東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Histor...

Fishman, Elliot A.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Historical precedents in university-industry technology transfer.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Historical precedents in university-industry technology transfer./
Author:	Fishman, Elliot A.
Description:	312 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 57-04, Section: A, page: 1814.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International57-04A.
Subject:	History of Science. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9627919

MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Historical precedents in university-industry technology transfer.
Fishman, Elliot A.

MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Historical precedents in university-industry technology transfer. - 312 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 57-04, Section: A, page: 1814.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1996.

This dissertation examines the history of MIT's Patent Policy in its formative era, roughly 1932 through 1946. It was during this period that MIT administrators conceived policies and established precedents to shape a practice recognizable today as deliberate technology transfer. MIT was one of the first American universities to license patents. Over time, the Institute also became one of the most prolific centers of such activity, and its practices were widely emulated. By tracing the motivations behind MIT's patent policy, insight is sought not only on MIT's history, but more generally on the overall development of economic relationships between American universities and industry. Many contemporary assumptions about the way business and academia should interact are rooted in MIT's early experience. It will be argued that MIT's patent policy was not conceived by any individual, nor was the policy deduced with a consistent economic rationale. Instead, the evolving policy can be seen as a highly complex social phenomena, in which disparate communities of businessmen and scientists, administrators and technologists, struggled to exploit particular professional interests. Social history, rather than economic history, is the appropriate interpretive mode. The aspirations of numerous faculty entrepreneurs were mediated in highly politicized patent committee. Committee debates centered on the distribution of equity in patents, on the terms of licenses, and on public relations concerns. Over time, the Patent Committee began discussing potential revenues and the financial risks of litigation. MIT's patent policy was further influenced by Research Corporation, a non-profit patent agent with close ties to MIT. Among the entrepreneurial faculty discussed are Nicholas Milas, Wilmer Barrow, Robert Van de Graaff, John Trump, and C. Hawely Cartwright. The premise of this dissertation is that a fundamental transmogrification occurred: In 1931, MIT's interest in patents was essentially passive. After a period of about 15 years, those passive interests were transformed into an enthusiastic culture of technology transfer. Administrative practices for technology transfer in 1946 conceptually resemble those of today.Subjects--Topical Terms:

896972
History of Science.

MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Historical precedents in university-industry technology transfer.
LDR:03119nmm 2200265 4500 001 1852351
005 20051230065948.5
008 130614s1996 eng d
035 $a (UnM)AAI9627919
035 $a AAI9627919
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Fishman, Elliot A. $3 1940213
245 1 0 $a MIT Patent Policy, 1932-1946: Historical precedents in university-industry technology transfer.
300 $a 312 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 57-04, Section: A, page: 1814.
500 $a Supervisor: Arnold Thackray.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1996.
520 $a This dissertation examines the history of MIT's Patent Policy in its formative era, roughly 1932 through 1946. It was during this period that MIT administrators conceived policies and established precedents to shape a practice recognizable today as deliberate technology transfer. MIT was one of the first American universities to license patents. Over time, the Institute also became one of the most prolific centers of such activity, and its practices were widely emulated. By tracing the motivations behind MIT's patent policy, insight is sought not only on MIT's history, but more generally on the overall development of economic relationships between American universities and industry. Many contemporary assumptions about the way business and academia should interact are rooted in MIT's early experience. It will be argued that MIT's patent policy was not conceived by any individual, nor was the policy deduced with a consistent economic rationale. Instead, the evolving policy can be seen as a highly complex social phenomena, in which disparate communities of businessmen and scientists, administrators and technologists, struggled to exploit particular professional interests. Social history, rather than economic history, is the appropriate interpretive mode. The aspirations of numerous faculty entrepreneurs were mediated in highly politicized patent committee. Committee debates centered on the distribution of equity in patents, on the terms of licenses, and on public relations concerns. Over time, the Patent Committee began discussing potential revenues and the financial risks of litigation. MIT's patent policy was further influenced by Research Corporation, a non-profit patent agent with close ties to MIT. Among the entrepreneurial faculty discussed are Nicholas Milas, Wilmer Barrow, Robert Van de Graaff, John Trump, and C. Hawely Cartwright. The premise of this dissertation is that a fundamental transmogrification occurred: In 1931, MIT's interest in patents was essentially passive. After a period of about 15 years, those passive interests were transformed into an enthusiastic culture of technology transfer. Administrative practices for technology transfer in 1946 conceptually resemble those of today.
590 $a School code: 0175.
650 4 $a History of Science. $3 896972
650 4 $a Economics, History. $3 1017418
690 $a 0585
690 $a 0509
710 2 0 $a University of Pennsylvania. $3 1017401
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 57-04A.
790 1 0 $a Thackray, Arnold, $e advisor
790 $a 0175
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 1996
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=9627919