This is more from a lawyer's perspective than an engineering perspective.
The gap between "works in the lab" and "real product" is pretty big and I think the real problem is getting across that, not getting license fees from those who cross the chasm.
If Stanford is beating the others it is because it encourages graduate students to walk out with the technology, build a company, and pay fees back to Stanford.
Hi Paul, this is not something which lawyer's will work on. This is something which the researchers have to think about. A lawyer doesn't know everything about an invention, an inventor knows. It's more about researcher and less about lawyers. Plus, I am totally confused regarding your argument where you said "If Stanford is beating the others it is because it encourages graduate students to walk out with the technology, build a company, and pay fees back to Stanford."
Other schools don't. When I go to an A.I. seminar at Cornell it is usually a job talk for a student who is going to talk at Facebook, Google, Microsoft and then a bunch of schools. That is, if you leave the academic track to pursue a startup you are perceived as a loser, not a winner.
The gap between "works in the lab" and "real product" is pretty big and I think the real problem is getting across that, not getting license fees from those who cross the chasm.
If Stanford is beating the others it is because it encourages graduate students to walk out with the technology, build a company, and pay fees back to Stanford.