In today's complex world with our many specializations, collaborative research is often a necessity. It is one of the cornerstones of GRAND. Researchers working together on cross-disciplinary projects, in concert with industry and government, is a large part of why GRAND exists. But as a lawyer I always shudder when I think of my experience with such projects. One of the reasons why many collaborative projects fail to achieve full success is that the participants do not properly prepare for the problems that are inherent in the process. In organizing any such project you need to consider the perspectives, attitudes and assumptions that each participant will bring. Social scientists do not look at problems and opportunities the same way as computer scientists, business people or government officials. This, of course, is why such research projects are valuable– if successful, they can bridge these gulfs. But to be successful they need proper governance, which means collaboration and consultation. And as anyone who has experienced collaboration and consultation knows, that means patience and understanding. One of the frustrations that business people have with such projects is that they are time consuming and "inefficient", but those are the price you have to pay.

One important aspect of preparing for success from the lawyer's perspective is coming to grips early with the intellectual property issues inherent in collaborative research. This is the topic that I was assigned at the annual NCE meeting in Ottawa in December. In my presentation (click here for a copy) Armand Benitah (one of my patent lawyer partners at Fasken Martineau) and I try to help you navigate through the waters of multiple individual creator rights, multiple university IP policies and multiple corporate sponsor agreements.