Search

Following a pause, with a relatively flat rate, from 1998 to 2008, the long-term trend of university patenting rising as a share of all patenting has resumed, driven by the internationalization of academic entrepreneurship and the persistence of US university technology transfer. The authors disaggregate this recent growth in university patenting at the US Patent and Trademark Organization (USPTO) in terms of nations and patent classes. Foreign patenting in the United States almost doubled during the period 2009-2014, mainly due to patenting by universities in Taiwan, Korea, China and Japan. These nations compete with the United States in terms of patent portfolios, whereas most European countries--with the exception of the United Kingdom--have more specific portfolios, mainly in biomedical fields. In the case of China, Tsinghua University holds 63% of the university patents in USPTO; followed by King Fahd University with 55.2% of the national portfolio.

[Objective] The scientific research system and mechanisms of national laboratories in China still need to be addressed. Leveraging the benefits of large-scale interdisciplinary research and the combination of large-scale team systematic scientific research, enhancing the overall efficiency of the scientific and technological innovation system remains a problem that requires addressing. In connection with the systematic technological innovation needs in the context of 'big science, big research, and big collaboration', the National Laboratories of the United States adopted an organizational model of 'small core + large periphery'. The concentrated breakthrough of major national scientific and technological tasks fully plays a bridging role, widely mobilizes advantageous resources, such as universities and enterprises, and leverages more social forces to invest in basic research. It is worth learning from the high-quality experience of the United States, which is enlightening and can be an important reference for China's national laboratory innovation research system and mechanism, boosting joint research and development of major scientific and technological tasks and speeding up the transformation of major scientific and technological innovation breakthroughs. [Methods] In this study, the inductive translation method is employed to summarize the patterns and characteristics of major scientific and technological tasks in collaboration with U.S. national laboratories and universities, research institutions, and industry from the dimensions of organizational management, selection of cooperative institutions, research funding management, benefit allocation, and achievement protection. Regarding organizational management methods, government departments should coordinate the establishment of flexible joint research and development (R&D) organizational management mechanisms, establish diversified top-level management offices, enhance the efficiency of resource allocation, and establish a temporary joint R&D working group to target breakthroughs in scientific research. Regarding choosing cooperative institutions, a strict mechanism for choosing cooperative institutions should be established, and enterprises and universities should be chosen from the industrial chain for cooperation. Regarding scientific research funding management, various project fund allocation management systems are implemented, and funds are allocated based on the number of scientific and technological research tasks. Enterprises should share the costs of participating in the projects. Regarding benefit allocation and achievement protection, the national laboratory has priority rights to patents, and participants can enjoy intellectual property rights and the significant resources of the national laboratory first. [Results and Conclusions] Based on the learnings from national laboratories in the United States and the actual situation in China, we propose a new type of institutional mechanism for the efficient completion of national strategic tasks in national laboratories in China. The suggestions mainly involve five aspects: 1 ensuring a strong top-level design and establishing a comprehensive management department for major scientific and technological research tasks; 2 leveraging the leading role of the national strategic scientific and technological force and constructing an organizational model for major scientific and technological R&D tasks; 3 promoting and guiding diversified investment and increasing funding support for major scientific and technological research tasks; 4 establishing a mechanism for choosing advantageous teams and implement a multi-route competitive exit mechanism for major scientific and technological research tasks; 5 scientifically coordinating the distribution of benefits and properly handling confidentiality issues in major scientific and technological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past four decades, Intellectual Property (IP) has been one of the main controversies of US-China trade relations. But the current US-China trade war contains a new focus - technology transfer. This article adopts a socio-legal and economic approach to examine the current technology and trade tensions between these two countries and why China became an Information Technology (IT) powerhouse. It first provides an overview of IP and technology transfer rules under the Phase One US-China Economic and Trade Agreement (POA). It then explores different forms of forced technology transfer activities and the in-depth reasons for the US to shift its main IP concerns from IP enforcement to technology transfer. It explains why the US and China trade war is inevitable, why the current US-China IP-trade war is significantly different from previous ones, and the economic and political reasons behind the global technology leadership competition by the two countries. Finally, the author concludes that the POA and its technology transfer rules are not the ends of the game but just the start of the global technology leadership competition between the US and China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper will focus on the recent development of the Chinese IP abuse legislation and its potential impact on IP protection and the operation of technology-driven foreign enterprises in China. Firstly, it will provide a brief overview of the TRIPS''s requirements on IPR abuse and technology transfer, and the recent development of IP abuse laws at the domestic level, particularly in the US and the EC. Secondly, by drawing a comparison with similar laws in the US and the EC, this paper will critically examine the recent development of the Chinese laws regarding technology transfer and IP abuse prevention, including both the recently enacted Anti-Monopoly Law 2008 (AML) and other prior-AML regulations. Thirdly, the paper will examine both opportunities and potential risks these laws may bring to foreign IP holders/technology-driven companies when operating in China, particularly focusing on the impact of the IP-related provision in the AML. Recent development in antitrust litigation in which Microsoft is a party, including the recent anti-monopoly investigation against Microsoft in China, will also be examined. Lastly, it will provide some practical suggestions for foreign IP holders and technology-driven companies to operate in China, such as useful defences against potential IP abuse claims, and other strategies for flexibly applying the IP abuse rules and better participating in future IP abuse legislative process in China. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]