Monthly Archives: June 2017

A New Guide to Bayh-Dole–Outline Version

Here’s an alternative guide to Bayh-Dole. There’s a whole book in here, but I’ve left out the chapter and verse documentation and the historical evidence and interviews and the like. This is not the version of Bayh-Dole you will read … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 5

Let’s say that companies have diverse views about patenting, as the Harbridge House report documented, and some companies might decline to participate in federal research because they can’t get title to inventions and won’t settle for a mere license. We … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 4

The origins of the argument for “mixing” government and private research funds can be found in the 1968 Harbridge House report. The report identifies six industry attitudes toward patenting, ranging from indifference to defensive positions to critical to business. The special … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Sponsored Research | 1 Comment

Sublicensing in Bayh-Dole

Let’s look at sublicensing of inventions made with federal support. Here’s the summary: Contractors can distribute rights in subject inventions in advance by assignment, substitution, and subcontracting. A contractor can grant sublicenses if it loses title to the government, provided … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Bayh-Dole | Leave a comment

That special special case 6: Bayh-Dole the enabler

The Benefits of the Special Special Case There’s a good argument that the special special case has put more money into the pharmaceutical industry than would otherwise be there. The chase for such lucrative profits has in turn attracted speculators … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

That special special case 5: From invention to patent to flip

Patent System and Public Covenants If the patent system is good as it is, and does not require a public covenant to run with inventions made in federally supported research, then why should federal policy endorse the two circumventions of … Continue reading

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

That special special case 4: Making it general

The special special case was turned into a general case, the only case, the best practice case. According to this new general case, inventions generally require private risk capital to become useful. Institutions must take on the responsibility to find … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

That special special case 3: The Kennedy patent policy

The special special case arose in the Kennedy patent policy in 1963. Look at the parameters. Here is the premise: A. The government expends large sums for the conduct of research and development which results in a considerable number of … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy | Leave a comment

That special special case 2: Circumventing the patent system

Here is the public policy agenda of Bayh-Dole. If one cuts through the apparatus and the happy-talk, Bayh-Dole stipulates that the patent system is to be used to create company monopolies on inventions made with private support, using private patent … Continue reading

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

That special special case 1: A bureaucratic urge

The special special case is special in a number of ways. That’s what makes it so special. Here’s the base form of the special case: a federally supported invention that: (1) cannot be beneficially used except as a commercial product–DIY … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History | Leave a comment