Hmpf Vol 1, appendix

The paper argues that Bayh-Dole represents a societal statement encouraging universities to work closely with industry despite cultural differences and the prospect for conflict of interest, and that with thoughtfulness these challenges can be met so that federally supported inventions get commercialized. One might even think the implied duty to commercialize is somehow intended as a federal pre-emption to concerns about conflict of interest or an indifference to commercialization, especially among biomedical researchers.

I think it is quite fine to construct a societal argument for the importance of commercialization. This can be directed at the role of industry in deploying medical knowledge through technology. One can look at the rise of new technology with the potential for undertaking medical interventions. One can ask how markets and investors create value that might focus development work to move from bench to bedside. These are decent things, and worthy. It’s a choice to do these things, not an implied duty under the law.

There’s just no reason to squeeze implied duties out of the law to get there.

This entry was posted in Bayh-Dole, Technology Transfer and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.