Key Takeaways: The University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) and aerospace company ASKA have agreed to explore collaboration on a drive-and-fly aircraft. The proposed joint development exemplifies the need for careful consideration of ownership in the resulting IP and innovations, especially those relevant to both companies’ businesses or technologies. Further, collaborations involving public entities give rise to certain IP pitfalls to consider, especially if government funding is used for the project.
On February 25, 2026, the public University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) and ASKA, a private California-based aerospace company, signed a memorandum of agreement to potentially partner on a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft. The aircraft would be a hybrid-electric, autonomous, “drive-and-fly” VTOL type. The agreement contemplates the UAH’s Rotorcraft Systems Engineering and Simulation Center (RSESC) and ASKA to explore opportunities in “battery systems, electric motors, simulation environments, safety systems and autonomous flight control technologies.” Beyond the technical collaboration, the partnership also creates opportunities to work with the U.S. Department of War and international programs.
“This agreement represents an important step toward advancing the development of safe, efficient and autonomous aerial mobility solutions,” according to Guy Kaplinsky, CEO of ASKA. “By working with UAH’s Rotorcraft Systems Engineering and Simulation Center, we aim to combine cutting-edge research with real-world development, accelerating innovation while preparing the next generation of aerospace leaders.”
“The UAH RSESC performs a wide variety of autonomous aerospace research, and we are excited about this partnership and applying our autonomy, UAS design and FAA expertise to support this initiative,” Jerry Hendrix, director of RSESC, noted.
IP Ownership
A joint technology development project between public and private entities raises myriad IP issues. One issue is who will own the resulting innovations. RSESC proclaims an expertise in research technologies such as autonomous aerospace research (ARS), vertical lift, and related technologies. ASKA touts proficiency in hybrid-electric drive-and-fly VTOL vehicles through its ASKA A5 platform. With technology interests in similar fields, the ownership of IP resulting from the deal should be addressed ahead of time. This can be done with a simple bifurcation of ownership based on technology, so that each party has sole ownership of its respective portion. If both parties are interested in rights in the same IP, an “assignment and license back” framework may define the boundaries of what the licensee can do with the technology, such as defining markets, geographies, etc. Less common is a “joint ownership” framework, which defines each parties’ ownership rights with respect to issues like licensing and enforcement.
Another issue is newly-generated IP that was unanticipated. The nature of R&D is that sometimes you get unexpected results. The agreement should address, as best possible, who will own such IP. As a purely speculative example, if one party will own the propulsion system, and the other party will own the aerospace vehicle, consider who will own interfacing technologies between the two components. Careful consideration of these types of unknowns ahead of time can prevent spending time and resources later to resolve disputes.
Further, be clear on whether IP rights are being assigned (e.g. sold or transferred ownership) or licensed (e.g. providing limited rights in use of the technology), as this will impact the rights and obligations of both parties. In this regard, be sure to avoid ambiguity in the type of transaction involving the IP.
Ownership can also hinge on the individual inventors properly transferring their rights to the respective parties in the partnership. All employees involved in the collaboration should sign written agreements assigning their IP rights to their respective employers. Ideally employment agreements will include present assignments of future innovations. It is also best practice to get specific assignments for innovations as they arise, such as when a patent application is filed. Addressing these details upfront helps to minimize the possibility of future potential conflicts.
Public-Private Partnerships and IP
This public-private partnership involves a public university and a private company. The rules and restrictions applicable to public entities result in additional IP considerations where public funds may be involved.
For instance, if the partnership involves research funded by federal government agencies, such as the Department of War, certain regulations may apply, including the Bayh-Dole Act and related regulatory rules. Such legal constraints may affect the public entity’s ability to assign or exclusively license newly-generated IP from the collaboration.
Finally, entities using public funds for technology development must also comply with strict government reporting obligations. Examples include timely reporting of invention disclosures to the relevant agency, submission of technology utilization reports, and other compliance requirements. Data rights, such as in software or other proprietary data, may be lost if certain assertions are not properly made to the government. The parties should be aware of the potential penalties for failing to comply, including the loss of title in the IP.
Subscribe for News and Updates
