add Value to Technology
By Ellen P. Winner
- Personal Impressions of
By Terry A. Young
- Where do the Leads for Licenses
Come From? Source Data from Six Institutions
By Christina Jansen and Harrison F. Dillon
- A Suggested Method for Assessing
the Economic Impacts of University R&D: Including Identifying Roles
for Technology Transfer Officers
By Albert N. Link
It is my hope that the readers of this issue of the Journal will notice,
when glancing at the Table of Contents or turning directly to a paper,
that there is a difference in this issue of the Journal. The difference
is that two contributions have more of a personal tone to them than
articles of the past.
Teri Willey's remarks to a subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation appear first. Succinct, clear, and
convincing, this record of Teri's oral remarks will serve as an
encapsulation of the impact of federal R&D on university technology
transfer and small business. If each member substitutes his or her own
university's facts for those of ARCH Development Corporation, he or she
could use these remarks to enlighten his or her own community whether
academic, business, or governmental.
The other novel contribution by a member is Terry Young's personal
impressions of his visit to China as part of a U.S. Delegation, which
undertook to share information on technology transfer with the Chinese.
Other members of the Delegation might well have different or even
opposite impressions. Nevertheless, the Journal Board believed Terry's
impressions would be of interest and value to members, many of whom will
have experiences in China in the future.
Two other papers carry out one of AUTM's foremost missions: to teach
members and keep them informed. Steven Price and Bryan Renk present an
enlightening comparison and analysis of the two systems of technology
transfer that often operate side by side—one for plant varieties
and one for "everything else." Even members who do not work with
agriculture research and products will find this article interesting and
full of information that all members should know. Another very
instructive paper, this one by Ellen Winner, makes a convincing case for
registration of trademarks as part of the overall licensing strategy for
increasing value in technology. Forward-looking and engaging, Ellen's
paper is a must read for every member.
The last two articles in this issue are, in my view, thought- provoking
for AUTM members. Where do you get your leads to licenses? What is the
economic impact of your university's R&D? I wonder if there are two
questions that occupy technology managers more.
Christina Jansen and Harrison Dillon have provided an answer to the
first question by undertaking and reporting a study of six institutions.
Members will be interested in finding out whether their own hypotheses
are proven out by the data that were derived from this insightful and
And finally, UNC Professor Albert Link has favored AUTM with his
scholarly and provocative paper on the technology transfer officer's
role in assessing the economic impacts of university R&D. It
provides an answer to that second question that technology managers
ponder. One of the pluses of Dr. Link's scholarly article was that it
generated significant discussion among Journal editors and the Editorial
Board. I believe this type of discussion enhances the content quality of
the Journal and the ultimate value of the Journal to the members. So I
challenge you to read Prof. Link's paper and to share your thoughts with
us. A dialogue, however extended in time, would benefit all AUTM
members. This invitation to share your thoughts extends to comments on
any of the papers included in this issue of the Journal. What do you
think? We would like to know.
My thanks go to each of these authors. Only members who have researched,
written, edited, and re-edited an article after receiving comments from
the Editorial Board will understand the work and persistence involved.
Each is commended for being willing to provide important information for
us in a form that is easy to assimilate.
Managing Editor, Diane Hoffman, and I are constantly seeking original
manuscripts or ideas for manuscripts. We invite you to contact Diane for
content and review procedures.
Katherine L. Chapman, Editor