中國(guó)很大，中國(guó)內(nèi)部也不是同構(gòu)型的；中國(guó)在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)(IP)的保護(hù)上有不太好的紀(jì)錄，但針對(duì)新技術(shù)與產(chǎn)品的研發(fā)，無論是在中央、省級(jí)或地方政府都有龐大資金補(bǔ)助，也有廣大的內(nèi)需市場(chǎng)作為支持…總而言之，中國(guó)市場(chǎng)是個(gè)有優(yōu)點(diǎn)也有缺點(diǎn)的大雜燴。 到目前為止，只有很少數(shù)的西方企業(yè)與學(xué)術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)能妥善應(yīng)對(duì)中國(guó)的“IP地 雷”，與當(dāng)?shù)亟⒊晒Φ幕锇殛P(guān)系并贏得市占率；北京大學(xué)產(chǎn)業(yè)技術(shù)研究院院長(zhǎng)陳東敏(Dongmin Chen)在接受EETimes 美國(guó)版編輯訪問時(shí)表示：“中國(guó)是復(fù)雜的?！倍@正是他著力之處。 陳東敏目前也主導(dǎo)北京大學(xué)的科技研發(fā)部門，是一個(gè)名為“開放創(chuàng)新平臺(tái)(Open Innovation Platform)”計(jì)劃的幕后推手；他解釋，該計(jì)劃是要在尋找投資項(xiàng)目的中國(guó)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)資金業(yè)者，以及中國(guó)各大學(xué)或新創(chuàng)IP供貨商(無論東西方)之間扮演媒合角色。陳東敏曾是美國(guó)硅谷創(chuàng)業(yè)家，并曾執(zhí)掌哈佛大學(xué)(Harvard)量子組件物理實(shí)驗(yàn)室(Quantum Device Physics Lab)長(zhǎng)達(dá)15年。 根 據(jù)陳東敏指出，如果“開放創(chuàng)新平臺(tái)”計(jì)劃成功，可望為中國(guó)的高科技產(chǎn)業(yè)帶來深遠(yuǎn)影響；無論是中國(guó)科技業(yè)者、相關(guān)大學(xué)院校與政府機(jī)構(gòu)，都在尋求來自西方的更 多技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移。這類活動(dòng)過去因?yàn)橹袊?guó)在IP保護(hù)上的不良紀(jì)錄而受到阻礙，陳東敏是賭上了北京大學(xué)以及他自己的專業(yè)聲譽(yù)來正視這個(gè)問題，其目標(biāo)是藉由開放平臺(tái) 來宣示中國(guó)保護(hù)智財(cái)權(quán)的承諾。

北京大學(xué)產(chǎn)業(yè)技術(shù)研究院院長(zhǎng)陳東敏
iXJesmc

在不久前于北京舉行的一場(chǎng)論壇中，針對(duì)中國(guó)科技部一位官員指“借用、消化、重新發(fā)明并創(chuàng)新”外國(guó)技術(shù)是中國(guó)可采取的作法，陳東敏公開表示不贊同；他響應(yīng)，這種作法在其它國(guó)家的眼中就是侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)。（請(qǐng)點(diǎn)擊這里查看《跟中國(guó)做生意，會(huì)擔(dān)心自己的技術(shù)被偷走？》） 陳東敏了解，IP保護(hù)是中國(guó)最大的缺點(diǎn)之一，因此其“開放創(chuàng)新平臺(tái)”特別著眼于這樣的現(xiàn)實(shí)，希望能促成在國(guó)際性協(xié)議之下的技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移到中國(guó)。該計(jì)劃有三大目 標(biāo)：一是為初期階段的新創(chuàng)公司分擔(dān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，二是協(xié)助海外與中國(guó)本地大學(xué)院校與中國(guó)投資者接軌，三是從基礎(chǔ)上改變中國(guó)新創(chuàng)公司的經(jīng)營(yíng)模式、讓它們能繁榮茁壯。 陳東敏表示，無論是中國(guó)或美國(guó)的新創(chuàng)公司“夭折率”都太高；而且目前風(fēng)險(xiǎn)資金業(yè)者的熱門標(biāo)的是軟件，較不關(guān)注硬件。另一個(gè)較大的問題是：“沒有人專門投資制程或是材料技術(shù)升級(jí)等領(lǐng)域。”藉由指派技術(shù)專家、創(chuàng)業(yè)家或是北京大學(xué)校友負(fù)責(zé)不同“媒合”任務(wù)，陳東敏認(rèn)為“開放創(chuàng)新平臺(tái)”能拉攏更多準(zhǔn)備IPO的企業(yè)與中國(guó)本地投資者。 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 本文下一頁：中國(guó)新創(chuàng)公司往往最后“不得善終”

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 中國(guó)多家國(guó)企使用盜版軟件被微軟起訴
• 跟中國(guó)做生意，會(huì)擔(dān)心自己的技術(shù)被偷走？
• 外觀設(shè)計(jì)專利要被重視，給你7個(gè)理由先iXJesmc

{pagination} 此外陳東敏指出，隨著越來越多私人資金轉(zhuǎn)向更低風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的投資項(xiàng)目，大學(xué)院校所擁有的IP更常被局限在校園中無法出頭；在此同時(shí)，全球各大學(xué)院校都在尋求中國(guó)本地的合作伙伴，或是能建立研發(fā)聯(lián)盟。例如在今年6月，美國(guó)威斯康辛大學(xué)(University of Wisconsin)就在上海成立了一個(gè)創(chuàng)新中心(UW–Madison Shanghai Innovation Office)，目標(biāo)是做為該校進(jìn)一步耕耘中國(guó)市場(chǎng)的前哨站。 事實(shí)上，這類“創(chuàng)新中心”在中國(guó)如雨后春筍般隨處可見；不過陳東敏表示，其挑戰(zhàn)不在于競(jìng)爭(zhēng)日益激烈，而是僅委托幾位專門人員負(fù)責(zé)營(yíng)運(yùn)這類機(jī)構(gòu)是否足夠？常見的問題是要找到中國(guó)本地的人才來協(xié)助中心的營(yíng)運(yùn)，并能夠與中國(guó)相關(guān)政府機(jī)關(guān)建立緊密關(guān)系。他進(jìn)一步指出：“雖然中國(guó)有各種地方與中央補(bǔ)助資源，但要拿到補(bǔ)助并不容易?！逼溟_放平臺(tái)將能協(xié)助這些大學(xué)院校與企業(yè)有效率 地取得更多資金并進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)。 中國(guó)新創(chuàng)公司與西方同業(yè)的發(fā)展模式不太一樣，在1980年代與2000年，中國(guó)新創(chuàng)公司主要 是從大學(xué)院校獨(dú)立出來；陳東敏表示，在過去十年，有越來越多中國(guó)本地大學(xué)院校讓教授出去成立新創(chuàng)公司，但這種模式的問題在于，教授們是否能由研究人員順利轉(zhuǎn)換身分為CTO，然后成為稱職的制造部門主管、甚至CEO。 也就是因?yàn)榇蠖鄶?shù)教授們并沒有接受過企業(yè)經(jīng)營(yíng)的訓(xùn)練，中國(guó)新創(chuàng)公司往往最后“不得善終”?！安皇敲總€(gè)人都能成為萬事通；”陳東敏指出：“我不打算聘用終身職教授來執(zhí)行這個(gè)計(jì)劃或是經(jīng)營(yíng)新創(chuàng)公司，我們需要來自外部的創(chuàng)業(yè)人才，可承擔(dān)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)計(jì)劃的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，也具備爭(zhēng)取國(guó)家補(bǔ)助的能力?！? 陳東敏解釋，未來那些教授或是創(chuàng)業(yè)家的薪資，將來自于他們自己負(fù)責(zé)的計(jì)劃，并不是由北京大學(xué)提供；不過他也表示，該平臺(tái)將為尋求創(chuàng)業(yè)協(xié)助的對(duì)象，提供北京大學(xué)的技術(shù)資源、該校教職員的專業(yè)知識(shí)以及博士后研究生等。 到目前為止，北京大學(xué)對(duì)于陳東敏的技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移提案響應(yīng)都很積極；該校納入陳東敏的計(jì)劃，有部分原因是他承諾以逐案審查的模式來資助新創(chuàng)公司，這種方法能消除舊 有人際關(guān)系、偏袒等因素，而是以一種新的評(píng)判基礎(chǔ)來媒合投資人與值得投資、保護(hù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的項(xiàng)目?！爸袊?guó)有資金；”他重申：“但中國(guó)需要在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)方面 訂定規(guī)則并使程序透明化?！? 編譯：Judith Cheng 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 本文下一頁：參考英文原文：Will China bury its bad IP past?，by Junko Yoshida

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 中國(guó)多家國(guó)企使用盜版軟件被微軟起訴
• 跟中國(guó)做生意，會(huì)擔(dān)心自己的技術(shù)被偷走？
• 外觀設(shè)計(jì)專利要被重視，給你7個(gè)理由先iXJesmc

{pagination} Will China bury its bad IP past? Junko Yoshida BEIJING – China is big. China is not homogeneous. It has a poor record of protecting intellectual property. But it also has plenty of government funding at the central, provincial and municipal levels to go along with a massive domestic market for new technologies and products. Add up the pluses and minuses and the Chinese market is a mixed bag. So far, only a few Western companies and universities have managed to navigate China’s IP minefield to form successful partnerships and grab market share. “China is complicated,” Dongmin Chen, dean in Peking University’s (PKU) School of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, noted during a recent interview with EE Times. That’s where Chen enters the picture. Dongmin Chen in his Peking University office. Chen, who also directs the university’s office of science and technology development, is the force behind new initiative called “Open Innovation Platform.” The idea is to match up “Chinese [venture capital] that can’t find projects” with “universities or startup IPs [Western or Chinese] that can’t find capital,” explained Chen, a former serial Silicon Valley entrepreneur who also headed Harvard’s Quantum Device Physics Lab for 15 years. If successful, the initiative could have far-reaching implications for China’s high-tech sector, where companies, universities and government agencies seeking more technology transfers from the West have been stymied by China’s weak record on IP protection. Chen is putting PKU’s and his professional reputation on the line in confronting the IP issue. His goal is to use the open platform initiative to demonstrate China’s commitment to IP rights. During a recent forum here, Chen openly disagreed with an official of China’s Ministry of Science and Technology who asserted that “borrowed, digested and reinvented innovation” based on foreign technologies is a legitimate option for China. Chen replied that such an option “is viewed as infringement of [IP rights] in other countries.” Chen knows IP protection is one of China’s biggest shortcomings. The Open Innovation Platform specifically addressed that reality, and China hopes it will eventually encourage technology transfer to China based on international agreements. Matchmaking The platform initiative has three goals: take risks on early stage startups; help foreign and domestic universities connect to Chinese investment; and fundamentally change the way Chinese startups are operated so that they can prosper. The “infant mortality rate” for both Chinese and U.S. tech startups is too high, Chen said. The current focus for VCs is software, not so much on hardware. A bigger problem is that “nobody is funding projects focused on improvement of manufacturing process or materials,” he said. By assigning technologists, entrepreneurs and PKU alumni to “match-making” tasks, Chen said he envisions the Open Innovation Platform connecting more pre-IPO companies with Chinese investment. University IP As more private capital moves to lower-risk investment, university IP remains locked up in school with nowhere to go, Chen said. Meanwhile, universities are seeking Chinese partners or creating research consortia. In June this year, the University of Wisconsin opened the UW–Madison Shanghai Innovation Office designed to “serve as a focal point for the university’s growing engagement in China.” Indeed, Chen said “innovation offices” are popping up everywhere here. Rather than growing competition, the challenge is whether this model is sustainable with only a few experts running the offices. A typical problem is finding local talent to help run an innovation office while building vital relationships with government agencies. Despite a variety of local and national funding sources, Chen said, “getting Chinese funding is not that easy.” Hence, Chen argued that the Open Innovation Platform can help universities and companies attract funding and gain market access – more efficiently and effectively. Growing Chinese startups Chinese startups often follow a different trajectory from their Western counterparts. Between 1980 and 2000, the Chinese startup was a university spinoff. Over the last decade, more universities have spun off professors to head startups, Chen explained. The problem with this “professor spin-off” approach is that professors who come up with innovations must shift gears from R&D to CTO, then manufacturing boss and eventually CEO. Chinese startups often end up floundering because most professors are not trained to do that. “Not everyone can be a jack of all trades,” Chen noted. “I have no intention to hire tenured professors to run projects or startups,” he said. “We need entrepreneurs coming from outside who are willing to take risks to lead projects and compete [for] national grants.” Pay for professor/entrepreneurs will be based on their projects, not out of the university’s payroll. Chen acknowledged that this Open Innovation Platform creates an “unfair competitive advantage for PKU.” The Platform is set up to offer PKU’s resources in technology, faculty knowledge and post doc students to those who seek help in developing an incubation process, he explained. The university’s response to Chen’s tech transfer proposal has so far been enthusiastic. Its embrace of the project derives in part from Chen’s promise to finance startups on a “project by project” basis. That approach could eliminate the importance of old connections and favoritism, requiring a new merit-based model to successfully connect investment with deserving projects that protect IP rights. “China has money,” Chen reiterated, but “China needs rules of engagement and China needs to make the process transparent” in order to protect IP rights.