Category Archives: Bayh-Dole

Bayh-Dole nonsense in a talk at the University of Pittsburgh

Last year (March 2016), Joe Allen gave a talk at the University of Pittsburgh, “Patent Ownership Under Bayh-Dole, reported in the University Times. Called “a key architect of the Bayh-Dole Act,” Allen manages to fill a talk summary with mostly … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

There are no Bayh-Doles in Canada

In a recent hearing held by the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, Michael Geist, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, made some valuable remarks, which he has published at his blog. Geist … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, Innovation, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 1

The Council on Government Relations, a university front group, published a “tutorial” that advocated that universities adopt a “uniform” policy on patents. COGR’s argument was that since administrators wanted to be able to “mix” funding from different sources, and the government … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 5

Moving to a new platform that’s really what Vannever Bush first proposed If you see this difference between an approach that transfers the government’s right and the Bayh-Dole approach, which attempts to transfer ownership of patentable inventions directly to institutions, … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 4

Bayh-Dole’s method of operation The IPA did not disturb patent law–it imposed its public convent requirements on the use of patents as a matter of federal contract. Bayh-Dole was different in two ways. First, Bayh-Dole dictated executive branch contracting policy. … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 3

Patents the government issues to itself The attributes of ordinary patents make little sense in the context of the federal government issuing to itself a patent. The government has no profit motive from the patent system. The U.S. patent system … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 2

The nature of federal research contracts Let’s work through how Bayh-Dole might have been structured. We start with the nature of federal contracts. A federal contract is not quite like a conventional contract formed under state laws. The federal government … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History | Leave a comment

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 1

This article starts a series on structural problems in Bayh-Dole. As an architecture to take ownership of inventions from university investigators, Bayh-Dole suffers from significant flaws. The effort by university patent brokers and their biotech partners has been to cover … Continue reading

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

The IPA and Wisconsin’s 1969 Patent Policy, 14

We can then distinguish three sorts of invention arising in federally funded research at universities: inventive tools, inventive tools that can be sold as products, and articles that can be used only as products. An inventive tool is anything useful … Continue reading

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

The IPA and Wisconsin’s 1969 Patent Policy, 13

According to the Harbridge House report on federal patent policy, from the 1930s until the 1950s, the pharmaceutical industry was the primary source of funding for university investigators in the area of medicinal chemistry–looking for compounds that might become prescription … Continue reading

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