The relevant policy documents of the Ethiopian government identify access to and disseminationrnof foreign technologies as a key factor for the achievement of development goals of the country.rnIt is also a day to day occurrence to hear high government officials through media outletsrnasserting the importance of technology transfer. Nonetheless, foreign technologies cannot berneffectively adapted in a vacuum. In addition to having the required technological capability tornabsorb foreign technologies, suitable legal and institutional arrangements need to be put inrnplace. This study paper thoroughly analyzes laws of the country that have direct or indirectrnimpact on technology transfer activities. It also examines the powers, responsibilities andrntechnology transfer activities of government organs which have mandates to deal withrntechnology transfer process.rnUsing the method of both scholarly and legislative documents analysis and interviews withrngovernment officials, the findings of the study reveals the inadequacy and fragmented nature ofrnthe rules on transfer of technology. Contrary to prevailing foreign experiences, determining thernterms and conditions of technology transfer agreements is left to the absolute autonomy of thernparties, there are no packages of incentives to persons who engage in technology transferrnactivities and the investment law fails to provide for attractive incentive to foreigners who investrnjointly with Ethiopian nationals. The patent and competition laws overlook to regulate restrictivernpatent licensing practices which may have the effect of defeating one of the very purposes ofrnintroducing the patent system, i.e, encouraging the transfer and adoption of foreign technology.rnFurthermore the country lacks compressive piece legislations that regulate franchising businessrnand trade secrets protection.rnAs regards institutional setups for the transfer of technologies in Ethiopia, the study identified,rnamong others, the Ministry of Science and Technology, Ethiopian Intellectual Property Officernand the Micro and Small Enterprises Agency as government entities which have mandates thatrnrelate with technology transfer. Among other things, absence of coordination, overlap ofrnmandates, bureaucratic hurdles, and absence of monitoring and follow up mechanisms hinderrnthese institutions from undertaking effective and efficient technology transfer activities.rnFinally, the writer of the paper suggests some solutions that may help to overcome thernabovementioned shortcomings. He recommends that it is high time to adopt a technologyrntransfer regulation that: prohibit the conclusion of restrictive technology transfer agreements;rnprovide for mechanisms for monitoring and follow up procedures; and provide for packages ofrnincentives for persons who engage in technology transfer activities. He also suggests for thernamendment of some parts of the patent law and inclusion of some other new legal arrangementsrnin the same. In addition, he calls for the enactment of compressive franchising and trade secretesrnprotection laws. He further advises that a special governmental organ should be established.rnThis government organ shall have the mandate to look over and coordinate all sorts ofrntechnology transfer activities in the country.