Category Archives: Bayh-Dole

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 | Leave a comment

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: “manufactured substantially” 3

The start of this article is here. We have looked at the first sentence of section 204 of the Bayh-Dole Act, which purports to dedicate subject inventions to American industry for manufacturing, but actually does almost nothing for American industry … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Leave a comment

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: “manufactured substantially” 2

The start of this article is here. We are taking apart section 204 of the Bayh-Dole Act, the “Preference for United States manufacturing” that ends up being almost useless for its purpose. But to get there, we have to go … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Leave a comment

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: “manufactured substantially” 1

Let me show you how empty the Bayh-Dole provision on “Preference for United States Industry” (35 USC 204) is. According to its terms, this provision is the single most important piece of federal patent policy. For convenience, here’s the provision: … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | 2 Comments

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: Bayh and Dole argue for unreasonable drug pricing

Here’s an article by Birch Bayh and Bob Dole published in the Topeka Capital-Journal in 2002 with the headline “Bayh, Dole: Drug price controls hurt, and weren’t intended.” In the article, the co-sponsors of Bayh-Dole aim to rebut Peter Arno … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Leave a comment

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: patent blockages and incentives

In 1979, when S. 414 was introduced by Senators Bayh and Dole–later much of the language of S. 414 would form the core of the Bayh-Dole Act–Senator Bayh made the following claim: Some 30,000 government-owned patents are piled up awaiting … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Leave a comment

Bayh-Dole–six parts real, one part faux

Bayh-Dole is a law in six real parts and one faux part. There’s a policy part (35 USC 200, 201, 206, 210-212); requirements for contractor owned inventions (35 USC 202(a, b), 203, 204, 205); requirements for federally owned inventions (35 … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s only purpose is to exploit public suffering for profit

The Bayh-Dole Act was created to permit the pharmaceutical industry to gain patent monopolies over inventions in medicinal chemistry made with federal government support. I have been through the history. I have worked through law for a decade. I practiced … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

The Biddle Report’s Perfectly Fine Assumptions

From time to time, I revisit territory. I wrote about this issue almost two years ago, now. I provide here a different angle that gets at the same point. Here’s Sean O’Connor proposing that a flawed assumption in the U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Stanford v Roche | Leave a comment

Optimism for a New Year

It’s a whole new year, rather than just December 32. In 2017, Research Enterprise published over 250 articles on various aspects of invention policy and innovation, with lots of attention on the Bayh-Dole Act and on universities that cannot seem … Continue reading

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