The long-running trial of strength between Cambridge academics and the university authorities over proposed rules to regulate how ideas are exploited commercially will enter its latest round next week.
The Regent House - Cambridge University's 3,000-strong ruling body of academics - will debate a revised draft of rules on intellectual property rights on Tuesday.
The issue was first raised in 2002 under the vice-chancellorship of Sir Alec Broers and was last debated in the Regent House a year ago, when critics warned that the proposed rules would undermine academic freedom.
The latest draft of the rules - put forward by the university council led by Alison Richard, the vice-chancellor - focuses on patents, trademarks and ideas that go through a formal process of "registration" before being exploited commercially, rather than including a general claim for copyright on published material.
It spells out how royalty income should be shared between the "inventor", department and central university funds or its spin-off department, Cambridge Enterprise, depending on the sums of money involved.
If Cambridge Enterprise were involved in the exploitation of an idea, the inventor would keep 90 per cent of the first £100,000 of royalty income, 60 per cent of the second £100,000 and 34 per cent of sums above Pounds 200,000 - giving a progressively larger share to Cambridge Enterprise and the inventor's own department.
If the spin-off department were not involved in the exploitation of an idea, the inventor would keep all of the first £50,000 in royalties, but give 7.5 per cent of royalty income above £50,000 to his or her department and 7.5 per cent to the university's central funds.
Mike Clark, president of the Cambridge branch of the Association of University Teachers, was one of the three members of the university council to reject the latest intellectual property proposals on the grounds that they would have a "chilling effect on the commercial exploitation of research" and slow the rate of inventions being brought forward for patent.
Dr Clark said that although some concerns had been addressed in the latest draft of the rules, more changes were necessary to create a "light-touch, flexible" system.
A ballot of academics on the proposals was likely in the autumn, he said.
"This represents some improvement over previous proposals, but I still have reservations about the final conditions because I think they will inevitably result in a brake on commercial exploitation of university intellectual property," Dr Clark added.
A Cambridge representative said that the university would not comment on the proposals before next week's meeting of the Regent House.