Monthly Archives: November 2011

Apply This 1% Solution to the Affected Areas…

UCSF has produced a short PowerPoint presentation [since removed] that lays out their rationale for changing their policy from a “promise to assign” to a “present assignment.”   You can flip through the slides in a few seconds. Standard story. Stanford … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

Sample language for my UC friends

I worked for six years in the University of California system, dealing with IP and research contracts.   Given the current changes to patent policy being sent out to policy under the “the Supreme Court made us change policy, but this … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Stanford v Roche | Leave a comment

Shrewdly administered business enterprises

The article I discussed in the previous post makes a pitch for federal policy to make revenue generation an objective of Bayh-Dole, and then worries that pitch.  Where the article is spot on is the need for accountability.  The authors … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

Recombinant Bayh-Dole

Here’s an opening to an article on the Axel patents at Columbia (my emphasis). The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 gave federally funded grantees and contractors, including universities, a clear and uniform mandate to patent and license inventions stemming from federally … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

Thoughts on the role of sale in licensing

I am working through some more history of academic inventions and their subsequent deployment.  This article provides a useful perspective on the Cohen-Boyer gene splicing patents.  The article points out the role of the Stanford OTL in making companies aware … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

CU’s a-Mazing IP Policy

In the University of Colorado’s IP policy we have a simple gesture that turns into a definitional and drafting maze.  The simple gesture is, “In an effort to make money licensing patent rights, the university requires the assignment of patentable … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Policy, Technology Transfer | 1 Comment