Category Archives: Present Assignment

When to disclose inventions? Part I. Arizona State

Here is a basic question: When should university-based inventors disclose their inventions to the university administration? This is a remarkably difficult question. Is it when the invention is “made”? If so, what does it mean to “make” an invention? What … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Policy, Present Assignment | Tagged , , | Comments Off on When to disclose inventions? Part I. Arizona State

NASA Turns Bayh-Dole Into a Vesting Statute

The US Supreme Court in Stanford v Roche ruled that Bayh-Dole was not a “vesting statute”–the law did not place ownership of patentable inventions made with federal support with the universities that hosted the research: Stanford contends that reading the … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche | Comments Off on NASA Turns Bayh-Dole Into a Vesting Statute

The University of Michigan’s Mess of a Copyright Policy, Part III

Part I of this series looked at the University of Michigan 1944 patent policy and its transmogrified afterlife as Regents Bylaw 3.10, and the strange Supplemental Appointment Information invention present assignment document that claims to derive from Bylaw 3.10. Part … Continue reading

Posted in Bozonet, Freedom, IP, Policy, Present Assignment | Comments Off on The University of Michigan’s Mess of a Copyright Policy, Part III

The University of Michigan’s Mess of a Present Assignment, Part I

In reviewing university IP policies, I came upon the following Form HR36100 at the University of Michigan titled “Supplemental Appointment Information.” After a section in which the appointee provides name and social security number, we have this: It is apparent that university … Continue reading

Posted in Agreements, Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The University of Michigan’s Mess of a Present Assignment, Part I

Some Questions from a Future FAQ on Bayh-Dole

Q. Can a university violate the Bayh-Dole Act? A. No. Bayh-Dole applies to federal agencies. The law requires federal agencies to adopt uniform practices regarding patent rights to inventions in funding agreements. Bayh-Dole (now) authorizes the Department of Commerce to … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Some Questions from a Future FAQ on Bayh-Dole

Bayh-Dole was written for the research foundations. Pity for us all that it didn’t work out.

After I wrote the previous article, it struck me that the origins of Bayh-Dole really are with the affiliated research foundations trying to license patents to industry, not with the universities, and not even with Research Corporation (which remained neutral … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Present Assignment | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole was written for the research foundations. Pity for us all that it didn’t work out.

How Bayh-Dole failed to protect faculty inventors (from university administrators)

[Now with some revisions in the second paragraph that on reflection were worth making.] There are a number of things wrong with the Bayh-Dole Act, such as the lack of accountability for the disposition of privately held patents on inventions … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on How Bayh-Dole failed to protect faculty inventors (from university administrators)

The Legal Context of University IP, Part 2 Revisited

In 2010, the National Academies and the National Research Council published a commissioned a report–The Legal Context of University Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer by Sean O’Connor, Gregory D. Graff, and David E. Winickoff. Here are comments on the findings of … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment | Comments Off on The Legal Context of University IP, Part 2 Revisited

The Legal Context of University IP, Part 1 Revisited

In 2010, the National Academies and the National Research Council published a commissioned a report–The Legal Context of University Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer by Sean O’Connor, Gregory D. Graff, and David E. Winickoff. The report lists 45 findings and expands … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Present Assignment | Comments Off on The Legal Context of University IP, Part 1 Revisited

Nolo Can’t Get Either Bayh-Dole or Stanford v Roche Right

I have always liked Nolo Press publications. They are usually well written, easy to read, and affordable. But here’s a bit from Nolo’s “Legal Encyclopedia” doing a number on Bayh-Dole–and this is after Stanford v Roche, because they manage to … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Present Assignment, Stanford v Roche | 1 Comment