INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY(IP) MANAGEMENT:

By

Dr I.M. Nwaedozie(SA/Ag.HOD)

(Technology Acquisition and Research Coordination)

National Office for Technology Acquisition and Promotion (NOTAP)

(Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, Abuja )

At the

Commissioning of IPTTO and Training

Igbinedion University, Okada, Edo State

7th- -8th August, 2019 1

Outline:

Introduction

Intellectual Property(IP) Management

Core Issues

Case Studies: IP in Development

Domestic Challenges

Recommendations

Conclusion

Introduction:

The National Office for Technology Acquisition andPromotion (NOTAP), is one of 17 agencies under theFederal Ministry of Science & Technology(FMST);

Established by Decree No 70 of 1979 as NationalOffice for Industrial Property (NOIP) and laterAmended by Decree 82 of 1992 , now Cap N62 LFN,2004 ;

Mandates includes:

Encourage a more efficient process for theidentification and selection of foreigntechnologies;

3

Introduction condt.

Development of the negotiating skills of Nigerians;

Provide a more efficient process for the adaptationof foreign technology;

Register all contracts and/agreements having effectin Nigeria entered into, for transfer of foreigntechnology to Nigerian parties;

Monitor on a continuous basis the execution of anycontract and/or agreement registered pursuant to theNOTAP Act;

4

Introduction condt.

Facilitating commercialization of R&D Results and

Inventions from the National Innovation System;

Promoting locally generated technologies and

disseminate technology information to SMEs and

National Researchers;

Keeping and updating the database of Nigerian Experts in

Science, Technology and Engineering and other fields

towards the implementation of Executive order No 5,

Promoting Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs)Culture through targeted programmes and activities;

5

Fig.1: IPs are creations of the human mind.

6

Intellectual Property (IP) is the creations of the

human mind e.g. inventions, literary and artistic

works,(WIPO, 1998); Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) are monopoly

rights conferred on the creators by a Statutory

Authority;

IP management is methodologies adopted to

achieve the commercialization of R&D results from

the faculties.

The structure varies but same objective

IP management is basically activities fortransforming an invention into tangible products orservices,

IPs are mostly generated from the knowledgeinstitutions such as universities, polytechnics,research institutes, public & private laboratories etc;

Generating IP requires conscious effort, commitmentand long time significant investments in R&Dactivities,

There are national and international laws andconventions guiding the commercial exploitation ofIPs;

Modern University Focus:

Management Structure Model:Organisational Options for Technology Transfer Office(Malaysian,2010)

Malaysian government place emphasis on capacity building of

the National Innovation System(NIS)-

focussing on bringing the research results to the market place

Source: UPM.2010

UMIP Management Structure

University of Manchester(2006)

University of Manchester(2006)

The core services offered include:

Assessment of commercial ideas,

Setting up of spin-out companies,

Business plan preparation,

Market research and evaluation,

IP management, licensing or sale,

Accounting & company secretarial services,

Access to venture capital & funding,

Secure Business angels & entrepreneurs

Spin-in and business monitoring

Networking of players & corporate financiers

Manpower Requirement in IP Office

Office Managers

Lawyers(-time optional or on part time arrangement)

Accounts,

Innovation Advisor

Project Managers

Scientific Officers-evaluators

Marketers

Characteristics of IP Assets:

New and novel;

Must lead to a product or service that is useful to

the Society;

Potential for Commercialization,

Economic viability and activities;

None obvious;

Must not have been disclosed;

Must have scientific basis, reproducible and must

not be shrouded in mystery,16

Key Conditions for Patentability(IP)

Novelty(new);

Inventive Steps(Not obvious);

Industrial Applications; and

Must Not be against the public interest/

morality.

17

Socio-economic Benefits of IP Commercialization

Companies are created for exploitation,

Employment opportunities are created,

New products are taken to the market,

Financial returns to the investors,

Future research is expanded,

Major source of revenue in academic institutions,

etc

Core Issues in IP Development in Nigeria

Low IP Awareness & poor culture of IP in development;

Absence of a National IP Policy

Low investment in R&D Activities;

Partnership between Industry and Research Centres is weak,

Low Commercial Content of Domestic R&D Results;

Ownership of IP and Revenue sharing formula not defined;

Absence of formal Guidelines on R&D Commercialisation

etc

Nigeria’s current Model IPTTO Mgt.

Case Studies: IP in Development

Fourteen(14) Universities in the US,

Northern Carolina University-US,

Niprisan: Sickle cell Drugs of NIPR-Idu-Abuja,But the commercialization of Niprisan, even with a potential market opportunity estimated to worth over $1 billion,

has been mired in controversy for over a decade. It has ended up denying millions of people affected by the scourge

of the disorder an opportunity of having a better life. Over 12 million people, mostly with origins in sub-Saharan

Africa, India, Saudi Arabia and Mediterranean countries(U.E.Epku in Quartz Africa, 2019).

Nigerian FIIRO Energy Biscuit,

High Nutrient Density Biscuit developed by

FIRRO,patented Via NOTAP and Commercialised by

NASCO Corporation.

Universities Innovation

Disclosures

Patent

Applications

Patent

issued

License

Agreements

Start-

ups

Programme

Revenue in $mWisconsin(2010) 350 200 130 61 2 $86.00Princeton(2009) 77 107 38 33 N/A $65.60Stanford(2009) 443 N/A N/A 77 9 $65.10MIT(2010) 530 184 166 57 10 $60.10Washington(2009) 349 262 40 220 10 $50.40Cornell(2010) 338 420 140 114 N/A $31.90UCLA(2009) 333 179 60 37 N/A $28.90UC Sam Diego(2009) 373 286 64 85 9 $26.30Michigan(2009) 350 151 72 78 8 $18.30Johns Hopkins(2009) 352 579 46 99 10 $16.20Harvard(2010) 301 133 38 37 7 $10.20Wash U.(2009) 125 106 50 44 2 $7.90Pittsburgh(2010) 225 69 33 54 N/A $6.10Colorado(2009)

258 204 24 61 11 $4.40

IP Assets Owned by Universities and the income generated in the USA(Darrell,2012)

Case Studies: IP in Development:

North Carolina State University IP Annual Report 2012

(After Essien,2013)

No Item Quantity

1 Patent Issued 806

2 Patent Pending 248

3 IP Disclosure 3,450

4 Products To Market 230

5 Startup Companies 100

6 Jobs Created 6,800

7 Jobs Created In North Carolina Only 320

8 Royalty $1.5 billion

Source Office of Technology Licensing (OTL)

Ranking of Universities in the US based on achievements in IP

and Patents (Top five)

R/k Institution Patents

Score

Licenses

Issued Score

License

Income Score

Start-Up

Score

Indexed

Score

1 University of

Utah

88.27 89.38 94.04 93.90 100

2 Columbia

University

85.86 84.54 97.08 88.50 87.83

3 University of

Florida

88.60 .95.37 91.60 87.84 97.66

4 Brigham

Young

University

85.59 85.83 86.76 94.95 97.58

5 Stanford

University

96.28 85.43 94.57 81.94 95.60

Source: Milken Institute,AUTM Statt Data Set

Typical Revenue Sharing

Cumulative net

income Inventors

Research

Team/Department

R&D

Director

Trust

First £50,000 50 10 20 20

Next£100,000 40 10 25 25

Next£150,000 30 10 30 30

Over£250,000 25 10 32.5 32.5

NOTAP IP Programs & Achievements

Establishment of 48 IPTTOs across tertiary

institutions in Nigeria(August, 2019),

Patent Support Services to Nigerian researchers,

Capacity Building/Sensitization on IP

information, education and communication in

Nigeria,

Commemoration of African Day for Technology

and Intellectual Property(IP) on behalf of the

Federal Government,

etc

Figure 1:Location IPTTOs Per Geo-political Zones in Nigeria(August,2019):48

28

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Southwest Southeast southsouth Northeast Northwest Northcentral

10

8

6

4

7 7

Numbers

Geo-political ZonesSource: NOTAP,2018

Figure 24: IP Grants Facilitated by NOTAP per Year:

29

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 October, 2018

68

6 6

32

6

16

5053

No of

Patents

Year

Figure 5: IP policy Advocacy Workshops/Seminars(2016),

30

IPTTO: aims/objectives/Functions

AIM OF IPTTO:

To promote the culture of Intellectual Property Rights(IPRs) and development of locally motivated technologies.

OBJECTIVES:

(i) Development and enforcement of institutional

intellectual property policy,

(ii) Creating awareness and educating researchers

in the tertiary institutions on the management of

intellectual property assets,

(iii) Promoting interaction and strengthening

linkages between university and industry/market,

Objective condt.

(iv)Developing a robust intellectual property

rights through patenting, copyright, technology

licensing,

(v) Encouraging technology transfer through

marketing of intellectual property rights to

investors

Responsibilities of the IPTTO Coordinator include;

Liaising with the institutional authority to

develop IP policy,

Sensitizing the institutional communities on the

activities of IPTTO through seminars and

workshops,

Collation of database on complete R&D projects

in the institution.

Evaluation of the Database of R&D Projects todetermine its commercial viability,

Collation of database of the researchers, documentingtheir contacts and areas of expertise,

Securing IP protection for viable R&D Resultsemanating from the institution,

Seeking partnerships fro the translation of R&DResults into products or services,

Monitoring on-going viable research projects toensure destination-market,

etc

Some Challenges.

Changing the mindset of Nigerian researchers;

Weak IP awareness and literacy level in the country;

Absence of IP policy in most Nigerian academies,

Inadequate infrastructure for research and innovation,

Poor innovative culture & inadequate investment in R&D

programs,

Low commercial content of indigenous IP Results

Weak enforcement of IP Laws infringement

etc

36

Recommendations

Re-orientation of the mind-set of Nigerian

academics,

Establish IP policy/administrative framework

Robust IP awareness creation/trainings,

Ensure that all institutional funded R&D

activities must be market driven,

Improved investment on R&D

activities/infrastructure,

Improve institutional visibility/Public relation

Etc.37

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of Intellectual Property(IP) assets and its role indevelopment has not been desired attention in Nigeriantertiary institutions ;

Legal protection of IP assets is fundamental to itscommercialisation;

National expenditure on R & D activities is still belowcontinental average of 0.41%(UNESCO)

About 90% of technology powering the Nigerian economy isimported and 50% is IP based with huge to the nation(NOTAP,2018);

Effective management of indigenous IP could makesignificant contribution to the institutional internalgenerated revenue. 38

Thank you

Thank You all