| ... | 17
It should be noted that it is absolutely true that at that time there were no financial means for radically solving the issue of manning the regular forces and for simultaneously creating and maintaining mobilization reserves. The IET’s proposals of 2001 were exactly aimed at finding an adequate solution to the problem at a minimum cost. In this, they were in full agreement with the then Concept of the National Security of the RF, which oriented all the specialists to finding economically feasible solutions. And somewhat earlier, in late 1998, the wording of the still valid edict of the RF President prescribing that all the positions filled by soldiers, sailors, sergeants and petty officers should be switched over to being manned on a “professional basis” or “under contracts” had been changed exactly for this reason. Initially, the Edict had specified a concrete date – “from spring 2000”. It was replaced with the following vague wording: “as the necessary conditions emerge”, without any indication as to the essence of these conditions. However, everybody is well aware that the switch – over of all the regular forces to being manned by volunteers has become economically feasible for Russia. What is still missing is struggle against corruption which is, according to D. Medvedev 54, “undermining the citizens’ faith in the authorities”. If we compare this words with the second line of Table 2, it will become clear that nothing has changed. Judging from media reports, the spring call – up of the current year is marred with numerous instances of extortion.
Has not the time indeed come for the new RF President to specify the “necessary conditions” for switching over to manning the regular forces on a genuinely voluntary basis that are mentioned in the above Edict And has not the time come, as well, for the new head of the RF Government to reveal the name of the concrete person, subordinated directly to himself as well as to the citizens and society, to be charged with the task of solving the problem most important for the population and the state, and whose sole duty will consist in tackling it, and to accord this person sufficient powers to achieve this end New Government’s Concept and Practical Steps to Form Innovation System I. Dezhina New approaches to the formation of innovation system in the country, that are outlined in the government’s Concept for long-term development of the Russian Federation up to 2020 are considered in the section. Practical steps undertaken by the government to create favorable innovation climate and conditions for technological and R&D developments transfer are considered. The project of the Federal Law “On technologies’ transfer” submitted to the State Duma is analyzed.
Since the beginning of the year elaboration and discussion of the Concept for long-term development of the Russian Federation up to 2020, submitted by the Ministry of Trade and Economic Development of the Eliseev, I.Vziatki ne v mode. Dmitrii Medvedev vozglavil sovet po bor’be s korruptsiei [Bribes are no longer fashionable. Dmitrii Medvedev has become head of the Council for Combating Corruption] // Rossiiskaia Gazeta, 22. 05.
Russian Federation, in which big attention is paid to the development of the national innovation system, has proceeded. This Concept, in contrast to many preceding conceptual documents, where the issues of innovation activities and innovation development were also considered, seems to be less eclectic; it contains quite distinct wording and presents a number of principles, which are undoubtedly important to correct the course of the current innovation policy. Thus, the following is mentioned in the Concept as the principles for reforms aimed at the formation of innovation system and increase in demand of real economy sector for technological innovations:
1. complexity and intercoordination of reforms actions and measures;
2. orientation to finding, support and replication of effective technological and organizationaladministrative innovations;
3. concentration of resources to support the most effective organizations, projects, scientific staff of the national innovation system55.
So far the first two points have not been fulfilled and the attempts to realize the third point were abundant but of little success.
At the same time the directions of actions to be undertaken to develop national innovation system seem to be too conceptual. Actions in three directions are planned: development of scientific potential, science and technological and innovation infrastructure, stimulation for the innovation clusters development56. Detail description of the actions does not contain single innovation. The phrases about the support for science and education integration, government science sector, creation of modern research base etc. are repeated.
At the same time it should be noted that many of the actions listed in the Concept are being fulfilled – this includes the creation of big objects of infrastructure, venture funds formation with the government participation, execution of scientific and technological projects on the basis of public-private partnership and some others.
It is also planned to increase investments in science and innovations from the business so that they grow at higher rates than government investments. To achieve this, however, it is necessary to develop measures of general control that would encourage investments in innovation projects. So far these tools are underdeveloped. Seemingly, the development of the Federal Law “On technologies’ transfer” is a right step in this direction. This measure can be regarded as an instrument of general regulation aimed at improvement of regulatory, legislative and administrative conditions to execute innovation activity.
This bill has long been expected in the scientific society, since it was hoped to obtain clear description for procedures and conditions of technologies transfer from the government sector of science to business when intellectual property created at the expense of budget funds is assigned for the company that is its author.
Under current conditions the postulation of rights transfer to the authors (stipulated in article 77 part IV of the Civil Code f the Russian Federation) the description for the mechanism of further transfer of these rights to business hinders implementation of research and development works results into economy.
Besides, such a law should stimulate the creators to make technologies and lift the existing administrative and financial barriers for commercialization process. For instance, at present the permission for the right of financial operations does not define the regulations for license payments use. In case the patent or license is sold all revenue received the organization must transfer to the budget. That is why administrations of research institutes and their employees do not have any incentives to register the objects of intellectual property and then to sell the licenses for development. After making changes to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, which came into effect on 1 January 2008, the situation aggravated, since now all the revenues the organization receives from the activities permitted will be transferred directly to the budget57. The bill “On technologies transfer” does not deal with any of the aspects mentioned.
The bill does not deal with all the cases of transfer of technologies created with the funds of the federal budget or the budgets of subjects of the Russian Federation. It does not suggest the mechanism to involve intellectual property in the economy process in case it was created at the expense of budget funds and was Concept for long-term development of the Russian Federation. Project. Ministry for Economic Development and Trade, March 2008 (Концепция долгосрочного социально-экономического развития Российской Федерации.
Проект. М.: МЭРТ, март 2008 г., с.92) Concept for long-term development of the Russian Federation. Project. Ministry for Economic Development and Trade, March 2008 (Концепция долгосрочного социально-экономического развития Российской Федерации.
Проект. М.: МЭРТ, март 2008г., с.92-95) Federal law from 26.04.2007 No 63-FZ “On making changes to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation as to regulation of budget process and bringing of some legislative acts of the Russian Federation in concordance with the budget legislation of the Russian Federation” assigned to the organization where it was developed and considers only the situations when the rights for the technology are fully or partially owned by the Russian Federation or subjects of the Russian Federation.
According to article 77 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation there are three such cases (paragraph article 1546 of the Civil Code):
1) the single technology is directly connected with the securing of defense and safety of the Russian Federation;
2) before the technology was created or later the Russian Federation took all the financing of the works of bringing the single technology up to the stage of practical application;
3) the executor did not secure the fulfillment of all the actions necessary for him to be recognized as having or for him to purchase the exclusive rights for the results of intellectual property, which is the part of the technology.
The bill suggests that single technology, created at the expense of the budget funds, be transferred to private investors on the basis of open competitions or auctions in exchange for liabilities for its commercialization. The funds raised from technology’s sale will be transferred to the budget and the conditions of authors’ remuneration will be defined by a special decree of the government. The most arguable case is when the Russian Federation or subject of the Russian Federation has the rights for the technology if the executor did not secure the fulfillment of all the actions necessary for him to be recognized as having or for him to purchase the exclusive rights for the results of intellectual property, which is the part of the technology. In this case according to paragraph 3 article 1546 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation the executor is not relieved from the liability to register rights for the results of the intellectual activity, which are a part of the technology. In this situation the executor should register the rights mentioned for his behalf and then to transfer them to the Russian Federation or its subject. The advisability of this norm is doubtful when the right for the technology of the Russian Federation or its subject results from the executor not fulfilling the liability to purchase or acknowledge exclusive rights. Further it is suggested that such a technology be sold at contests or auctions organized by the government, and the executor (the person that organized its creation) have primary right to purchase the single technology (article 7of the project of the federal law “On technologies’ transfer”).
Thus, the authors of the single technology are not at advantageous, not to say at absurd, positions. First they develop a technology, then because of the conditions their willingness or intentions often cannot influence, they cannot or do not manage in time to register the rights for intellectual activity results, which are the part of single technology (make applications for patents, government registration of the results of intellectual activity) in six months and consequently have to transfer the rights to the government. But in order to do this they still have to make expenses for intellectual property registration and after it transfer the rights to the Russian Federation. Then the Russian Federation conducts an auction or a contest and organization where the technology was developed can purchase rights for it.
Such a scheme contradicts foreign practiced proved by the time – according to it results obtained at the expense of the budget funds and having commercial potential are given to the organizations that produced them and they conduct the negotiations with the private sector independently. The sides should observe general framework condition set by the government. Such an approach applied, the costs of technology’s development is returned to the government in the form of tax payments from its commercialization and not as direct transfer to the budget.
The approach suggested in the project of the law is especially ineffective when the demand of business for the results of research and development works in government sector of science is low and volumes of sales throughout the country are very small. That is why the bill, which in theory corresponds to the purposes of the Concept for long-term socio-economic development as to the formation of the innovation system, because of the narrowing of regulated object and suggested mechanism will rather hinders commercialization process for research and development results, which were produced with the attraction of the budget funds and will not contribute in stirring up of innovation activity in private sector and, consequently, the development of innovation system.
| ... | 17