I would like to discuss agreement with you

Obviously section 9 is important and I am a little unclear
what is the relevent Intellectual Property

1) There is IP of business plans that we look at -- that belongs to proposers
2) There is evaluation reports faculty produce
3) There are ideas coming from discussions between faculty at 3CV meetings

As I understand model, 2) and 3) are 3CV funded sources of IP?
Is there something else? Your preamble defines IP to include other things
(e.g. software produced for you by faculty) but this does not appear to part
of basic process

As I understand Indiana University, they are not concerned about you owning
2) or 3). They are concerned if my university work is either hampered
(I can't work in some area as I was exposed to proprietary ideas there) or
misdirected (I get my students to work on issues that 3CV not NSF wants)

Being naive, I didn't understand why Argonne needed 9.3 as 9.2 only
discusses IP not owned by third parties -- so if Argonne my definition
owes all IP, then 9.2 still valid