On 1 July 2025, the Center for Open Science (COS) and the Horizon Europe IP4OS project convened a Small Circle Meetup in London during the Metascience Conference. This invitation-only session brought together nine representatives—from researchers and funders to publishers, policy experts and research infrastructure providers—to discuss how intellectual property (IP) and open science (OS) can work together rather than being at odds. Building on the “Small Circle” methodology first piloted by the Path2Integrity project, the organisers created a confidential space for candid dialogue. Two background papers were used to start a vivid conversation in the group. Under Chatham House rules, all comments were anonymised, allowing experts to speak freely about institutional realities and systemic barriers.

The resulting report synthesises these conversations into three sections: open science focal points as of June 2025; recent policy initiatives; and conclusions looking ahead. Participants reaffirmed that research should be “open by default” but acknowledged legitimate exceptions for dual‑use risks, privacy,  temporary patent sequencing, and more. They noted persistent confusion about licensing—researchers often aren’t sure which licence to choose or worry that sharing will jeopardise later IP claims—so the report calls for clearer toolboxes and dedicated support officers. Funders observed that open‑access mandates and IP exploitation obligations currently run in parallel but rarely interact, leading to box-ticking rather than meaningful impact. Examples like CERN’s knowledge transfer office demonstrate that institutional capacity—open source programme offices, licensing clinics, and reward structures that value data curation—helps align IP and OS. Finally, the report highlights promising public–private models where industry partners share pre-competitive data yet retain targeted protections, and it underscores the growing importance of fair data governance as AI and health‑data use proliferate.

In short, this report captures what happened in London: a frank, cross-sector conversation about turning perceived tensions into synergies. It explains why IP and OS should be seen as complementary drivers of trustworthy research, and it offers concrete areas—licensing literacy, policy alignment, institutional support and data governance—where the community needs to act.

Find the report here.