Category Archives: Bayh-Dole

28,000 federal patents and the monopoly meme went into a bar, 4

In 1980, in introducing S. 414, Senator Dole repeats the 28,000 patents meme: Now, however, it’s 5 percent, not 4 percent, and it’s not inventions licensed but rather inventions used. It’s a wonderful bit of bluffery. There’s nothing in Forman’s … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 3

A careful read of Bayh-Dole and its omission of the patent agreement requirement argues not only did Bayh-Dole reverse the “presumption” of federal ownership of inventions made under contract but also repudiated the federal requirement that contractors own inventions so … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 2

We are looking at how Bayh-Dole botches invention ownership. Where the Federal Procurement Regulations implemented in 1975 were clear, Bayh-Dole in 1980 is muddy. The FPR approach is simple: contractors must have patent agreements that ensure that contractors will be … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 1

Bayh-Dole botches its management of invention ownership. To see how, we need to look at how Bayh-Dole in 1980 changed the Federal Procurement Regulations put in place in 1975. In particular, let’s look at how the definition of subject invention … Continue reading

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

A clever misrepresentation at the origin of Bayh-Dole

Let’s see if we can isolate the origin of the Bayh-Dole Act. In about four minutes, you will read the following again: The roots, then, of Bayh-Dole are to be found in a mischaracterization of the Harbridge House report of … Continue reading

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

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: “manufactured substantially” 6

Now let’s look at Bayh-Dole’s treatment of federal employees who make inventions. Actually, there’s nothing in Bayh-Dole about it–Bayh-Dole applies only when a federal agency grants licenses to the inventions it owns. When the federal government allows a federal employee … Continue reading

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

Illusions of Bayh-Dole: “manufactured substantially” 5

Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200 includes a provision calling for the use of the patent system “to promote the commercialization and public availability of inventions made in the United States by United States industry and labor.” Folks … Continue reading

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

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