Joint Response to the HERC IP Framework Consultation

This joint submission by Research Australia, Medicines Australia, the Medical Technology Association of Australia (MTAA) and AusBiotech responds to the consultation paper on a Higher Education Research Commercialisation (HERC) Intellectual Property (IP) Framework, intended to standardise commercialisation agreements between universities and business. The organisations support a standard framework in principle but object that the 1,500-word limit for responses to 17 questions prevents adequate comment, and ask for an extended consultation with sector-specific workshops. Their main concern is the proposal to make use of the framework mandatory in many circumstances. Citing the Office of Best Practice Regulation’s seven-step approach, they argue that alternatives to mandating the framework and their costs and benefits have not been assessed. They warn that mandatory contracts could deter large companies and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), would require legislation and a complex transition timetable, could stifle innovation in agreement types, may not suit international parties, and are unusual internationally, noting that the UK Lambert toolkit is voluntary. They propose that the framework be available to all entities without restriction from its release, with a formal pilot collecting data on which parts are used, time and costs, and reasons for non-use, compared with agreements made outside it. In the longer term they suggest a register of commercialisation agreements and, if warranted, an opt-out model for certain research funding.