Research for the Situation of Technology Transfer in European Countries *Overseas Researcher: Ryoko OSHIKAMO **Acquisition of useful technologies by technology transfer (TT) is one strategy to promotetechnological development by reducing development costs and the time investment. Research results
by universities and others can become basic patents in the future, and there is a high probability thattechnology required by companies is present in the research results. For smooth international TT, it
should be noted that the legislations and systems concerning TT differ among countries.
Japan concluded the Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union (EU), andthe economic relationship with the EU will be strengthened. In order to facilitate TT between Japanand Europe, it is necessary to understand the noteworthy points and the actual conditions of licensing
in each country. In this research, the legislations and systems relating to industry-academia
collaboration (IAC) among European countries and between Japan and Europe, and Europe are
analyzed for consideration of the institutional harmonization necessary for smooth TT and relevantmeasures.

I. Introduction and TT in Europe
Licensing is subject to agreement between the parties based on the principle of freedom ofcontract but the content of the contract should be competitive 1. Licensing activities relating to TT arebasically competitive both in Japan and Europe 2 . Therefore, in this research, IAC in European
countries and the attribution of university inventions, which are subject to licensing in patent law, areanalyzed.
The TT system depends on the economic and science and technology policies of thegovernments of each country, and in many cases special laws are formulated. Therefore, this researchalso considers each national policy and TT system of European countries.
As legal framework on European TT, at the European level, there is the European Function* This is a summary of the report published under the 2018 Collaborative Research Project on Harmonization of Industrial Property

Right Systems under a commission from the Japan Patent Office.

** LL.M (IP & Competition), Helsinki University Faculty of Law.

Jiyoung Han, ‘Study on Intellectual Property Licensing under Antimonopoly Law in the U.S., Europe, and Japan,’ (Institute ofIntellectual Property) (2005) p.1-5
2 R&DBER Prefaces(6)(8); R. Oshikamo, ‘Comparative Analysis of Issues on Patent Laws for Medical Invention on Recent Drug
Development between Japan and Europe’ (Japan Patent Office FY2016 Industrial Property Research Promotion Project (Heisei 2830) Report)(Foundation for Intellectual Property Institute of Intellectual Property) (2018), p.26-27, 31-33.
1iTreaty (TFEU), and the European Council establishes rules, directives, etc. based on the proposal of
the European Commission. Study is conducted on TT and attribution of university inventions inGermany, the UK, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, the Czech Republic,
Poland and Latvia.
1. Trends in TT Policy
Common science and technology policies of European countries tend to expansion of
government R&D investment, promotion of IAC and technological innovation of SMEs 3.
(1) Difference in TT policies among European countries
The TT policy of the centralized states is government-led from policy planning to promotion.
In the decentralized states, the technological innovation policy is governed by the federal
governments in Germany and Belgium while in Switzerland the authority of the federal government
is limited to backward support for realization of technological innovation 4. The TT policies of the
Scandinavian model countries are promoted by the central state governments. Though the countries
are relatively small, they are evaluated as innovation leaders 5.
(2) Background of TT Policy Conversion
In Germany, the economic downturn after the East-West unification was the turning point of
their national policy 6. In Switzerland and Finland, TT was promoted during the economic recession
period in the 1990s 7. In the UK, a drastic policy of university budget reduction due to the introductionof a liberal economy triggered universities to start TT business 8. The Belgian TT was introduced tocompensate for labor shortage 9. For Central and Eastern European and the former Soviet Union
countries, the end of the Cold War and the accession to the EU ware the turning points. But due toTokyo Institute of Technology (TIM), ‘Research Report on Cooperation Policy between University Intellectual Property
Headquarters and TLO’ (2004) p.9.; J. Edler, K. Stefan, and B. Maria, ‘Changing Governance of Research and Technology Policy:
The European Research Area' (2003), p.169-175.
4 National Center for Industrial Property Information and Training (INPIT), ‘Research Report on Trend of Technology Transfer
Market in Western Europe (March 2018)’ (2008) p.5-6.; ASTP-Proton Annual Conference 23-25.5.2018 Liège, Belgium ‘LIÈGE
SCIENCE PARK: GUIDED TOUR’ on 23.5.2018.; R & D Strategy Center (CRDS) ‘Overseas Research Report Science andTechnology Trend of Competitive Small Countries’ (2014) p.21-24.
5 CRDS2014, p.46.; European Commission (EC),‘Country Report 2018 Sweden,’p.1, 4-5, 46-47.; EC, ‘Country Report 2018
Denmark,’p.1, 38
6 Edler, p.88-89.; N. Andoh, T. Sukagawa, K. Tamai, ‘Current State of Technology Transfer from Universities / Industry-Academia
Collaboration in the World (1) European Countries (Germany and Austria)’ PATENT Vol.58, No.4, (2005) p.54.
7 T. Maki, Tokugikon, Vol.24, No.260; CRDS2014, p.24-27.
8 S. Nakazawa, ‘On the Present State of Technology Transfer in UK Universities,’ Tokugikon, no.270 (2013) p.110.
9 Gee, p.56-58.
3ii

aftereffects of the Communist era, the problem of private enterprises not being involved in TT still
exists 10.
Belgium and Switzerland are small countries and technological innovation is essential to theirindustrial structure. However, fundamental industries have been established for a long time and eachprovince performs TT in accordance with its own culture 11. Belgium adopts a strategy specialized intechnological innovation and Switzerland has been internationally highly evaluated for technologicalinnovation capabilities specializing in the pharmaceuticals and watches industries which are highly
profitable 12. Finland has recognized the dominance of domestic industries 13 and the UK has hightechnical innovation capabilities in specific industries in specific areas 14 . TT may be considered
suitable for promoting ‘selection and concentration’ of domestic industries.
(3) Financial Support
In European countries, tax incentives and entrepreneurship promotion funds are formulated forsupporting SMEs. For example, in the UK R&D tax credit system, the deduction rate for SMEs ishigher than that for large companies 15. However, in Germany, though tax incentives are considered,they have yet to be introduced 16.
Many countries formulate tax incentives for R&D investment. In France, research tax credit(RTC) is the key to IAC 17. Britain has a tradition that charity organizations support R&D, and since
the preferential tax system for donation is also developed, companies and individuals tend to donate
to charitable organizations. Tax incentives relating to the so-called patent income ‘patent box’ havealso been introduced 18.
II. TT System of IAC(1) TT system
The ‘Fraunhofer Model’ is an incentive for IAC in Germany. Under this model, the researchEC, ‘Country Report Czech 2018’ p.36-37.; EC, ‘Country Report Poland 2018’ p.32.; EC, ‘Country Report Latvia’ p.3, 5.
CRDS2014, p.4-12.
12 Gee, p.56-58, 65-66.; CRDS2014, p.3-12, 17-18, 22-23.
13 CRDS2014, p.46.
14 CRDS2014, p.4-12.
15 Y. Tsuda, ‘Science and Technology in the UK in March 2015’ (CRDS Overseas Trend Unit) (2015), p.52
16 CRDS, ‘Trend Report of Science Technology and Innovation in Germany (CRDS Germany)’ (2015), p.32-34.
17 S. Berger, ‘Reforms in the French Industrial Ecosystem’ (2016) p.13.; INPIT, p.144.
18 J. Chapman, and, Y. Tsuda, ‘Science and Technology in the UK in December 2015’ (CRDS Overseas Trend Unit) (2015) p.14-15.;
T. Sawada, ‘Research and Development Strategy in Each Country Third German Manufacturing Industry Advanced Project"Industry 4.0’ Industry-Academia-Government Collaboration Journal (2014) p.14-15, 52.; Tsuda, p.14-15, 52.
10
11

iii

budget amounts for laboratories for the next fiscal year are set in conjunction with the previous year's
amounts relating to collaborative research with the private sector 19. In France, the Carnot Instituteand RTC are incentives for collaboration with the private sector, and the TT of public research
institutes is increasing 20.
In Switzerland, the Federal Government is responsible for supporting regional IAC andfacilitating large-scale TT in the biotechnology field 21. In Finland, an entrepreneurial activity system
wherein research results obtained by universities are given back to the community has been
established by the national innovation policy 22. The Danish TT system is mainly composed of aplurality of organizations established within the government-led legal framework 23.
In Belgium, each regional government conducts their regional TT including universities 24. In
Germany, all states have established university-related TTOs, and there is a TT member organization
as a comprehensive alignment agency of the TTOs 25. TT in the UK is promoted by both centralized
government policy and decentralized regional autonomy strategy 26.
(2) Clusters
TT seems to be compatible with regionally-oriented industrial-specialized economies. Local
governments conduct TTs in Belgium and Switzerland 27. The Catapult program, a unique cluster
program in the UK, includes a high-value manufacturing catapult center with the latest researchequipment that individual universities and companies cannot invest in, which supports a wide rangeof manufacturing industries 28 . Switzerland has some biotechnology clusters where global
pharmaceutical companies are centered 29 . Many companies in the Swedish cluster IDEON
commercially succeeded by IAC with the adjoining Lund University. The Copenhagen region in
Denmark and the Skane region in Sweden have formed a cross-border cluster, Medicon Valley 30.
Though Germany is also in an environment where clusters are easily formed, the excessively
CRDS Germany, p.24.
CRDS, ‘Trend Report of Science Technology and Innovation in France (CRDS France)’ (2015), p.24.
21 CRDS2014, p.22-27.
22 Interview with Dr. Gen Tamyar (Commercialization Officer of Helsinki Innovation Services Ltd.) on 6.8.2018 at University of
Helsinki.
23 H. Iwabuchi, ‘Science and Technology Policy in Denmark - as an Example of Scandinavian Science and Technology Policy (March 2005)’(National Institute of Science and Technology Policy of Ministry of Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Scienceand Technology (MEXT))(2005), p.28-34.
24 V. Blondel, ‘The Research and Innovation Landscape in Belgium,’ (ASTP-Proton Annual Conference 23-25.5.2018 Liège Belgium)on 24.5.2018.; V. Reuter, ‘The Research and Innovation Landscape in Belgium’(ASTP-Proton Annual Conference 2018).; Gee,
p.54-58.
25 INPIT, p.5-6.
26 Nakazawa, p.103.; Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), ‘Survey on Case Report on Intellectual Property Distribution
and Financing,’ p.4-5.; INPIT, p.4-6.
27 Blondel.; Reuter.; Gee, p.54-58.; CRDS2014, p.22-23.
28 Chapman, p.17, 19-21.; Tsuda, p.15, 18-19.
29 CRDS2014, p.21.
30 Iwabuchi, p.34.
19
20

iv

established regional clusters have been evaluated as problematic. The French regional TTOs founded
in response to SMEs have not functioned well 31.
(3) University technology transfer agencies
The common service of university TTOs in each country is to support the commercializationof university inventions and to select license partners. In addition, the TTOs of Belgian universities
are in charge of TT of universities and university hospitals and play a central role in technologicalinnovation and ecosystems, encouraging economic growth 32 . In Finland, the university TTOs
functions as a hub for IAC 33.
Public research institutes that have succeeded in TT in Germany and France are advancing TT
in their own way 34. Autonomy is given to universities in the UK, and TTOs of Oxford University andCambridge University are highly evaluated worldwide. It seems preferable that TTOs haveautonomy 35.
For example, the knowledge transfer office (KTO) of Leuven Catholic University is involved
in licensing activities of clinical trial data in the life science field, and income from the life sciencefield, including blockbuster pharmaceutically active substances, is high 36 . As a result ofstrengthening IAC by concentrating their resources on the R&D of the pharmaceutical industry, thebasis of industry in Switzerland, their international competitiveness has been highly evaluated byincreasing the number of SMEs including start-up companies 37 . ‘Innovation Mill,’ a framework
exploiting dormant patents 38, in Finland is also useful.
In Finland, Denmark, Poland, etc., TTOs evaluate the possibility of commercialization ofuniversity inventions. In Poland, when TTOs decide the commercialization of an invention, a ‘special
purpose medium’ functioning as a startup company for preparing for TT is established and theuniversity invention will be transferred from the university to this intermediary. The aim of theintermediary is to reduce the economic risk to the university by indirectly managing university
inventions and to flexibly promote the commercialization 39. In Finland, the national and regional
financial funding organizations also support the commercialization of university inventions after
ASTP-Proton.; INPIT, p.6-7, 131-132; Ando et al., p.55; Chapman, p.17, 19-21; Tsuda, p.15, 18-19; Tayanagi; CRDS France, p.21;
Iwabuchi, p.34.
32 ASTP-Proton.
33 Maki.
34 Max Planck Innovation (MPI), ‘Connecting Science and Business’ (2016) p.9-13.; INPIT, p.133-142
35 Nakazawa, p.104-5; TIM, p.19-20.; Chapman, p.20.
36 KU Leuven KLO Website https://lrd.kuleuven.be/en retrieved on 31.10.2018.; Hearing from Mr. Wim Fyen and Mr. Ivo Roelants(KU Leuven R&D) on 16-27.10.2018.
37 KU Leuven KLO website; Hearing with Mr. Fyen and Mr. Roelants; CRDS2014, p.27-28.
38 Hightech Finland website‘IT’S ALL ABOUT IDEAS – AND WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH THEM’
http://www.hightechfinland.com/direct.aspx?area=htf&prm1=1035&prm2=article retrieved on 22.10.2018; CRDS2014, p.46-47.
39 Interview with Ms. Czanik-Kawecka in Uniwersytet Medyczny w Warszawie on 17.11.2017.; Oshikamo, p.31.
31v

university inventions judged to have no prospects for commercialization are returned to theresearchers 40.
III. Impact of Attribution of University Inventions on IAC
Some countries have university inventions stipulated in education-related legislation. Ideas
such as that contribution to society through the commercialization of research results is recognized
as one mission of universities are relatively new. The degree of penetration of the concept seemed tobe reflected in the handling of attribution of university inventions in each country.
Many TTs have been carried out with the private connection between university researchers
and the private sector. Before the German Employee Invention Act was revised in 2002, university
inventions were attributed to researchers under the Professor Privilege system. The
commercialization of university inventions was not enhanced while the researchers obtained
excessive economic interests. The Act was therefore amended and universities would become
responsible for the commercialization of university inventions 41.
On the other hand, the Professor Privilege system still exists in Sweden which they see assuitable for a laissez-faire approach based on market mechanisms and that the attribution ofuniversity inventions should be made on a case-by-case basis 42 . The attribution of university
inventions in Poland is to university researchers, and the university obtains profits throughcommercialization as compensation. The aims so are to avoid financial risks for universities and toprovide university TTOs with incentives for promoting TT 43.
University inventions belong to universities in the UK and France. Even in countries where
university inventions are attributed to university researchers such as the Czech Republic andDenmark, universities can manage patent applications by making a decision on a claim for thetransfer of rights from researchers 44.

Interviews with Ms. Czanik-Kawecka; Oshikamo; Interview with Dr. Tamyar
T. Takenaka "Employee invention systems of Western countries in comparison with Japanese system" (JIPA Industrial Crossfunctional Duties Inventor Forum Document); Nomura Research Institute, ‘Researchers, engineers and others from the perspectiveof system and operation of each country concerning employee inventions: Survey report on human resources leakage’ (2014) p.1518; Patent Office material 5-3 Employee invention system in Germany
https://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou/toushin/shingikai/pdf/tokkyo_5/11_5-3.pdf (retrieved on 18.2.2018)
42 Tayanagi
43 Szkalej, p.297-299.; Interview with Prof. Dr. Justyna Ożegalska-Trybalska (Director of the IP Department of Division of Laws ofJagiellonian University), Mr. Krystian Gurba (Manager of the Centre for Technology Transfer CTTRU of Jagiellonian University),
Dr. Radpslaw Rudż (Leader of Technology Transfer Section of CTTRU) at Tecnology Transfer Office of Jagiellonian University
on 20.11.2017.
44 Interview with Dr. Machu.
40

41

vi

IV. Possibility of Institutional Harmonization Relating to IAC
TT is affected by the science and technology policy of each country. If a successful TT system
in one country is introduced into other countries while ignoring the government policies, the system
may not always adapt to the culture of each country. Moreover, as mentioned above, the autonomy
of TTOs is one factor for successful TT. Therefore, one university TT system does not always
conform to all countries and universities.
There are many university TTOs evaluating the commercialization of university inventions. It
is therefore desirable that staff of university TTOs can accurately evaluate inventions. Meanwhile,
making licensing contracts with their own inventions and obtaining research expenditures are
incentives for university researchers who have close contact with companies. This ensures thecommercialization of their inventions as well. Even KTO of Leuven Catholic University of Belgium
where evaluation is extremely high worldwide, actively promotes personal connection of academic
researchers as licensing partners 45. In this respect, the German system is worth considering in that
university researchers can decide whether to notify their university inventions to their university by
their own will and there is room for personal TT by university researchers. From the viewpoint of
reliable commercialization, the support system for commercialization of inventions by the nationaland regional organizations in Finland is also effective.
Through some interviews, it was found that the appointment and education of human resourcesfamiliar with international business are important for the success of university TT. The high qualityof research results transferred due to the high education level also works effectively 46. Some research
institutes succeed by TT of blockbuster inventions 47.
Many university TTOs are still in the process of development and it seems premature toconclude the pros and cons of the IAC systems.
V. Conclusion = Consideration of Institutional Harmonization Necessary for Smooth TT
For smooth TT, it is necessary to conclude an appropriate contract in addition to proper
approach to technical seeds. In international TT, since the national TT policy and business practicediffer among countries, contracts with foreign companies involve complicated procedures andnegotiations take a long time 48. Therefore, the existence of an international TT agreement model or
KU Leuven KLO website.
Discussion with Mr. Miklas Vargic (Attorney), Ms. Alice komarkova (Manager of the Technology Transfer Office of Pardubice
University), Mr. Tomas Kubesa (Attorney of Technology Transfer Office of Brno Technical University) etc., at the Annual
Conference of Czech Bar Association on 21.9.2018; Hearing with Mr. Fyen and Mr. Roelants.
47 MPI, p.9-13.; INPIT, p.133-142.
48 Discussion with Mr. Vargic et al; Hearing with Mr. Fyen and Mr. Roelants.
45
46

vii

materials for examining the content of TT agreements in other countries and business practices would
avoid unnecessary conflicts and shorten the negotiation period. Some countries provide domestic TT
contract models. A French public research institution provides a term sheet for reducing thenegotiation period. The Belgian government also offers a similar sheet 49. Those must be useful.
As approach to technology seeds, university researchers can often find licensing partners bythemselves. However, this does not always happen. Therefore, some countries, states and universities
have their branch organizations abroad to construct local networks for IAC 50. However, university
TTOs do not always have branches abroad.
In the context of approaching seeds, the Finnish ‘Innovation Mill’ to promote the utilization of
dormant patents may be worth considering 51. License of Light (LOR), aiming at promotion of theutilization of patent rights 52 and the German system, ‘interest in granting license,’ where a patentee
can register their intention for licensing their invention without legally binding force 53, may also be
worth considering.
"User friendliness" of the system, where anyone can easily access the information of inventions,is also important. Considering the mission of the patent specification as technical literature 54, it isbelieved that patent literature can be positively utilized for matching of TT 55. It is easy to obtain
information on inventions from the bibliographic page of a patent application by accessing databasesof national patent offices and WIPO. Therefore, if the intention of an applicant who wishes to licensewith a third party can be expressed in this bibliographic page of the patent application, the period
from searching seeds to negotiation with the patentee can be reduced and approaching seeds can bepromoted dramatically.

MEXT, ‘Survey Research on Handling Research Result from Joint Research etc. Learning from Case of Intellectual Property
Management at University etc -Provision of Sakura Tool-.; Oshikamo, p.28, 36.; Heinz Goddar,‘University/Industry Cooperationin Europe’1.9.2017 http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/amc/en/docs/vienna51goddar.pdf; INPIT, p.133-142; Hearing with Mr.
Fyen and Mr. Roelants.
50 Tsuda, p.59-60; Interview with Dr. Hana Kosova in ASTP-Proton Annual Conference 23-25.5.2018 Liège, Belgium on 24.5.2018.;
Nakazawa, p.103-5; TIM, p.19-20.
51 Hightech Finland, p.46-47.
52 German Patent Act 23(1); Dennemeyer, ‘Licence of Right: A possibility to reduce maintenance fees’
http://legacy.dennemeyer.com/jp/white-papers/licence-of-right/ retrieved on 18.2.2018; Oshikamo, p.29-30, 36.
53 Intellectual Property Research Institute, ‘Research Report on Fee Policy Measures on Industrial Property Rights’ (2009) p. 54.
54 S.Yoshifuji, K. Kumagai ‘Outline of Patent Law (13th Edition)(Yuhikaku) p.247-8.
55 Dr. Goddar; Oshikamo, p.36.
49viii