Acceptability of intellectual property.

§ 603.550 Acceptability of intellectual property. (a) In most instances, the contracting officer should not count costs of patents and other intellectual property ( e.g. , copyrighted material, including software) as cost sharing because: (1) It is difficult to assign values to these intangible contributions; (2) Their value usually is a manifestation of prior research costs, which are not allowed as cost share under § 603.545; and (3) Contributions of intellectual property rights generally do not represent the same cost of lost opportunity to a recipient as contributions of cash or tangible assets. The purpose of cost share is to ensure that the recipient incurs real risk that gives it a vested interest in the project's success. (b) The contracting officer may include costs associated with intellectual property if the costs are based on sound estimates of market value of the contribution. For example, a for-profit firm may offer the use of commercially available software for which there is an established license fee for use of the product. The costs of the development of the software would not be a reasonable basis for valuing its use.