From a historical perspective, users of IT first paid largely for hardware, then software, and today services. Today hardware is inexpensive relative to its historical cost. Today the real cost of software continues to be well beyond what you pay up front for the licence. Hence the focus is more and more on services applied to the hardware and software. In this opportunity open source software is growing at an exponential rate.
Recently a lawyer insisted that a contractual disclaimer he put into a contract should remain despite my strong protest. He said my client should simply deal with the issue by conducting "due diligence".
I replied the disclaimer was unreasonably wide removing any scope for complaints. I added that my client would do "due diligence" if the lawyer could provide me with a "due diligence" checklist at the level of a managerial risk management checklist (supported as they often are by recognised standards). The phone went silent. I never received any "due diligence" checklist.
Technology forecasting is fundamental to what must be done in technology commercialisation. Legal opinion (AKA legal forecasting) should get with the program. Understanding the broader imperatives for a technology to work is vital. Otherwise a risk is that legal opinion will make or contribute to make something that is unworkable.
About 10 years ago I was inspired to prepare an adaptation of a graphic. The inspiration came from a publication issued by the Institute of Intellecual Property in Japan. The publication was titled "Exposure '94: A Proposal of the New Rule on Intellectual Property for Multimedia".
It's very frustrating to hear of a good idea killed at birth by a lawyer who warns of "legal risks" but leaves the idea's champion unconvinced that the legal issues are critical or unmanageable. How can the manager fight back? Instead of freezing when hearing the phrase "legal risks", how can a manager who does not have a law degree test the "legal risks"?
To answer this question imagine a context. Imagine you have a new IT idea for your company and as the project manager you are suddenly blocked by advice by the company's lawyer that legal risks would arise at the commercialisation stage. You are unconvinced, you want clarity about the legal risks.
It is well known that New Zealanders were the first to commercialise the kiwifruit globally. Less well known is the role of intellectual property in this New Zealand success story. Get ready for a tasty illustration of - intellectual property, food research, commercialisation and ISO 9001 compliance - working in unity to maintain New Zealand's leadership in the global $US2.5 billion kiwifruit market.
Read this post and you will learn to say "intellectual property" in three languages and you will look forward to the day when one language might suffice. This post comments on terms relevant to commercialisation. An earlier one was Defining Commercialisation.
The first language comes from management consultants (others commonly using this language are in IT and venture capital). They often say "intellectual capital" when referring to what lawyers prefer to call "intellectual property".
The concept of intellectual capital, and increasing discussion of that concept in management literature (especially since the late 1980s), has given prominence to the role of processes and competencies in creating environments for creativity, invention, innovation, entrepreneurship, commercialisation and good management generally.
The $US900 million ($A1.18 billion) deal for MySpace, announced on 7 August 2006, between News Corp and Google is a milestone in the history of the commercialisation and monetising of social networking websites.