New York University hauled in $157 million in 2006 by charging licensing fees to use faculty inventions. Stanford University, a distant second that year, collected $61 million.

But locally -- where universities put the word "research" in Research Triangle Park -- licensing fees didn't crack $10 million combined.

That relatively small take underscores a truth that often goes unmentioned when boosters talk about the wonders of RTP: Technology transfer hasn't brought much to the coffers of Triangle universities.

"The fact is that most of these massive dollar figures you see are for drugs or treatments that are tied to blockbusters -- or people suspect they are going to be blockbusters," said Dave Winwood, former associate vice chancellor for technology development at N.C. State University. "And those just don't happen too often."

Success without profit wasn't the goal of universities when schools won the right to patent faculty inventions more than 20 years ago. Back then, landmark legislation sparked visions of gold in the nation's ivory towers.

"I'm surprised to hear universities say the income doesn't make any difference," said Larry Sumney, CEO of Semiconductor Research Corporation of Durham, a national organization that works with dozens of universities to commercialize inventions. "That's not the way it started. The original intent was to develop a source of revenue."

But with only 28 U.S. universities topping $10 million in licensing fees, tech transfer officials have redefined value. Today, inventions are valued for the businesses they launch, the jobs they create or the improvements to your life.

"It's university administrators who expected tech transfer offices to be profit centers," said Monica Doss, president of the Council for Entrepreneurial Development in Durham. "Those who run the programs have known for a while that that isn't likely, but they are stuck between the reality and the expectation."

No boatload of money

The modest returns haven't stopped universities from seeking new markets. NCSU, Duke University and UNC-Chapel Hill have negotiated more than 1,000 active licenses combined. Businesses spun out of those efforts, such as Cree in Durham and Biolex Therapeutics in Pittsboro, are well known locally.

Biolex, for example, employs more than 100 people, has attracted at least $100 million in private investment and has several products in the pipeline. It has just about everything NCSU could want in a spinout -- except for profit.

"The return as far as royalties are concerned so far has been a big fat zero," said Winwood, who took a job last month as CEO of the University of Alabama Research Foundation. "However, I still think it's one of my biggest success stories."

That's because tech transfer officials say their job is to move ideas to market and stimulate economic development -- not make a boatload of money.

If an invention generates publicity or some lucky faculty member strikes it rich, universities are more than happy to celebrate the moment.

"But we don't pursue an idea based on how much money it will make," said Rose Ritts, director of the Office of Licensing and Ventures at Duke. "We look for a corporate partner based on an idea's potential to benefit society."

Law incubates patents

Few people knew what to expect when tech transfer offices started popping up on campuses after Congress approved the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, but they knew university inventions were routinely dying in the lab.

"The government was funding a lot of research, but there was no way to manage it and deliver it to companies," Winwood said. "And at the time, the U.S. was getting its rear end kicked by Japan."

Next page >