Lawyer Gao:

Technology transfer is a multi-party, highly complex process that bridges innovative research outcomes with commercial applications in the market. Along the way, it involves critical steps such as defining ownership rights, assessing value, structuring transactions, and ensuring policy compliance. Lawyers play a pivotal role in this process, directly influencing whether these innovations can be efficiently and safely brought to market.

I believe lawyers in this field should embody a combination of three key roles.

First is Rule Translator Researchers focus on the technology itself and often lack familiarity with legal and policy frameworks, while businesses and investors are more concerned with commercial returns and risk management. Lawyers, therefore, must bridge this gap by translating complex legal and policy language into actionable, practical solutions that researchers can understand and implement. At the same time, they need to "translate" the technical advantages of scientific breakthroughs into clear, commercially and legally sound documents that resonate with capital markets. This two-way translation process effectively shortens the distance between communication and decision-making.

Second is A designer who prioritizes risk management One of the core challenges in transforming scientific and technological achievements into marketable products is the issue of ownership rights—especially in scenarios involving cross-institutional collaborations and multi-party funding for research and development, where the outcomes often involve rights held by multiple stakeholders. If issues such as patent applicants, inventors, usage rights, and revenue-sharing arrangements aren’t clearly defined at the project’s outset, disputes over ownership could later lead to delays—or even outright failures—in commercializing the innovation. That’s why lawyers need to get involved early in the process, carefully crafting a rights structure that not only complies with legal and policy requirements but also effectively motivates all parties involved, ensuring the technology achieves stability and readiness for market entry.

Third is Builder of business bridges Simply put, technical value doesn’t equate to market value. Lawyers must understand the industry ecosystem and business models, leveraging tools such as technology licensing, patent-backed financing, and equity swaps to integrate innovative outcomes into a company’s strategic business plan—transforming them from mere "patent certificates" into tangible "cash flow."

Among these three roles, my philosophy has always remained consistent: leveraging my expertise to help clients overcome obstacles, save time and costs, and ensure that innovative breakthroughs reach the market more efficiently—allowing them to avoid detours, accelerate their go-to-market strategies, and quickly start generating value. As a lawyer specializing in technology transfer, I’m not just the drafter of contracts—but also the architect and catalyst who maps out and accelerates the path to commercializing cutting-edge innovations.

Lawyer Gao:

I don’t think the two are conflicting—on the contrary, I believe that comprehensiveness and specialization actually complement each other in the field of technology transfer. After all, the goal of legal services is to solve problems, and specialization doesn’t mean expertise in a single branch of law, but rather proficiency in addressing specific types of issues. Given that the "problems" inherent in technology transfer are inherently interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral, lawyers need to not only deepen their legal expertise but also integrate and synthesize knowledge from fields like technology, industry, and finance.

Specialization means possessing an irreplaceable edge in a specific niche area, and the commercialization of scientific and technological achievements is precisely such a field that demands deep expertise. For instance, from patent application to technology transfer, the process may involve multiple steps—such as university research management regulations, compliance issues in state-owned enterprise asset disposal, and intellectual property-backed financing—all of which require lawyers to provide highly precise solutions. Without this specialized guidance at each stage, the entire transformation process could easily run into obstacles.

This kind of specialization isn’t something you learn from textbooks—it’s honed through hands-on practice. I’ve always believed that legal services should be grounded in, oriented toward, and tailored to real-world practice. Driving technology transfer initiatives isn’t about static paperwork; it requires dynamic, multi-party collaboration, real-time risk management, and precise policy alignment. Lawyers must continually test and refine their strategies in the field, ensuring that solutions not only meet regulatory standards but also successfully translate into practical business applications.

Lawyer Gao:

This statement isn’t just a vague slogan—it’s the professional methodology I’ve gradually developed throughout my practice. When clients come to a lawyer, it may seem like they’re simply seeking resolution to a legal matter, but in reality, they’re striving to achieve a specific goal or fulfill a deeper dream—whether it’s turning a technology into an industry, globalizing a brand, or even launching a creative work across international markets. Yet between their aspirations and those objectives, there invariably lie systemic barriers, challenges in matching resources, complex negotiation dynamics, time constraints, and even emotional pressures.

My job is to leverage my professional expertise to minimize these gaps as much as possible. Here, "professional expertise" goes beyond just being familiar with legal statutes—it also encompasses a deep understanding of the industry ecosystem, the ability to design sophisticated transaction structures, the skill to anticipate policy trends, and strong cross-disciplinary communication capabilities. Only when these skills come together can we truly bridge the gap between conceptualization and execution.

For instance, in a science and technology commercialization project, prioritizing speed-to-signing alone could inadvertently create hidden risks of ownership disputes. Conversely, being overly cautious and implementing excessive safeguards might cause you to miss the critical window of market opportunity. My approach is to ensure that core risks remain manageable by carefully designing an optimal transaction structure, identifying the right collaboration partners, and establishing a practical revenue-sharing model—allowing the innovation to enter the market swiftly yet securely. At its core, this method helps clients save time, cut costs, and minimize trial-and-error, enabling them to move closer to their goals faster and with greater confidence.

The importance of my guiding principle lies in the fact that it not only directs how I approach each individual case but also shapes my career path. I’ve always aspired to be more than just a legal advisor for my clients—I want to be their collaborative partner and driving force in helping them turn their dreams into reality. Whether it’s protecting intellectual property or facilitating the commercialization of technological innovations, I aim to leverage my expertise to bring my clients one step closer to achieving their goals.