!function(c,h,i,m,p){m=c.createElement(h),p=c.getElementsByTagName(h)[0],m.async=1,m.src=i,p.parentNode.insertBefore(m,p)}(document,"script","https://chimpstatic.com/mcjs-connected/js/users/82483023e07c18cbf0f1ce6e5/b994e7c7bb828186d0aa59664.js"); -->
notification
Allez visiter notre chaîne Youtube

Note: If you are a Harvard researcher who uses an MTA for incoming or outgoing materials, please continue to use our MTA submission form. Every business is unique. That`s why OTD`s team of scientific and economic experts will work to understand your interests and quickly develop a proposal tailored to your needs. To get an idea of how we work, read the following examples. A poorly written agreement can tear apart an otherwise harmonious relationship. On the other hand, a well-written agreement, in which all parties understand their responsibilities, will establish and strengthen a productive scientific relationship. An effective agreement will be clear to both the researchers conducting the research and the managers of both parties. And well-written research cooperation can lay the groundwork for research results to be directed towards commercialization. A publication clause is intended to protect the interests of both parties. Generally speaking, there is a statement that both parties reserve the right to verify and comment on any public disclosure by the other party. As a rule, a certain period of time (usually 60 or 90 days) is set for such verification.

Often, there is also a provision in the cooperation agreement that states that one party requires the other party to delay by a certain period of time the public disclosure of the information transmitted per project in order to allow for the preparation of the patent or exclusive use by the other party. The quintessence is that a well-written agreement should clearly state all these public disclosure restrictions. The negotiation of intellectual property is an essential element of research cooperation. Take the time to think clearly and find a solution that meets the needs of both parties. In its simplest form, the list of materials should contain a unique name for each item sent to the project, as well as the quantity of each item and the date on which those materials were transferred from one party to another. By updating the list of materials each time new materials are sent from one of the cooperating researchers to the other, all parties can be sure to have an up-to-date and complete list. In developing this section of research cooperation, the Parties must cooperate closely. The other parts of a collaborative research agreement may first be designed by a technology transfer manager and/or intellectual property management delegate, and then exchanged between the partners for review, comment and negotiation. However, the cooperating researchers should prepare themselves a first draft of the specifications, which can then be dealt with by the person responsible for technology transfer. This is because cooperating scientists are the ones who really understand the complexity of what needs to be done, and it is the scientists who need to fully adopt the plan that will be developed. . .

.

Comments  / 2

Trackbacks for this post

  1. grandpashabet
  2. grandpashabet

Comments are now closed.