[1. Apple, Kirsten S. “Evaluating university technology transfer offices”: 139-157. In: Zoltan J. Acs and Roger Stough, eds. Public policy in an entrepreneurial economy. New York: Springer, 2008.]Search in Google Scholar
[2. Bouchie, Aaron. “Survey reveals US university licensing up, startup formation down.” Bioentrepreneur (2005) // http://www.nature.com/bioent/bioenews/012005/full/bioent843.html (accessed October 1, 2012).10.1038/bioent843]Search in Google Scholar
[3. Canada Statistics. “Patent or perish? Universities are more inventive than ever.” Innovation Analysis Bulletin 1(1) (1999) // http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/88-003-x/88-003-x1999001-eng.pdf (accessed October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[4. Canadian Association of University Teachers. “Intellectual Property & Academic Staff Legal Review (Parts 1-3).” (Ottawa, 2003-2004) // http://www.caut.ca/pages.asp?page=217 (accessed October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[5. Canadian Association of University Teachers. “Responding to the Intellectual Property Commercialization Challenges Report.” (Ottawa, 2006) // http://www.caut.ca/uploads/ipcon_comm_workshop.pdf (accessed October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[6. Doloreux, David. “Regional innovation systems in Canada: a comparative study.” Regional Studies 38 (2004): 481-494.10.1080/0143116042000229267]Search in Google Scholar
[7. Flick, Uve. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 4th ed. Berlin: Sage Publications Ltd, 2009.]Search in Google Scholar
[8. Hoye, Katherine A. University Intellectual Property Policies and University-Industry Technology Transfer in Canada. Ph.D. dissertation. Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, 2006.]Search in Google Scholar
[9. Jensen A., Richard, Jerry G. Thursby, and Marie C. Thursby. “The Disclosure and Licensing of University Inventions: ‘The best we can do with the s**t we get to work with’.” (2003) // http://www.nd.edu/~rjensen1/research/Disclosure.pdf (accessed October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[10. Karjala, Dennis S., and Mindaugas Kiškis. “Intellectual property rights within the university.” Intellectual economics No. 1(9) (2011): 65-84.]Search in Google Scholar
[11. Kenney, Martin, and Donald Patton. “Does Inventor Ownership Encourage University Research-Derived Entrepreneurship? A Six University Comparison.” (May 2011) // http://ssrn.com/abstract=1847184 (accessed October 1, 2012).10.2139/ssrn.1847184]Search in Google Scholar
[12. Kiškis, Mindaugas. “Understanding Canadian Innovation System.” SocialSciences Vol. 75, No. 1 (2012): 92-99.10.5755/j01.ss.75.1.1595]Search in Google Scholar
[13. Lach, Saul, and Mark Schankerman. “Incentives and invention in universities.” NBER Working Papers 9727 // http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9727.html (accessed October 1, 2012)]Search in Google Scholar
[14. LaRoche, Kevin, Christine Collard, and Jacqueline Chernys. “Appropriating innovation: The enforceability of university intellectual property policies.” International Property Journal 20(2) (2007): 135-175 // http://www.danielnelson.ca/pdfs/20_IPJ-CAN_135_4-9-09_2122.pdf (accessed October 1, 2012)]Search in Google Scholar
[15. Lissoni, Francesco, and Fabio Montobbio. “Inventorship and authorship in patent-publication pairs: An enquiry into the economics of scientific credit.” Centro di Ricerca sui Processi di Innovazione e Internazionalizzazione(CESPRI) Working Paper No. 224 (2008) // http://www.francescolissoni.com/prova_g000019.pdf (accessed October 1, 2012)]Search in Google Scholar
[16. Mizaras, Vytautas. Autorių teisė. 2 tomas. Justitia, 2009.]Search in Google Scholar
[17. Monotti, Ann L., and Sam Ricketson. Universities and Intellectual Property:Ownership and Exploitation. Oxford University Press, 2003.]Search in Google Scholar
[18. Neuman W., Lawrence. Social Research Methods: Quantitative and QualitativeMethods. 10th ed. Pearson/Allyn & Bacon, 2009.]Search in Google Scholar
[19. Polster, Claire. “The University Has No Business in the Intellectual Property Business.” CAUT Bulletin Vol. 46, No. 7 (September 1999) // http://www.cautbulletin.ca/en_article.asp?ArticleID=2740 (accessed October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[20. Salazar, Monica, and Adam Holbrook. “Canadian science, technology and innovation policy: the product of regional networking?” Regional Studies 41 (2007): 1129-1141.10.1080/00343400701530865]Search in Google Scholar
[21. Silverman, Ed. “The Trouble With Tech Transfer.” The Scientist (January 1, 2007) // http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/24640 (accessed October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[22. STIC-CSTI. “State of the Nation 2010 - Canada's Science, Technology and Innovation System” // http://www.stic-csti.ca/eic/site/stic-csti.nsf/eng/h_00038.html(accessed on October 1, 2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[23. Turk L., James, ed. The Corporate Campus: Commercialization and theDangers to Canada’s Colleges and Universities. Toronto: ACPPU & James Lorimer, 2000.]Search in Google Scholar
[24. Vaver, David. Intellectual Property Law: Copyright, Patents, Trade-Marks. 2nd ed. Toronto: Irwin Law, 2011.]Search in Google Scholar
[25. Wuchty, Stefan, Benjamin F. Jones, and Brian Uzzi. “The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge.” Science 316 (5827) (2007): 1036 - 1039.10.1126/science.1136099]Search in Google Scholar
