Category Archives: Policy

Taking Apart APLU’s Talking Points on Bayh-Dole, 3

We are working through APLU’s Talking Points on the cash cows of Bayh-Dole, commercialization, entrepreneurship and whatever else the federal government can be induced to fund. The APLU Talking Points turn next to what the federal government should do to … Continue reading

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

Taking Apart APLU’s Talking Points on Bayh-Dole, 2

We are working through APLU’s Talking Points on the cash cows of Bayh-Dole, commercialization, entrepreneurship and whatever else the federal government can be induced to fund. We reach a talking point in bold. It must be more important than the … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

Taking Apart APLU’s Talking Points on Bayh-Dole, 1

The APLU has published a set of talking points about a bunch of things (original spelling retained): TALKING POINTS: UNIVERISTY TECHNOLOGY COMMERCIALIZATION, FEDERAL RESEARCH FUNDING, THE BAYH-DOLE ACT, AND FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR ENTREPRENURSHIP/GAP FUNDING PROGRAMS Let’s call them “cash cows” … Continue reading

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

The Bayh-Dole implications of “big” projects created by university policies and practices

In the usual depictions of the Bayh-Dole Act, the emphasis gets put on university ownership of inventions made with federal support. What is not pointed out is that Bayh-Dole not only allows (but does not require) such ownership, but makes … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Bayh-Dole, Policy, Projects | Leave a comment

Lower drug development costs than industry reports–shock!

At the SciScip discussion group notice has been given to an article published in September 2017 in JAMA that has determined the median cost to develop a new cancer drug at $648m, much lower than the pharmaceutical industry reports for … Continue reading

Posted in Commons, Metrics, Policy, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

University of Misery’s IP Policy Scam, 17

We are pretty much through with the University of Missouri’s policy scam. Let’s clean up a few last gobbets of policy ugliness. To review. The University of Missouri’s patent policy provides only two conditions under which the university may claim … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

University of Misery’s IP Policy Scam, 16

University administrators insist that they, unlike their corporate counterparts, can expand their institutional claim on inventions to be anything that’s invented, and faculty must agree to this claim as a condition of employment. That is, administrators claim the right to … Continue reading

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

University of Misery’s IP Policy Scam, 15

In Bayh-Dole, the definition of “subject invention” is not a matter of defining a term in a federal contract. Bayh-Dole is part of federal patent law, so “subject invention” is a definition of patent law. A subject invention is a … Continue reading

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

University of Misery’s IP Policy Scam, 14

The use of “subject invention” in federal contracting goes back to at least as early as 1947, when the military used “subject invention” in research contracts. Here’s an instance from a Navy contract (quoted in Mine Safety Appliances Company v. … Continue reading

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

University of Misery’s IP Policy Scam, 13

In the Institutional Patent Agreement program operated by the NIH, the “conception or first actual reduction to practice” scope gets changed from being only about the scope of what the government does not have to compensate a patent owner for … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy | Leave a comment