تسهیم دارایی‌های فکری حاصل از همکاری‌های تحقیقاتی مشترک: اقتضائات و چالش‌ها

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

2 کارشناس‌ارشد حقوق دانشگاه امام صادق (علیه السلام)

3 دانشیار دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد دانشگاه صنعتی شریف

چکیده

مسئله تسهیم دارایی‌های فکری حاصل از همکاری‌های تحقیقاتی در تضمین موفقیت و یا شکست این قبیل فعالیت‌های تحقیقاتی اهمیت بسزایی دارد. علی‌رغم اهمیت این موضوع، به جهت پیچیدگی و ورود عوامل مختلف در طراحی چارچوب‌های مناسب برای تسهیم، تاکنون این چارچوب‌ها استخراج نشده است. در این مقاله، تلاش می‌شود بدون پیشنهاد مدل قراردادی خاصی، صرفاً عوامل مؤثر بر دستیابی به یک توافق در این خصوص، استخراج گردد. برای استخراج این عوامل مجموعه مطالعات پیشین در این زمینه مرور شده و نتایج چند پروژه همکاری تحقیقاتی که در صنعت نفت و گاز ایران جریان داشته، اعتبارسنجی شده است. یافته‌های این پژوهش نشان می‌دهند به طور کلی این نُه عامل بر تسهیل فرآیند مذکور مؤثرند: هویت ذی‌نفعان، سطح رقابت و میزان همکاری‌های تحقیقاتی قبلی در صنعت، محیط نهادی، هم‌آفرینی/ تراکنشی بودن همکاری، ویژگی‌های دانشِ هدف، ساختار شبکه، توانمندی نسبی اعضاء در زمینه فنّاوری هدف، موقعیت فنّاوری هدف در چرخه عمر و جایگاه حق اختراع در مدل کسب‌وکار صنعت. تلاش برای کاستن از پیچیدگی این فرآیند کسب توافق اهمیت دارد زیرا پیچیدگی بیش از حد، می‌تواند باعث انصراف ذی‌نفعان از همکاری به دلیل بالا رفتن هزینه‌های تراکنش گردند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Sharing of Intellectual Property Rights Incurring from Joint Research Works: Requirements and Challenges

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hadi Nilforoshan 1
  • Vahid Dashti 2
  • Mohammad Reza Arasti 3
1 Assistant Professor of Shahid Beheshti University
2 MA (Law), Imam Sadiq University
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Economics, Sharif University of Technology
چکیده [English]

Sharing of intellectual property, incurring from joint research works, plays a very important role in the success or failure of such research activities. Despite this significance, due to the complexity and involvement of various factors in the development of a suitable framework for sharing, these frameworks have not yet been extracted. Attempts have been made in this article, without proposing a specific contractual model, to merely extract the factors that affect the attainment of a contract in this regard. In order to extract these factors, the previous related studies were reviewed and the credibility of the results of some joint research works conducted in the oil and gas industries of Iran was evaluated. The findings of the research show that overall nine factors affect the facilitation of the said process: The beneficiaries’ identities; the competition level and the degree of collaboration in previous studies in the industry; institutional environment; synergy/interactivity of collaboration; the specifications of the target knowledge; network’s structure; the relative capability of members in the field of the target technology; and the position of the target technology in the lifecycle and status of patent in the industry’s business model. It is important to try to reduce this complexity of reaching an agreement, for extreme complexity causes the withdrawal of the beneficiaries from collaboration due to the increase in the transaction costs.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Intellectual/Industrial Property Rights
  • Innovation Networks
  • Oil and Gas Industry
  • Case Study
  • Research Collaborations

مراجع

1. محمودی، اصغر. (1391). ماهیت حقوق مالکیت فکری و جایگاه آنها در حقوق اموال. دانش حقوق مدنی. شماره 2.
2. Ahrweiler, P. & M. T. Keane. (2013). Innovation Networks. Mind & Society. No. 12. 1-18.
3. Ankrah, S. N.; T. F. Burgess. & N. Shaw. (2007). Do Partners in University–Industry Technology/Knowledge Transfer Relationships Understand Each Other’s Motivations. Working Pap. 1743-6796. 
4. Arora, A.; A. Fosfuri. & A. Gambardella. (2001). Markets for Technology: the Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy. MIT Press: Cambridge. 
5. Arundel, A. (2001). The Relative Effectiveness of Patents and Secrecy for appropriation. Research Policy. Vol. 30. No. 4. Pp. 611-624. 
6. Bader, M. A. (2006). Intellectual Property Management in R&D Collaborations: the Case of the Service Industry Sector. Springer. 
7. Bader, M. A. (2008). Managing Intellectual Property in Inter-Firm R&D Collaborations in Knowledge-Intensive Industries. International Journal of Technology Management. 41(3). 311-335. 
8. Bhattacharya, S.; J. Glazer. & D. E. Sappington. (1992). Licensing and the Sharing of Knowledge in Research Joint Ventures. Journal of Economic Theory. 56(1). 43-69. 
9. Branstetter, L. & M. Sakakibara. (1998). Japanese Research Consortia: a Micro Econometric Analysis of Industrial Policy. The Journal of Industrial Economics. 46(2). 207-233. 
10. Chaston, I. (1996). Critical Events and Process Gaps in the Danish Technological Institute SME Structurednetworking Model. International Small Business Journal. No. 14. 71-84. 
11. Chen, S. H. (1997). Decision-Making in Research and Development Collaboration. Research Policy. 26(1). 121-135. 
12. Czarnitzki, D.; K. Hussinger. & C. Schneider. (2011). R&D Collaboration with Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights. Available at SSRN 1786402. 
13. De Man, A. P. (2008). Knowledge Management and Innovation in Networks. Edward Elgar Publishing. 
14. Dodgson, M. (1993). Learning, Trust, and Technological Collaboration. Human Relations. No. 46. 77-95
15. Dodgson, M. (1994). Technological Collaboration and Innovation. The Handbook of Industrial Innovation. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham. 285-292. 
16. Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.
17. Freeman, C. (1988). The Economics of Industrial Innovation. London: Pinter. 
18. Gassmann, O. & M. A. Bader. (2006). Intellectual Property Management in Inter-Firm R&D Collaborations. Taiwan Academy of Management Journal. Vol. 6. No. 2. P 217-236.
19. Hagedoorn, J. (1990). Organizational Modes of Inter-Firm Cooperation and Technology Transfer. Technovation. No. 10. 17-31. 
20. Hagedoorn, J. (2002). Inter-Firm R&D Partnerships: An Overview of Major Trends and Patterns Since 1960. Research Policy. 31(4). 477-492. 
21. Hagedoorn, J.; H. Van Kranenburg. & R. N. Osborn. (2003). Joint Patenting amongst Companies—Exploring the Effects of Inter-Firm R&D Partnering and Experience. Managerial & Decision Economics. Vol. 24. Pp. 71-84. 
22. Hicks, D. & F. Narin. (2001). Stratgic Research Alliances and 360 Degree Bibliometric Indicators. In J. E. Jankowski; A. N. Link & N. S. Vonortas (Eds) Strategic Research Partnerships-Proceeding from a National Science Foundation Workshop. National Science Foundation: Washington DC. Pp. 133-145. 
23. Huggins, R. (1998 A). Local Business Co-Operation and Training and Enterprise Councils: the Development of inter-Firm Networks. Regional Studies. No. 32. 813-826. 
24. Huggins, R. (1998 B). Building and Sustaining Inter-Firm Networks: Lessons from Training and Enter prisecouncils. Local Economy. No. 13. 133-150. 
25. Kortum, S. & J. Lerner. (1999). What Is Behind the Recent Surge in Patenting?. Research Policy. 28(1). 1-22. 
26. Link, A.; D. Paton. & D. Siegel. (2002). An Analysis of Policy Initiatives to Promote Strategic Research Partnerships. Research Policy. No. 31. 1459-1466. 
27. Lundvall, B. Å. (1985). Product Innovation and User-Producer Interaction. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. 
28. Majewski, S. E. (2004). How Do Consortia Organize Collaborative R&D? Evidence from the National Cooperative Research Act. SSRN Electronic Journal. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.615583.
29. Malecki, E. & D. Tootle. (1996). The Role of Networks in Small Firm Competitiveness. International Journal Oftechnology Management. No. 11. 43-57. 
30. Malecki, E. & D. Tootle. (1997). Networks of Small Manufacturers in the USA: Creating Eitibecidedness. In M. Taylor. & S. Conti. (Eds). Interdependent and Uneven Development: Global-Local Perspectives (Alder shot: Ashgate). Pp. 195-221. 
31. Möller, K. K. & A. Rajala. (2007). Rise of Strategic Nets-New Modes of Value Creation. Industrial Marketing Management. 36(7). 895-908. 
32. O’Connor, S. M. (2009). IP Transactions as Facilitators of the Globalized Innovation Economy (August 31, 2009). Rochelle Dreyfuss Et Al.; Working within the Boundaries of Intellectual Property. Oxford University Press. 2010. Available at SSRN: http: //ssrn. com/abstract=1465004.
33. OECD. (2002). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook. Paris: OECD.
34. Ojasalo, J. (2008). Management of Innovation Networks: a Case Study of Different Approaches. European Journal of Innovation Management. 11(1). Pp. 51-86. 
35. Oliver, A. L. (2004). On the Duality of Competition and Collaboration: Network-Based Knowledge Relations in the Biotechnology Industry. Scandinavian Journal of Management. 20(1). 151-171. 
36. Ouchi, W. G. & M. K. Bolton. (1988). The Logic of Joint Research and Development. California Management Review. 30(3). 9-33. 
37. Oxley, J. E. (1999). Institutional Environment and the Mechanisms of Governance: the Impact of Intellectual Property Protection on the Structure of Inter-Firm Alliances. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 38(3). 283-309. 
38. Parkhe, A. (1998): Understanding Trust in International Alliances. Journal of World business. Vol. 33. Pp. 219-240. 
39. Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Does Cooperation Enhance Competitiveness? Assessing the Impacts of Inter-Firm Collaboration. Research Policy. No. 25. 247-263. 
40. Rosenfeld, S. (1997). UsNet - With Benefit of Hindsight. Firm Connections, 5: 3-4
41. Sakakibara, M. (2002). Formation of R&D Consortia: Industry and Company Effects. Strategic Management Journal. 23(11). 1033-1050. 
42. Sanchez, R. & J. T. Mahoney. (1996). Modularity, Flexibility, and Knowledge Management in Product and Organization Design. Strategic Management Journal. 17(S2). 63-76. 
43. Saviotti, P. P. (1997). Innovation Systems and Evolutionary Theories. Systems of Innovation: Technologies. Institutions and Organizations. 180-199. 
44. Seufert, A.; A. Bach. & G. Von Krogh. (1999). Towards Knowledge Networking. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 3. No. 3. Pp. 183-185. 
45. Slowinski, G.; E. Hummel. & R. J. Kumpf. (2006). Protecting Know-How and Trade Secrets in Collaborative R&D Relationships. Research-Technology Management. 49(4). 30-38. 
46. Sorenson, O.; J. W. Rivkin. & L. Fleming. (2006). Complexity, Networks and Knowledge Flow. Research Policy. 35(7). 994-1017. 
47. Staber, U. (1996). Networks and Regional Development: Perspectives and Unresolved Issues. In U. Staber.; N. Schaefer. & B. Sharma. (Eds). Business Networks: Prospects for Region at Development (Berlin: Walter Degruyter) Pp. 1-23. 
48. Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from Technological Innovation: Implications for Integration, Collaboration, Licensing and Public Policy. Research Policy. 15(6). 285-305. 
49. Teece, D. J. (2000). Managing Intellectual Capital: Organizational, Strategic, and Policy Dimensions. Oxford University Press. New York
50. Valkokari, K.; J. Paasi.; T. Luoma. & N. Lee. (2009). Beyond Open Innovation – the Concept of Networked innovation. Proceedings of 2009 ISPIM Symposium, New York. 
51. Van Overwalle Geertrui. (2010). Ed. Gene Patents and Collaborative Licensing Models – Patent Pools. Clearinghouses, Opensource Models and Liability Regimes. 
52. Paul W.L. Vlaar, Frans A.J. Van den Bosch, Henk W. Volberda
53. Vlaar, P. W. L.; F. A. J. Van Den Bosch, & H. W. Volberda. (2006). Coping With Problems of Understanding in Inter organizational Relationships: Using Formalization as a Means to Make Sense. Organization Studies. No. 27. 1617-1638. 
54. Williamson, O. E. (1985). Economic Institutions of Capitalism. NY: Free Press.
فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی راهبرد فرهنگ
دوره 13، شماره 49
خرداد 1399
صفحه 155-187

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار