KEEPING YOUR PATENT COSTS UNDER CONTROL - PART II
This is Part II of a three-part article which
discusses the strategies that educational institutions can use to
protect their intellectual property, while keeping associated costs
under control. In Part II, we discuss the second of three strategies
to be covered, Partnering with Business. You can find a link
to Part 1 at www.cwilson.com/cgi/webadmin/jump.cgi?ID=793.
2.2 Partnering with Business
Because there are so many good ideas available for
commercialization, it can be challenging to attract the right
business partners.
(a) Developing a Marketable Reputation
The most direct way to secure partners from
industry is to build a reputation for technical and business acumen,
at least in select fields, so that businesses will either come
calling to discover what technology is available for
commercialization or will at least be receptive to a direct pitch.
Institutions that have developed a marketable reputation also tend
to enjoy collaborative research partnerships with industry, in which
industry funds both commercialization and additional pure research.
As well as cultivating world-class researchers and performing
world-class research, an institution can further develop a
marketable reputation by encouraging its faculty and students to
become integrated into industry and business networks, both local
and virtual, in addition to academic networks. Faculty who are
skilled at preparing successful grant applications enjoy enhanced
reputations within their institutions and in the world at
large.
(b) Banding Together with Other
Institutions
Very few institutions have the size and resources
to go it alone in all fields, so partnering arrangements with other
institutions are important to consider. For example, Centres of
Excellence and associations of Industry Liaison Offices provide a
forum for institutions to pool their research, interact with
industry, and actively pursue solutions to specific industry
needs.
Westlink Innovation Network Ltd. (www.westlink.ca) is an
association of Industry Liaison Offices from mainly Western Canadian
institutions. Westlink's mission is to:
- bundle the intellectual property of its
member institutions into comprehensive portfolios that can be
marketed to targeted industries; and
- provide consulting services to business
clients to find solutions to their specific needs by assembling
bundles of member technology.
There is also a relatively recent trend in which
institutions identify key market sectors and place their patents
into pools that can be easily and widely accessed by standard-form,
easy-to-administer licenses.
(c) Internet Invention Marketplaces
Not surprisingly, the Internet is also driving the
creation of marketplaces that facilitate transactions in
intellectual property. While many institutions post information
about their licensable technology on their own websites, this
approach has limitations because potential licensees are more likely
to search for solutions by technology, not by institution.
Therefore, other Internet marketplaces have developed to meet this
need. For example, www.yet2.com is a large
Internet marketplace used by blue-chip multinationals to advertise
their technical needs and licensable technology. Closer to home,
Flintbox, a Vancouver company founded by the University of British
Columbia and Westlink Innovation Network Ltd., has developed a
low-overhead electronic commerce engine to enable institutions to
track interest in and grant click-wrap licenses for their
technology. Flintbox is particularly well suited to high-volume,
low-cost technology that might not warrant patent protection at all,
because it can be sufficiently and more efficiently protected
contractually through licensing.
Flintbox's Bob de Wit explains,
"We created Flintbox (www.flintbox.ca) to improve
the connection between university researchers and the end-users of
their inventions. By enabling click-wrap licensing of any technology
and affordable wide-scale distribution of software and content over
the Web, we have enabled tech-transfer organizations to quickly
gather market information about new discoveries. This information
can prove critical in their decision to convert provisional patent
applications into full submissions.
Flintbox can also save institutions the trouble of
trying to target likely receptors of new technology; in several
instances, Flintbox has already helped prospective licensees from
the most unlikely places to find the technology that they need and
then to obtain a click-wrap license from the institution that owns
the technology.
Overall, we expect this new tool to not only improve
institutions' licensing and dissemination results, but also to
reduce their overall patenting expenses, because institutions will
be better able to decide to forego patent protection for poorly
received inventions and for inventions that are generating an
adequate click-wrap royalty stream."
In Part III of this series (which will appear in our next
issue of Campus Counsel), Michael Roman will discuss the third
strategy, Minimizing (Delaying) Patent Prosecution
Costs.
AN OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS:
HOW THEY ARISE AND HOW TO AVOID THEM
The Problem
Institutions of higher learning are undertaking
major capital projects to deal with ageing infrastructure, deferred
maintenance and the demand of a burgeoning student population. This
has forced institutions to deal with projects which require skills
which are very different from those required for the institutions’
core missions of education and research. In many instances, capital
projects have been plagued with construction claims both during and
following completion of the work. These claims can cause significant
legal expense and also create a huge drain on personnel whose time
could be better spent on more productive matters.
How do Construction Claims Arise?
Construction claims can be caused by a number of
factors. Understanding what causes construction claims is the first
step in avoiding them. In general, construction claims occur because
of the following:
- delays in construction and completion of the contract;
- delays in the delivery and supply of materials;
- weather which slows down or prevents construction from
proceeding;
- owner requested changes;
- changes which occur even though not requested by the owner;
- poor management and administration of the construction site;
- site conditions which differ from those expected;
- work becomes impossible to perform due to unavoidable
circumstances, such as force majeure;
- inadequate plans and specifications;
- failures to disclose information which is material to the
construction;
- conflicts and failures to co-operate among consultants,
contractors and subcontractors involved in the project;
- acceleration of the work;
- failure to adequately schedule and co-ordinate the work;
and
- insolvency of contractors, subcontractors or key
suppliers.
General Recommendations for Avoiding Construction
Claims
Owners who have been involved in construction
claims, and especially those which have resulted in arbitration or
litigation, are well aware of the costs, disruption and often ill
will, caused by such claims. In many cases, construction claims can
be avoided if effective risk management is performed at the
outset.
Effective risk management to avoid construction
claims involves a cost/benefits analysis at each stage of the
project. It may not be practical to take all or even most of the
steps set out below for avoiding construction claims. However, if an
owner undertakes some of these steps the owner is likely to incur
significant savings in the long term.
12 Steps to Avoiding Construction Claims
- The best way to ensure that something occurs or does not occur
is to put it in the contract. Obtain good legal advice before
entering into key contracts in order to ensure that your
objectives are properly and adequately reflected. The standard
general conditions contained in industry standard documents may
not be adequate for your needs, and in particular, they commonly
contain limitations on liability which are not fully understood by
the owner and may be inappropriate in the circumstances. This is
particularly true of public entities which have special and
diverse needs and interests.
- Owners should try to hire contractors and consultants with
whom they have a good relationship and who have a good reputation
in the industry, are credit worthy and are qualified to undertake
any specialized work required for the project. An owner is well
advised to investigate the reputation and qualifications of its
general contractor [or?]any key subcontractor. Bonding will
address some of these concerns.
- Owners should realize that the lowest bid is not always the
best bid.
- Owners should ensure that the contract allows them to have
some say in the general contractor's selection of subcontractors,
especially when any element of the project requires specialized
expertise.
- The parties to a contract should ensure that they understand
their duties and obligations and that they have the ability to
perform these duties and obligations as required by the
contract.
- Owners should ensure that the project is well planned from the
outset to minimize the need for change orders. Changes are likely
to cause additional costs, in and of themselves, but are also
likely to increase the risk of construction claims due to delays
and impacts caused by the changes.
- Owners and contractors should do what they can to ensure
proper management and administration of the project, including
proper and adequate staffing and co-ordination of the project and
trades, establishment of protocols for site meetings and provision
of timely responses to requests for review of working drawings and
for provision of instructions.
- All parties benefit from an atmosphere of mutual trust and
respect and each party should do what it can to engender such an
atmosphere among the parties and their advisors.
- While it may be initially attractive to a party to shift all
of the risk in the contract to the other party for risks such as
insufficient plans and specifications and unexpected site
conditions, a contract which is skewed in favour of one party
often results in a higher chance of a dispute and hence, a
construction claim. A contract that recognizes and balances the
interests of all parties and that does not include an overly
unfair allocation of risk will result in a decreased likelihood of
construction claims.
- Ensure proper and adequate documentation for the project.
- Acknowledge and settle claims which have merit at an early
stage.
- Ensure that the contract has an adequate process for dispute
resolution. Try to provide for a range of solutions from
discussions between key personnel, through mediation and
culminating in binding arbitration. Provide for how the project
will proceed pending resolution of a dispute.
For a more in depth understanding of a broader
range of issues relating to risk management (including insurance
risk) in relation to construction projects, our readers should
attend the conference at the Hyatt Regency Hotel on November 3, 2004
entitled Insurance and Risk Management for Construction
Projects. The conference is sponsored by Pacific Business &
Law Institute and is co-chaired by Neo Tuytel, a partner at Clark
Wilson, and Gordon Wainwright, Risk Officer for Simon Fraser
University. To find out more, contact Pacific Business & Law
Institute, Suite 305 - 1681 Chestnut Street, Vancouver BC V6J 4M6;
Phone (604) 730-2500 and Fax (604) 730-5085, or link to www.cwilson.com/seminars/criskmtg.pdf.
UNIVERSITY AMENDMENT ACT
Bill 60, being the University Amendment Act,
2004 received first reading in the Legislature on October 4, 2004.
Bill 60 enacts three key amendments to the University Act.
The first of these amendments affects only the University of British
Columbia; the second two affect each of the universities governed by
the University Act, namely UBC, University of Victoria, Simon
Fraser University and University of Northern British Columbia.
The first amendment in Bill 60 will facilitate the
academic governance structure required by UBC to incorporate the
university elements of Okanagan University College into UBC. This
structure will give UBC two senates and a council, as follows: there
will be an Okanagan senate, which will be responsible for the
academic governance of the portions of UBC which its board of
governors specifies are to be governed by the Okanagan senate, and a
second senate which will be responsible for the academic governance
of the rest of UBC. In addition, UBC will have a council, comprised
of members of both the Okanagan and the Vancouver senates. Any of
the president, the board of governors, the Vancouver senate or the
Okanagan senate may refer to the council a matter which might be
considered by either of the two UBC senates. In such event, the
council will consider and dispose of the matter as though it were a
senate.
The second two amendments have been long awaited by
BC’s universities. Section 50(2) of the University Act has
now been amended to require only the approval of the Minister of
Advanced Education (rather than an Order in Council) where a
university wished to dispose of its land. With respect to the third
amendment to the University Act, first, a bit of background.
Universities are creatures of statute, and as such have only the
powers conferred on them by the University Act. If a
university does not have the power of a natural person, anyone
dealing with the university must consider if each action or
obligation undertaken by the university is authorized under the
University Act. The relevant amendment in Bill 60 states:
"Subject to this Act and for the purposes of exercising its powers
and carrying out its duties and functions under this Act, a
university has the power and capacity of a natural person of full
capacity". Universities in British Columbia have requested the power
to contract on the same basis as a natural person of full capacity
for some time. If this power were conferred without qualification,
it would give universities the broad ability to contract which is
enjoyed by conventional business corporations.
Clearly, a number of activities which a university
may wish to undertake remain subject to external approvals in spite
of Bill. For instance, grants and conveyances of land remain subject
to the obligation to obtain the approval of the Minister of Advanced
Education under Section 50(2) of the University Act.
Borrowings for the purposes set out in Section 58 remain subject to
approval by the Minister of Advanced Education and the Minister of
Finance. If a power of the board of governors is qualified or
limited in Section 27, such limitation remains in force. But is the
power and capacity of a university to act like a natural person of
full capacity further limited? The new language in Bill 60 makes a
university’s expanded power and capacity available "for the purposes
of exercising its powers and carrying out its duties and functions"
under the University Act. This may invite an analysis of what
the duties and functions of a university are under the University
Act before any determination can be made if a given power
exercised by a university is in fact authorized. It would have been
preferable, in our view, if Bill 60 had simply stated: "Subject to
this Act, a university has the power and capacity of a natural
person of full capacity."
NACUA 44TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE: JUNE 2004, VANCOUVER BC
This year Vancouver hosted the 44th Annual
Conference with over 900 delegates in attendance.
The National Association of College and University
Attorney’s ("NACUA") membership is made up primarily of accredited,
non-profit colleges and universities. Most, but not all, of the
members are American. As an organization created to foster and
promote higher education by advancing knowledge in the practice of
law on behalf of colleges and universities, NACUA has made a
conscious decision to focus on service to the fundamental unit of
higher education – accredited institutions. NACUA is an important
resource for the lawyers at Clark Wilson LLP and the Annual Conference
gives us the opportunity to enjoy an exceptional program and a
chance to catch-up with old friends and meet new ones, as we
continue to expand the firm’s network. Clark Wilson LLP was the
co-sponsor of an open reception which was held on a beautiful summer
evening at the Museum of Anthropology at UBC.
Through our involvement with NACUA, the lawyers at
Clark Wilson LLP are able to better understand the issues of the day as
they affect our clients and, as well, develop an important network
of contacts across North America.
We look forward to next year’s Annual Conference,
which will be held in Orlando, Florida.
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY SOLICITORS
Brock Johnston and Roy Nieuwenburg of Clark Wilson LLP attended the
annual CAUS conference on September 17 and 18 in Kelowna. The
conference was attended by in-house and external counsel of many of
Canada’s universities, including BC lawyers from UBC, Ogilvy
Renault, Taylor Jordan Chafetz and Richards Buell Sutton.
Representation extended from British Columbia through the Prairies
and Ontario to the Maritimes. Papers were presented on a broad range
of topics, ranging from "Who is a Student" to "Unlocking Value of
Campus Real Estate". In addition, the event provided an excellent
opportunity for lawyers involved in the higher learning sector to
canvass, in an informal way, many areas of common concern and also
to get to know each other better. Next year the CAUS conference will
be held in Halifax, Nova Scotia.
CAMPUS COUNSEL VIA EMAIL
If you would prefer to receive
Campus Counsel via email, please send your name and e-mail address to webmaster@cwilson.com.
You may access back issues of this and other Clark Wilson LLP newsletters
on our website at www.cwilson.com. |