NELSEN, Lita
Lita Nelsen is the Director of the Technology Licensing Office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where she has been since 1986. Every year, the office manages over 400 new inventions originating from M.I.T., the Whitehead Institute, and Lincoln Laboratory. Typically, the office negotiates over 100 licenses and starts up over 20 new companies each year. Ms. Nelsen earned her B.S. and M.S. degrees in Chemical Engineering from M.I.T., as well as an M.S. in Management from M.I.T. as a Sloan Fellow. Prior to joining the M.I.T. Technology Licensing Office, Ms. Nelsen spent 20 years in industry, primarily in the fields of membrane separations, medical devices, and biotechnology; she worked at such companies as Amicon, Millipore, Arthur D. Little, Inc., and Applied Biotechnology. Ms. Nelsen was the 1992 President of the Association of University Technology Managers. She serves on the board of the Mount Auburn Hospital and the Scientific Advisory Board of the Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Foundation. She also serves as the intellectual property advisor to the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative and is a founding and current board member of MIHR. Ms. Nelsen is widely published in the fields of technology transfer and university/industry collaborations. She was a CMI Fellow at Cambridge MIT Institute (at the University of Cambridge), where she studied the role of university/industry/government partnerships in technology transfer and local economic development. She is a co-founder of Praxis, the U.K. University Technology Transfer Training Programme.
 Abstract
The Activities and Roles of M.I.T. in Forming Clusters and Strengthening Entrepreneurship
Abstract:
This chapter describes the structure, policies, and operations of the Technology Licensing Office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.). The chapter emphasizes the licensing office’s role in generating spinout companies and considers the importance of the biotechnology cluster within the state of Massachusetts and it’s surrounding regions. Also discussed is M.I.T.’s approach to ensuring that licensing procedures maximize access to medicines and vaccines arising from M.I.T.’s research.
Abstract
Ensuring Developing-Country Access to New Inventions: The Role of Patents and the Power of Public Sector Research Institutions
Abstract:
If universities adopt sound licensing practices, the universities will not only help stimulate investment in research on diseases that primarily afflict the poor in developing countries, but also ensure that the products of the research are affordable and widely available in those countries. Ensuring global access is one of the central goals of intellectual property management. But universities confront two main obstacles in their efforts to achieve the goal. First, university administrators, technology transfer officers, and business people are too often unaware of both the need to ensure access to new health technologies in developing countries and the manner in which patenting and licensing practices can be an integral component of global access strategies. Second, there is only a short history of experience in incorporating such concerns in negotiating licenses, so no best practices have yet evolved. This chapter offers a few possible approaches to ensuring broad access to university inventions while preserving incentives to development, including patenting inventions in a select list of developing countries. The chapter concludes by urging all of the players in this field to build upon their own experience and to take creative risks in the pursuit of new solutions.
Abstract
Evaluating Inventions from Research Institutions
Abstract:
The patenting strategies of research institutions are based on three key decisions. The first involves whether or not to file a patent. This decision must be based on sound information about the market, the uniqueness and usefulness of the invention and/or technology, the likelihood of being able to obtain patent protection, factors related to the inventor, and the potentially paradoxical impact of patenting on the institution’s social and humanitarian responsibilities. The second decision involves whether to market the invention to established companies or to develop a spinout business. The third involves how much to charge for a license. Related to all of these decisions is the key question of whether patenting is the most effective route to global access. Negotiating licensing agreements that are fair to the research institution, the private company, and developing countries can be challenging because research institutions may have difficulty determining fair market values. In addition to outlining a process for obtaining these values, this chapter offers some rough numbers for guidance. In general, the author concludes that it is far better to conclude a deal than to wait for the best agreement while fighting interminably for perfect financial terms.
Abstract
Ten Things Heads of Institutions Should Know about Setting Up a Technology Transfer Office
Abstract:
Technology transfer is a rewarding process for the university, researchers, students, the business community, the public, and the professionals who make it all happen. Technology transfer brings new products, services, and jobs. But it is a complex process, one that requires sustained dedication at every level. This chapter offers advice about some of the most important policy and strategy issues: five are economic issues and five relate to implementation. The chapter concludes with a discussion of technology transfer pitfalls caused by unrealistic expectations. The chapter emphasizes the role of senior management in changing the IP (intellectual property) culture, the need for transparent conflict-of-interest policies, and the importance of sufficient autonomy and infrastructure support for technology transfer officers.
Message from the Board of Patrons
|
Printer Friendly
Show All Abstracts