Author Archives: Gerald Barnett

Wipe Bayh-Dole off the books

When Congress passed Bayh-Dole, they made a giant turd. There is pretty much nothing that someone can say about Bayh-Dole that is positive, true, and substantiated. Bayh-Dole needs to be, ahem, wiped off the books. Between the IPA program and Bayh-Dole, we … Continue reading

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

28,000 federal patents and the monopoly meme went into a bar, 3

Howard Forman, a long-time patent attorney in the chemical industry turned federal employee, introduced the 28,000 unused federal patents meme into Bayh-Dole rhetoric in his congressional testimony in 1976. Senator Bayh includes Forman’s meme in his introduction of S. 414, … Continue reading

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

28,000 federal patents and the monopoly meme went into a bar, 2

Howard Forman’s 1976 testimony is where the 28,000 patents meme enters what will become the Bayh-Dole rhetoric. Senator Bayh uses Forman’s meme when he introduces S. 414 in 1979: When the Government decides to retain patent rights on these inventions … Continue reading

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

28,000 federal patents and the monopoly meme went into a bar, 1

Here’s an important–perhaps the pivotal–instance of the monopoly meme in the history of what will become the Bayh-Dole Act. Synopsis. Howard Forman introduces the meme of 28,000 unused federal patents in his legislative testimony in 1976. Senator Bayh repeats the … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole the Giant Turd

Howard Forman, a patent attorney, introduced the claim that the federal government had 26,000 unused patents in his testimony before a House subcommittee in 1976, and that the reason for the nonuse was that the government made the inventions available … Continue reading

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

Five easy ways to circumvent Bayh-Dole’s “manufactured substantially” requirement

Bayh-Dole makes American manufacture of product based on subject inventions the centerpiece of the law. Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy and objective calls out promotion of inventions “made in the United States by United States industry and labor” (35 USC 200). … Continue reading

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

NSF’s circumvention of Bayh-Dole in cooperative research centers

Bayh-Dole positions the “preference” for United States industry as the most important provision of the law, asserting precedence over any other part of Bayh-Dole (see 35 USC 203). Bayh-Dole requires owners of subject inventions to require certain exclusive licensees to … Continue reading

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

What the NIH says about Bayh-Dole, 3

Now we arrive at the source of the NIH’s conflation in its most recent “background” misrepresentation of Bayh-Dole. We are deep into the federally owned invention side of Bayh-Dole, section 209(a), in a list of the requirements that must be … Continue reading

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

What the NIH says about Bayh-Dole, 2

We are working through the NIH’s most recent misrepresentation of the Bayh-Dole Act. In the first part of this effort, we looked at the NIH’s bungling of the basic premise of Bayh-Dole and the concept of practical application. Bayh-Dole’s first … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, Open Source | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

What about inventions made on equipment purchased with federal funds?

How does the Bayh-Dole Act apply to inventions made using equipment purchased with federal funding? Here’s the thing–Bayh-Dole applies to inventions owned by a contractor–a party to a federal funding agreement for research or development. If the inventor is not … Continue reading

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