Monthly Archives: July 2013

I want my, I want my IPA–Part IV

Previous parts of this essay (I, II, and III) have taken up the structural shift of Bayh-Dole from the Institutional Patent Agreement, removing assignment to the university but also relaxing licensing oversight to the point of non-consequence.  What is left … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Metrics, Policy | Comments Off on I want my, I want my IPA–Part IV

I want my, I want my IPA–Part III

Part III continues a discussion of the changes from the Institutional Patent Agreement to the Standard Patent Rights Clause authorized by Bayh-Dole.  (Part I is here; Part II, here). The Bayh-Dole Act was passed like swiss cheese, with a bunch … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy | Comments Off on I want my, I want my IPA–Part III

I want my, I want my IPA–Part II

The first part of this essay showed how the architecture of the Institutional Patent Agreement differs from the new structure introduced by the Bayh-Dole Act.  An IPA was a master agreement while Bayh-Dole was embedded in patent law, applied to … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy | Comments Off on I want my, I want my IPA–Part II

I want my, I want my IPA–Part I

From time to time advocates of the idea that Bayh-Dole vests ownership of inventions with employers argue that the intent of the law was to build off of the Institutional Patent Agreement model developed by the NIH.  The IPA approach … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy | 2 Comments

A Provisional History

I have been trying to figure out what happened to Research Corporation and why AUTM is so antagonistic to the idea of faculty inventors having a choice of who they work with to deploy their research findings.  I call it … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on A Provisional History

The new public purpose of the American research university

While working on a new Guide to Bayh-Dole (one that COGR has yet to thank me for), I spent some time looking at recent patent infringement litigation initiated by universities.  It’s not a pretty picture. In “Sue U.,” Jacob H. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on The new public purpose of the American research university

University of Utah’s Policy on State Control of Research Results

University patent policies these days typically contain a definition of “invention.”  Often they try to conflate copyright and patent matters and introduce a new definition, such as “discovery” or “intellectual property” in an attempt at administrative convenience.  These new definitions … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Policy, Present Assignment | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

A Brief History of University Patent Policies

American University Patent Policies:  A Brief History 1900-1924 Universities have no formal policy on patents, and follow defaults provided by law, addressing issues as they arise. 1912 University of California professor Frederick Cottrell forms non-profit Research Corporation to manage inventions … Continue reading

Posted in History | Comments Off on A Brief History of University Patent Policies

10 Issues That May Limit Infringement Claims on Subject Inventions

I have been working on the problem of infringement litigation involving subject inventions under Bayh-Dole.   Here is a working summary of Bayh-Dole-related issues that companies being hit by universities with subject invention infringement cases might consider.  I am not aware … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP | Comments Off on 10 Issues That May Limit Infringement Claims on Subject Inventions

Letters of Marque

Here is an odd thing. Under the US Constitution, Congress is granted in Article I, Section 8, among other Powers, the power To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Letters of Marque