Article#4: interactions with the biotech swindlers

Recently I found myself in a peculiar situation being a target of the IP theft. It prompted me to think and write a cautionary article primarily aimed at scientists, not financial schemes. So here you have my Article#4: interactions with the biotech swindlers.

How common it is: we have currently in biotech startup success rate at ~1/20. However, not each of the starting 20 companies aims at financial success for their investors or for changing the world. Some have much sinister goals to spend the money of their investors and scout some results when some progress needs a show. Sometimes businesses struggle and a neighbor has a solution. There are many reasons for the theft and it is more common than most of us think.

We all have been told about it very vaguely as “Don’t tell what you do when going on a conference”, “Don’t reveal any unpublished information when talking to strangers”. I remember well, when we discussed it with @MariaQuantz and she exclaimed: “If I cannot discuss what I do, then what is the point of going to a conference?!”. So if you were in a similar situation, read on as I will be describing 2 real-world examples and conclude with the list of more specific red-flags I have learnt about.

/example 1:        

A Company X approached me to informally discuss a common project we were collaborating on. In our lab we had completed validation of a screening and generated massive datasets and had several leads to prosecute further. During the course of collaboration I noticed ample verbiage from the partners but no real data to substantiate it. However, as we had a mutual goal it felt right to communicate. We met a café and I showed a few slides on what we had discovered. It threw me off pretty fast to see the change in the behavior and their hunger to get the slides, raw datasets and all the “dirty kitchen” behind the experiments presented in the 2 nicely polished slides. I further was concerned by the one-sidedness of the conversation: they could not show me anything of their own, despite the reason for the meeting stated as ”we have some technical problems with data consistency from the previous meeting”. I was anticipating actually to see (finally) the data coming out from that lab to discuss its inconsistency but instead the interest went to discuss our datasets. Later it appeared that legally our collaboration was structured to the advantage of the opposite party if/when they find anything of value. They did not want to invest in wet-lab data generation as they contractually were set to do, therefore they needed to get the missing data from somewhere else, unfortunately not shunning stealing it.

/example 2:        

A more recent incident came back to me as I use the reverted way of it. Let me explain: my philosophy is that if I want to know what the company is planning to do, I should look up their career page and see who they are desperately and unexpectedly hiring. So, a few days ago I received a LinkedIn message from a CEO of a Company Y inviting me to discuss a potential job opportunity. Not that I am looking for a job or actively advertising my profile, in fact, I am pretty all set with the current 3 stealth projects. Anyways, I agreed to talk with the team to meet people. We setup a free version zoom call for 30 mins. Usually it is enough to get a sense if we should proceed to discuss details at a next stage. Since it was rather uninvited from my side, I asked who had recommended them to approach me. However, I got a generic non-answer. The conversation was very one-sided, they did not bother to introduce the company, the purpose of the interaction with me, potential goals should I be interested in a position. I did not feel the hiring party wanted to have me excited about what they are planning to do or to work with them. It started throwing me off. The call looked more like an interrogation (me being interrogated) lasted for over 1 hr, from which I could not conclude what people want me to deliver and where they have a need, or what they are planning to do for that matter. We agreed to have a follow-up call the same time, where I requested to introduce me to their plans and specify deliverables for my potential engagement in various modalities. Alarmingly, the CEO of the Company did not care about the Confidentiality paperwork. I was very surprised to find at the end of the day that the follow-up call is scheduled at 4AM despite us chatting about the locations/time differences. I pretty much concluded that I am not going to engage, but as a professional I got myself up at 3:30 and turned-on the laptop, sketched the info needed bullet-points, just in case they emerge interesting.

The team assembled did not seem to be in place to discuss the substance nor to present what they are doing. The CEO aggressively jumped to re-start the interrogation about the solutions at my current workplace. I interrupted and asked specifically if we discuss their goals, and mode of engagement, which were none. The CEO started cursing and telling me that he knows that the questions he is asking are very trivial and probably I have no clue about assay development, heh. I referred them to the leadership of my current company, followed up with the appropriate reporting to make sure others stay vigilant.

/CONCLUSION:        

• stay vigilant when being approached by internal and especially external unexpected interlocutors.
• Identify their boundaries and contractual obligations and make sure to stick to them.
• Constantly monitor if the interaction is genuine:
• Is the time adequate or the meeting is running disproportionally longer, taking place when you are obviously less alert?
• Is there unwarranted flatter, demeaning or imposing someone’s views.
• Are there unexpected swings in the behavior/vibe or the presentation arose unhealthy interest?
• Is the degree of details that the other party is inquiring stays minimal? We all hate fodder of unnecessary data. Why are they asking for additional information? What they want/can potentially use it for?
• It is always efficient to lay out the goals for the meeting and to have a list of the desired outcomes, monitor if the meeting proceeds according to the expectations, the discussion is aiming at agreeing on the desired outcomes and vigilantly monitor subversions of the goals.
• How skewed the discussion is? Do your partners share information with you sufficiently to the stated goals?
• Are they ready to answer your questions?

I hope it helps general scientists to feel more confident discussing their exciting results and projects as it is a true benefit to have honest and unimpeded exchange of information while preserving reputation, integrity, caring for the good standing and rights of the company you are devoting your efforts for.