Author Archives: Gerald Barnett

Bayh-Dole is thin soup when it comes to federal innovation policy

NIST wants march-in for Bayh-Dole’s section 203(a)(2) and (3) to be for “national emergencies” only. Section (a)(2) concerns health or safety needs that are not “reasonably satisfied.” Section (a)(3) concerns regulatory requirements that are not “reasonably satisfied.”  But the *price* … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

More bad Bayh-Dole advice in the wild

Here are “three important questions answered” by a company specializing in Bayh-Dole compliance. (I’m sorry, Nikki. Have your people up their game.) 1) If you report an invention after the 60-day deadline, can the Government take title? Yes, the Government … Continue reading

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

Research Enterprise Policy Issues: fragmentation of noisy research

We have looked at noisy research and quiet research. Policy folks don’t much care, but it appears to make a difference whether research is conducted quietly or noisily. In quiet research, variations are explored, applications considered, data assembled, evidence checked … Continue reading

Posted in Commons, Innovation, Policy | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Research Enterprise Policy Issues: noisy work, quiet work

Let’s discuss practice around research, invention, and enterprise. Let’s start distinguish quiet work and noisy work. When someone is doing unprovoked research on their own–in the proverbial laboratory (institutional) or garage (unaffiliated, gadgeteer, entrepreneur), their work tends to be quiet. … Continue reading

Posted in Innovation, Sponsored Research | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Typical Bayh-Dole wrongness in the wild

Here’s a 2017 article on Bayh-Dole, “Bullies and Beakers: How Large Universities are Squashing Research Competition and the Contractual Remedies to Solve It,” by Jonathan Fort, then a law student, published in the Washington University Journal of Law & Policy. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 3

We have worked through nine things Bayh-Dole does not require. Let’s come back around a work through the disclosure requirement that Bayh-Dole does not require in detail. Bayh-Dole has a disclosure requirement that is to be placed in the default … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 2

We are working through a list of nine things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do. It’s worth the review because there are all sorts of claims out there–almost never contested–about what Bayh-Dole requires. Most of it is nonsense. And … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 1

Let’s review some of the things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do. These, despite what you may have heard. First the list, then the discussion, then an extended technical note for the folks that want detail and think perhaps … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bayh-Dole’s patent law policy on patent property rights, 2

We are working through Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200 on the premise that this statement of policy, a part of patent law, has a material effect on the patent property rights of all inventions within the scope … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s patent law policy on patent property rights, 1

Bayh-Dole, part of federal patent law, starts with a statement of “Policy and Objective” at 35 USC 200. Usually, commentators treat this bit as “preamble” or “a restatement of legislative intent” or, bluntly, inoperative fluff. The commentators are wrong. 35 … Continue reading

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