Monthly Archives: July 2016

Listing Our Way to a Uniform Compulsory University Patent Policy

I have yet to see a cogent argument for comprehensive, compulsory invention assignment policies at universities. There was a time, years ago now, when most universities had no patent policy at all. Time goes by, and Archie Palmer rallies universities … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Leave a comment

Comply with commitments under federal regulations

Restoring voluntary assignment for university inventors is the first step in reconditioning university invention management–and putting that management on a road of development consistent with university mores and roles. Voluntary assignment can be accomplished a number of ways. I will … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Sponsored Research | Leave a comment

The NSF recommends bureaukleptic compliance

Here’s interesting guidance in a footnote to the current NSF statement of terms and conditions for grants to universities: Footnote 2 offers a “reminder” that universities should adopt a present assignment in “employee assignment agreements.” The idea is that somehow … Continue reading

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

New Mis-Guidance on Bayh-Dole for Universities

There’s a very nice guide on the internet to managing federal grants, “A Guide to Managing Federal Grants for Colleges and Universities.” The Guide is published by Atlantic Information Services and looks like it was published this year. The primary … Continue reading

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

Dealing with compulsory assignment, Part 4 (Florida)

There are alternatives to compulsory invention assignment practice–there’s still a voluntary aspect to nearly all university patent policies, already there, built-in–on the administrative side. There are often two mechanisms in policy by which patent administrators can implement a voluntary program … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | 1 Comment

Dealing with compulsory assignment, Part 3 (Kansas)

There are alternatives to compulsory invention assignment practice–there’s still a voluntary aspect to nearly all university patent policies, already there, built-in–on the administrative side. There are often two mechanisms in policy by which patent administrators can implement a voluntary program … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Leave a comment

Dealing with compulsory assignment, Part 2 (Iowa)

There are alternatives to compulsory invention assignment practice–there’s still a voluntary aspect to nearly all university patent policies, already there, built-in–on the administrative side. There are often two mechanisms in policy by which patent administrators can implement a voluntary program … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Leave a comment

Dealing with compulsory assignment policies, Part 1 (California)

Restoring voluntary assignment for university inventors is the first step in reconditioning university invention management–and putting that management on a road of development consistent with university mores and roles. Voluntary assignment can be accomplished a number of ways. I will … Continue reading

Posted in Policy, Sponsored Research | Leave a comment

Is There Any Public Interest Out There? Not at Wake Forest, Clearly

Here’s some bits from the Wake Forest University patent policy. The upshot is that the Wake Forest patent policy mandates making the most money possible from the sale of whatever administrators decide to treat as “property.” First, the statement of … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | Leave a comment

Modifying a university patent policy to make clear its voluntary assignment foundation

Restoring voluntary assignment for university inventors is the first step in reconditioning university invention management–and putting that management on a road of development consistent with university mores and roles. Voluntary assignment can be accomplished a number of ways. I will … Continue reading

Posted in Policy | 1 Comment