Monthly Archives: January 2018

Bayh-Dole in one simple diagram

Let’s put Bayh-Dole in simple, coarse terms. Here’s a diagram of how Bayh-Dole works: Now here are two thousand words that say roughly the same thing, with the addition of a cesspool that I didn’t find a good way to … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole in one simple diagram

Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 5

The Necessity of Government Action Under Its Non-exclusive Licenses Let’s look at two arguments why the government must act on its licensed rights in subject inventions. The first argument has to do with the rhetoric of Bayh-Dole. If the government … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 5

Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 4

The Faux Public Covenant in Bayh-Dole The government license forms an essential part of the public covenant on inventions arising from research or development supported in part by government funding. For the other parts of the public covenant, the patent … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 4

University of Manitoba’s Transformational Partnerships, 5 Years On

Five years ago on this date I posted an article about the University of Manitoba’s bold new venture to transfer inventions made in sponsored research without charging anything but a running royalty on actual sales. There’s all sorts of things … Continue reading

Posted in Policy, Sponsored Research | Comments Off on University of Manitoba’s Transformational Partnerships, 5 Years On

Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 3

Government Rights We turn finally to the government’s rights in inventions arising in federally supported research and development. We will consider both the scope of these rights and the effect these rights should have on the development of new technology … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 3

Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 2

We are working through the four primary elements of Bayh-Dole’s public covenant, which runs with each invention made in federally supported research or development. Enterprise Bayh-Dole makes a gesture, at least, in its public covenant for using the patent system … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 2

Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 1

Patents on Subject Inventions Are Not Ordinary Patents It has been clear since at least the late 1940s that patents on inventions made with federal government support should not be treated like ordinary patents. No one–even the advocates for Bayh-Dole–has … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Public Covenant, 1

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: the bathos of university practice, 3

We are working through a report of a workshop discussion of Bayh-Dole’s “manufactured substantially” requirement in 35 USC 204. Actually, it’s not really a requirement–more like a gesture. It’s incredible what the workshop panel folks can’t get right about the … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet | Comments Off on Illusions of Bayh-Dole: the bathos of university practice, 3

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: the bathos of university practice, 2

We are working through a report on a workshop discussion of the “manufactured substantially” provision in Bayh-Dole (35 USC 204). Now we get to a rich part of Schwartz’s discussion, actual university practice: Because Johns Hopkins has applied for and … Continue reading

Posted in Bad Science | Comments Off on Illusions of Bayh-Dole: the bathos of university practice, 2

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: the bathos of university practice, 1

In 2013, David Schwartz wrote an article posted at Tech Transfer Central’s “Technology Transfer University Reporter” about the “substantially manufactured” requirement in Bayh-Dole (35 USC 204). Schwartz reports advice offered by a workshop panel on handling NIH waiver requests, but … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet | Comments Off on Illusions of Bayh-Dole: the bathos of university practice, 1