Sample Research Collaboration Agreement

Harvard OTD organizes thousands of material transfers each year to facilitate scientific progress and innovation. The following model agreements contain terms representative of Material Transfer Agreements (SAAs), but serve only to illustrate and are subject to change. In collaborative research, many discoveries fall into CE2. A well-written research cooperation agreement defines how and by whom findings of ownership are to be made in cases where IP/TP is detected by either party. Most collaborative research agreements have five general components. Agreements can be a bit flexible in the terminology they use. The names assigned to the sub-buckets are not very important. It is important that the agreement covers the following points: confidentiality agreement (confidentiality agreement, confidential disclosure agreement) (concluded) A legal document allowing the transfer of intellectual property from one party to another, the latter being authorized to use the information for specific purposes and only for the purposes indicated in the agreement and committing to: not to pass on the information to others. Another point to consider is the quantification of the work to be done. It may not be necessary to use precise numbers (for example.B.

the types and replications of an experiment or the number of specimens you will use), but to add general instructions on the size and scope of collaborative research. For example, if you are doing a power study and you are using 30 mice per replication, indicate this in the agreement. In this way, both parties will be aware of the magnitude of the types of data to be generated and the level of resources needed for their share of work. Researchers often think they understand what the other has in mind, but without a written description, such assumptions often give rise to misunderstandings. For example, if a researcher at the institute says he or she will “test a new variety in the fields,” he or she may have in mind an area of half a hectare needed to produce enough plants for publication, while the company scientist has 100 hectares in mind. So be as clear as possible about the sizes or number of replications and other quantifiable aspects in the specifications. Please click to view a number of license agreements. Granting an option is usually very useful, as it is very difficult to predict which IP/TP will be generated. In addition, it is difficult to predict the value of such a new IP/TP.

Therefore, agreements that directly grant a license and fully represent the conditions of the certificate can lead to a gross miscalculation of the value of new IPs/TPs, either undervalued or overvalued. If the IP/TP is overvalued, it would likely have a deterrent effect on the future development of such an IP/TP. If the new IP/TP is significantly undervalued, it can act as a block for future relations between the parties, as one party has been treated unfairly. In the case of both approaches, the cooperation agreement should provide for time limits within which the party obtaining the option to obtain a licence must decide whether it wishes to execute its option and acquire a licence. The option should not be open. In this way, another lessee can be sought if the cooperating party does not wish to develop and market the new IP/TP. After establishing an inventory (in the list of materials) of the IP/TP that will be introduced into the project, the next step will be to clearly determine how to determine the ownership of the new property (new IP/TP) discovered as part of the project. In a typical collaborative research project, there is potential for three classes of new IP/TP: consider the following examples of two statements of objectives from real agreements: Perhaps the most important section of the general provisions deals with intellectual property and material property (TP) provisions. . . .