Category Archives: Policy

What should the federal government do with patents it issues to itself? Part 2

The Bayh-Dole Dissatisfaction with the Patent System According to its advocates, starting with Sen. Bayh, the idea of behind Bayh-Dole was to require federal agencies to pre-assign their ownership interest in invention contract deliverables to university contractors. It’s a clever … Continue reading

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

What should the federal government do with patents it issues to itself? Part 1

Here is a question: What should the federal government do with patents it issues to itself? Some Context In the 1940s and 1950s, as the United States government contracted for research services associated with the development of weapons systems and … Continue reading

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

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 5

Let’s say that companies have diverse views about patenting, as the Harbridge House report documented, and some companies might decline to participate in federal research because they can’t get title to inventions and won’t settle for a mere license. We … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 4

The origins of the argument for “mixing” government and private research funds can be found in the 1968 Harbridge House report. The report identifies six industry attitudes toward patenting, ranging from indifference to defensive positions to critical to business. The special … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Sponsored Research | 1 Comment

That special special case 6: Bayh-Dole the enabler

The Benefits of the Special Special Case There’s a good argument that the special special case has put more money into the pharmaceutical industry than would otherwise be there. The chase for such lucrative profits has in turn attracted speculators … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

That special special case 5: From invention to patent to flip

Patent System and Public Covenants If the patent system is good as it is, and does not require a public covenant to run with inventions made in federally supported research, then why should federal policy endorse the two circumventions of … Continue reading

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

That special special case 4: Making it general

The special special case was turned into a general case, the only case, the best practice case. According to this new general case, inventions generally require private risk capital to become useful. Institutions must take on the responsibility to find … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Leave a comment

That special special case 3: The Kennedy patent policy

The special special case arose in the Kennedy patent policy in 1963. Look at the parameters. Here is the premise: A. The government expends large sums for the conduct of research and development which results in a considerable number of … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy | Leave a comment

That special special case 2: Circumventing the patent system

Here is the public policy agenda of Bayh-Dole. If one cuts through the apparatus and the happy-talk, Bayh-Dole stipulates that the patent system is to be used to create company monopolies on inventions made with private support, using private patent … Continue reading

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

The banal myth of the necessary institutional monopoly

Louis Rosenfeld wrote an insightful article in Clinical Chemistry on the discovery of insulin “Insulin: Discovery and Controversy.” Three collaborators in the research had a disagreement over inventive contributions to various portions of the work and to settle their disputes gave … Continue reading

Posted in Innovation, Policy, Stanford v Roche, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment