Talk:University technology transfer offices

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ansh.b.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some other stuff[edit]

The Kauffman Foundation strongly supports entrepreneurship and has studied/tracked the field of tech transfer. Lots of good stuff on their website that you could use for sourcing, including this overview report.

Interestingly around 2009 Kauffman began advocating for "inventor free-agency" - namely that bayh-dole should be changed to allow inventors to take their inventions anywhere. They viewed the system established by bayh-dole as monopolistic and inefficient. See Stangler, Carl Schramm, Robert Litan And Dane (6 November 2009). "New Business, Not Small Business, Is What Creates Jobs". Wall Street Journal.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) and especially Litan, Robert E.; Mitchell, Lesa (January–February 2010). "The HBR List: Breakthrough Ideas for 2010: 6: A Faster Path from Lab to Market". Harvard Business Review.

The book -- Washburn, Jennifer (2006). University, Inc. : the corporate corruption of American higher education. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 978-0465090525. -- is a pretty good summary of one stream of criticism of tech transfer. Good review of that book here: Rutt, J. Steven (November–December 2005). "Book Review: Bayh-Dole & Nanotechnology: corporate corruption of U.S. higher education". Nanotechnology Law & Business. 2 (4).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date format (link)

Another stream of criticism is that by over-enthusiastically patenting inventions, tech transfer offices create patent thickets and a tragedy of the anticommons. Rebecca Eisenberg and Michael Heller have been the main proponents of that (discussed in the "tragedy" WP article)

here is another critical article, long, with lots of reporting: <ref>Leaf, Clifton (September 19, 2005). "The Law of Unintended Consequences". Fortune.

Great piece from Stanford's history department about why Stanford is so successful, here.

you may find these helpful.. Jytdog (talk) 18:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]