Don’t transfer technology without a licensing agreement

Why Technology Transfers Need to Be Protected

For technology to have an environment where it can develop and flourish naturally, there needs to be an agreement about intellectual property. Who owns which part? And, should the technology be further developed, who will profit and how? Agreements answer all these questions and promote development.

What is a Licensing Agreement?

A licensing agreement is meant to denote intellectual property rights, especially when it comes to technology transfer. A licensing agreement allows a mutually beneficial, collaborative environment between academics or developers and businesses. So that the interests of both parties are protected, these agreements state the conditions under which researchers can go on developing and testing technologies, with an eye to maturing them and readying them for the market. These agreements regarding intellectual property ownership and profits will also outline what the potential market and profit is for the particular proposed invention. This means that researchers, inventors, and developers must disclose their creations and businesses should appoint a third party to perform due diligence before a transfer can take place.

Why Does a Technology Transfer Matter?

Once a technology transfer is initiated, a licensing agreement can be drawn up. The end goal for any technology transfer is commercialization. And this is why determining the presence of intellectual property value, as well as market positioning and viability, are part of the strategy for drawing up a licensing agreement that is actually responsive, rather than coercive or reductive. A technology transfer is a process that requires the patent holder (the researcher, inventor, developer, etc.) to come together with the licensee (usually, the business or industry partner), in order to negotiate terms for transfer, compensation and/or sale.

Technology transfers don’t have to include the whole nine yards. In fact, holders of the patent, depending on their own needs, can issue non-exclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive licenses. Why would anyone buy into a technology transfer that grants multiple non-exclusive licenses? In this case, for example, it may be due to the hope of opening up development to spur competition, in order for the best features to rise to the surface. The idea here, too, is that a technology could be ready for commercialization faster than if a licensee is granted exclusive rights.