Monthly Archives: November 2012

A bureaucrat’s thumb in every hopeful innovation pie

Advocates of the “faux” Bayh-Dole make the claim that the inspired part of the Act is that it gives ownership of faculty inventive work supported by federal funds to university bureaucrats for their fun and profit. I know, I’ve skipped … Continue reading

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

Another Wild Assertion of Best Practice

Here is a passage from the “IP Handbook of Best Practices,” from an article about the development of University of California “technology transfer”, co-authored by a former director of the UC tech transfer office (emphasis added): In 1943, the first … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy | Leave a comment

Thanks

As we in the US celebrate another Thanksgiving holiday, it is also time to thank all the tech transfer folks for their hard work in the service of innovation for a better society.  We may not always agree on methods … Continue reading

Posted in Freedom, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Right More Often Than Wrong

John Gruber writes Daring Fireball, one of the best blogs on technology management, innovation, and business, generally from an Apple baseline.   I like how he selects from the news of the day, pulls a quote, and provides a quick … Continue reading

Posted in Social Science, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

Considering "Pay the employee as if it had exploited the patent"

I have been looking at the impact of the “export” of the faux Bayh-Dole Act from the US to other countries. By “faux” I mean the interpretation of Bayh-Dole that claims that the Act vested, mandated, and/or assured university ownership … Continue reading

Posted in Technology Transfer | Leave a comment