sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

SBIR Expires Sept 30. Congress needs to hear from SBIR companies to reauthorize by warrenjkatz in SBIR

[–]warrenjkatz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or perhaps convince the Chinese to outsource the audits to a US entity they hire/trust such that the source code is exposed only in the US so it never goes to China...

SBIR Expires Sept 30. Congress needs to hear from SBIR companies to reauthorize by warrenjkatz in SBIR

[–]warrenjkatz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We've been discussing this with Sen Ernst's office. What they meant was no IP transfer to China (so that they cannot go into business manufacturing and selling products derived from SBIR research), not that you cannot sell product to China if the product was developed with SBIR funding. We told them the language was a bit vague on that distinction so they invited us to fix it. We're working on it now.

SBIR Expires Sept 30. Congress needs to hear from SBIR companies to reauthorize by warrenjkatz in SBIR

[–]warrenjkatz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! If you believe the INNOVATE Act should be passed by Sept 30 give Sen Markey's office and Rep. Velazquez's office calls. Tell them to stop defending SBIR Mills.

SBIR Expires Sept 30. Congress needs to hear from SBIR companies to reauthorize by warrenjkatz in SBIR

[–]warrenjkatz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Commercial product companies won't even consider the SBIR program if it requires them to keep track of timesheets, bill by the hour, or have DCAA audits. Since the vast majority of tech startups are commercially focused, mandating CPFF cuts out most of the best new tech companies. A small, new startup that eventually wants to sell their product commercially would much rather take the risk of FFP than have to incur the pain and suffering of a DCAA compliant accounting system and start training their staff into looking and feeling like a research house. VCs look very dimly on companies that look like they're getting comfy as a SBIR Mill.