Intellectual Property Securitization, A Comparative ‎study with the U.S Capital Market

 
Abstract
Nowadays the importance of intellectual property is so clear, and in technological developments, ideas have become significant, as the intellectual property rights are developing day by day. In fact, nowadays some things more than financial resources are needed to succeed in business. So even a start-up business can become one of the pioneers of the market by relying on new and innovative ideas. In such a situation, the concepts raising from intellectual property are very important. On the other hand, commercialization and financing for development of these kinds of properties are two main problems for the owners. In general, the traditional methods related to intellectual property and obtaining resources are mainly contracts such as license, franchise and direct contracts. These types of traditional contracts not only create many restrictions for the intellectual property owner, but also do not cover all the available financing capacities. Accordingly, the use of new financing procedure for the operational development of these kind of assets has become increasingly substantial. Due to the high capacity and flexibility of the existing methods in the capital market in comparison with other financial markets, especially the money
market, raising money through the capital market has always been the focus of intellectual property owners. Securitization is one of the newest financing instruments during which an intellectual product is separated from other assets and the balance sheet of its owner or founder, and then, based on the expected future cash flow from this protected asset, negotiable securities are issued and made available to investors who are willing to purchase these securities. It is worth mentioning that, if there are correct valuation method and sufficient legal protection, this approach could be a perfect way to use dispersed funds, and conduct them towards productive economic operations. Unfortunately, despite the importance of the subject, the research conducted in this field is not enough, and the lack of operational history of financing based on this approach in Iranian capital market, more fundamental research in tune with the implementation of this method is doubly important. Considering the importance of the matter and lack of research, this study examines intellectual property securitization in comparison with the U.S capital market in three parts. In the first one, suitable intellectual properties for securitization will be explained. In this section, the distinctive features of any intellectual property that make it appropriate for issuing negotiable securities based on the expected future cash flow will be illustrated in detail. The second part of research includes the expression of the implementation mechanism of this method and its instruments. In this part of the article, different stages, legal relations governing each stage and different effective components are examined. In the third part, some operational examples of intellectual property securitization, along with the analysis of its positive and negative points are provided. In addition, the detailed explanation of each method, the published securities and their related features have also been described. This research has been prepared by analytical library method, and to increase the practical aspects, two successful implementation international experiences have been reviewed. The present article seeks to answer the question of which category of intellectual properties is more likely to be financed by this approach, and what the legal challenges are.
 The hypothesis of this article is that intellectual property securitization is possible, and according to the existing regulations, it has a high executive capacity. However, it is necessary to use accurate and specialized methods of valuation and the requirement to use credit rating agencies services. In addition, creating awareness and cultural infrastructure in dealing with intellectual property, and recognizing its rights by the government is very significant. It can be considered that, without awareness in the society, operational implementation will not be possible. Also, lack of regulations governing the possibility of issuance securities based on intellectual properties, has made the practical procedure ambiguous.