Category Archives: Policy

War and Publification of Medicine Development, 3

Think of it this way, at least simplistically. You are patent counsel for the NIH in 1968. You have no control over how the NIH allocates funding, and the NIH chooses to fund lots of research and declines to fund … Continue reading

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

War and Publification of Medicine Development, 2

The “war on disease” usage asserts a primary federal government role in directing the research and development of disease-directed therapies. The “war” usage asserts that the “market” for treating disease with new therapies–inventive therapies–is a governmental market, and that patents … Continue reading

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

War and Publification of Medicine Development, 1

In 1944, President Roosevelt asked Vannevar Bush to respond to four questions (or, perhaps it was Vannevar Bush who arranged for President Roosevelt to ask him four questions). These questions formed the foundation for his report Science the Endless Frontier. … Continue reading

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

A non-compliant Bayh-Dole written agreement at Yale-5

We are working through Yale’s “Patent Policy Acknowledgement & Agreement.” We have been looking at Paragraph 6 of the Yale patent policy to try to make sense of what inventions Yale really does assert an interest in. Paragraph 6 demands … Continue reading

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

A non-compliant Bayh-Dole written agreement at Yale-4

We are working through Yale’s “Patent Policy Acknowledgement & Agreement.” Most recently we borked about employment and faculty freedom. Now let’s look at how the agreement deals with consulting. It tries to worry the problem of conflicting obligations–Yale doesn’t want … Continue reading

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

A non-compliant Bayh-Dole written agreement at Yale-3

We are working through Yale’s “Patent Policy Acknowledgement & Agreement.” The agreement requires personnel signing it to “abide” by Yale’s patent policy, as if that patent policy does not apply but for this agreement. That’s a bit odd. Even odder, … Continue reading

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

A non-compliant Bayh-Dole written agreement at Yale-2

Now let’s look at a “Patent Policy Acknowledgement & Agreement” from Yale University. Here it is: Yale’s web site asserts that this agreement is required “for grant and patent compliance.” That’s a strange combination–grant and patent. One might think grant … Continue reading

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

A non-compliant Bayh-Dole written agreement at Yale-1

Bayh-Dole’s standard patent rights clause introduces a requirement not in Bayh-Dole. 37 CFR 401.14(f)(2) requires contractors to require their employees, other than clerical and non-technical employees, to make a written agreement to protect the government’s interest in subject inventions: The … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A sense of proportion–5

One can see, then, where Bayh-Dole comes into play in this meaningless mess. Bayh-Dole was drafted by the same folks who created the IPA system. The IPA system was shut down in 1978 as ineffective and contrary to public policy. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Fun, History, Policy, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on A sense of proportion–5

A sense of proportion–4

To lay it out in bullet points, the now dominant university patent-based approach to research inventions defaulting to exclusive licenses: fragments invention platforms with no way to restore them attracts speculative investors while pushing away companies raises barriers to early … Continue reading

Posted in Fun, History, Innovation, Policy, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on A sense of proportion–4