Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Monthly Archives: February 2012
The University D-Economy, Fitt 5
I have been looking at various statements regarding the “D-economy.” It goes by various names–Shanzhai rules, débrouillards, System-D. The Wired write up was interesting. Here is another, from Coley Hudgins at Resilient Family. Here’s another by Robert Neuwirth (who was … Continue reading
Posted in Bozonet, History, Innovation, Shanzhai, Social Science, Technology Transfer
Tagged bozonet, D-economy, NIPIA, shanzhai
Comments Off on The University D-Economy, Fitt 5
Patent battles and research fragmentation
John Dvorak over at PC Magazine has an interesting comment on the patent battles shaping up in mobile. His more general observation, however, is what caught my eye: This whole idea of actual inventions and the monopoly is over. Around … Continue reading
Projects, the Treatment for Fool's Dream Virus
The gulf between the Supreme Court decision in Stanford v Roche and the push in universities for present assignments is huge. The Court decided the question whether Bayh-Dole was a vesting statute. It said no. Wasn’t. By doing that, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Projects, Sponsored Research, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Projects, the Treatment for Fool's Dream Virus
Please Leave the Den Now
Attorneys analyzing Stanford v Roche and the Bayh-Dole Act from a distance need to understand: Bayh-Dole is directed at federal agencies. It requires agencies to use a standard patent rights clause in their funding agreements. The patent rights clause is … Continue reading
Recycling Losing Arguments as Policy Intent
In a recent essay on the Stanford v Roche decision, Sean O’Connor gives a fascinating perspective on the push by the University of California to impose a present assignment obligation on faculty. I could not figure how they could rationalize … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche
Comments Off on Recycling Losing Arguments as Policy Intent
Present Assignment Agreements, the Coming Nightmare for University IP Practice
This turned out to be a longish essay for a blog environment. It’s not for everyone. It puts together arguments against the idea that present assignments somehow address the Stanford v Roche situation, or situations like it, or are otherwise … Continue reading
Posted in Agreements, Bayh-Dole, IP, Policy, Present Assignment, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Present Assignment Agreements, the Coming Nightmare for University IP Practice
Stevenson-Wydler Technology Transfer Reporting
I have written before about technology transfer standards (here and here, for instance), and how the AUTM licensing survey in particular fails to provide useful management information, and in some ways is quite misleading with regard to what is going … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Metrics, Policy, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Stevenson-Wydler Technology Transfer Reporting
Why an Innovation Bill of Rights, and not Better Bureaukleptic University Policy?
I’m looking at a new article on Stanford v Roche that ends with the assurance that universities can use present assignments and doing so will “fix” their ownership problem. Before getting into the article, I want to emphasize that this … Continue reading
Posted in Innovation, IP, Policy, Present Assignment, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Why an Innovation Bill of Rights, and not Better Bureaukleptic University Policy?
Texas wants you anyway
The University of Texas has a fine statement of ownership in its policy (Rule 90101, Section 2). The Board of Regents automatically owns the intellectual property created by individuals subject to this Rule that is described in Sections 3, 5, … Continue reading
Posted in Policy, Present Assignment
1 Comment
Stevenson-Wydler and Public Domain
In working through the agent model anticipated by Bayh-Dole, I was chasing down the citations for each of the possible outcomes. The one that caught me up, however, was how a subject invention gets to the public domain. I thought … Continue reading