Category Archives: Bayh-Dole

If you are against a crappy law like Bayh-Dole

Kevin E. Noonan, a biotech patent attorney, made an interesting assertion in a LinkedIn comment on the fourth article in this series. Maybe he was being flippant, but let’s consider: People against Bayh-Dole just support private industry (much of it … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on If you are against a crappy law like Bayh-Dole

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 7: Grubbers, innovation, and march-in

Reflections on Bayh-Dole by “industry leaders”–shills out shilling for industry. Good shilling earns shillings, so it is a viable career choice. We use these shills reflecting on Bayh-Dole to also reflect on Bayh-Dole, though our reflections won’t earn us any … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 7: Grubbers, innovation, and march-in

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 6: Fragmentation, lockup, and babble talk

We are still reflecting on reflections on Bayh-Dole. It’s a hall of mirrors, with reflections all the way down to the insubstantial substance of the operation of the statute itself. We continue with a reflection on a reflection of what … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 6: Fragmentation, lockup, and babble talk

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 5: Incentives and basic research

We have been working through a set of reflections on Bayh-Dole by a set of patents-in-healthcare shills. We are at this claim: prior to the Act, the government often funded research to spark innovation, but then put the research in … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 5: Incentives and basic research

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 4: Fake history, executive branch patent policy, and contamination

Back to reflecting on fake history, namely this: prior to the Act, the government often funded research to spark innovation, but then put the research in the public domain for non-exclusive licensing,… Executive branch patent policy from Kennedy on (until … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 4: Fake history, executive branch patent policy, and contamination

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 3: Fake history, sparking innovation, and a pernicious requirement

[I have made revisions and additions and placed the second half of this article in part 4.] We are still reflecting on reflections on Bayh-Dole by “leaders” hoping that you will follow them. More: prior to the Act, the government … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 3: Fake history, sparking innovation, and a pernicious requirement

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 2: Commercialization and certainty

We are working through reflections of Bayh-Dole made by some iron rings in cows’ noses that claim to give milk–er, “industry leaders.” The exercise is useful not merely to mock them for their nonsense–mockery is here salutory and inclusive–but also … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 2: Commercialization and certainty

Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 1: Intent and utilization

Rebecca Tapscott has posted an article at IP Watchdog, “Industry Leaders Reflect on Bayh-Dole at 40.” There are lots of problems with this article–and with the “leaders’” “reflections” when it comes to Bayh-Dole. But hey, folks are entitled to mis-remember … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Reflections on Shill Reflections on Bayh-Dole, 1: Intent and utilization

The Wall Street Journal publishes an editorial against using Bayh-Dole march-in for remdesivir

Sally Pipes has published an op/ed piece at the Wall Street Journal on Bayh-Dole and Gilead, “The Remdesivir Patent Isn’t State Property.” There is so much going on with Pipes’s work. We should take a closer look. First, the title … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, high priced medicines, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Wall Street Journal publishes an editorial against using Bayh-Dole march-in for remdesivir

Bayh-Dole’s repeal is more worser Bayh-Dole

I’ve worked this idea before, but I will try again. What happens if Bayh-Dole is repealed? First, things fall back to EO 12591, which stipulates that the heads of federal departments and agencies shall, among other things (1)(b)(4): promote the … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | 1 Comment