Category Archives: Sponsored Research

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

Vice presidents for research beg for Directive 10-289.

Here’s a bit from the APLU/AAU fakographic on university technology transfer: And here’s a bit from “‘Miracle machine of U.S. innovation is in danger,” a new op/ed by Kelvin Droegemeier and Daniel Reed. Droegemeier is the vice president for research at … Continue reading

Posted in Bad Science, Metrics, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Leave a comment

UW startups for FY2013 four years later, 1

In 2014, Research Enterprise ran a series of articles on the fake startup metrics at the University of Washington: Only 1 University of Washington Startup for FY 2014 4 Not 17 University of Washington Startups in FY13 Faked Metrics in … Continue reading

Posted in Metrics, Sponsored Research, Startups | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 3

This third form of mixing–intentional–created the problem for the PHS and universities in the area of medicinal chemistry. It was not mixing in the abstract; not mixing in an open university environment, but rather intentional mixing. The drug industry had … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy, Sponsored Research | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 2

We can distinguish three forms of “mixing” of funding. (1) Two or more projects, each funded on different terms, in which their participants, having the freedom of the university, talk with one another, learn things, and apply what they learn … Continue reading

Posted in History, Policy, Sponsored Research | Leave a comment

The bogus argument for “mixing” research funds, 1

The Council on Government Relations, a university front group, published a “tutorial” that advocated that universities adopt a “uniform” policy on patents. COGR’s argument was that since administrators wanted to be able to “mix” funding from different sources, and the government … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 5

Moving to a new platform that’s really what Vannever Bush first proposed If you see this difference between an approach that transfers the government’s right and the Bayh-Dole approach, which attempts to transfer ownership of patentable inventions directly to institutions, … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 4

Bayh-Dole’s method of operation The IPA did not disturb patent law–it imposed its public convent requirements on the use of patents as a matter of federal contract. Bayh-Dole was different in two ways. First, Bayh-Dole dictated executive branch contracting policy. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Sponsored Research | Leave a comment

How Bayh-Dole went wrong and what might be done, 3

Patents the government issues to itself The attributes of ordinary patents make little sense in the context of the federal government issuing to itself a patent. The government has no profit motive from the patent system. The U.S. patent system … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Sponsored Research | Leave a comment

The IPA and Wisconsin’s 1969 Patent Policy, 13

According to the Harbridge House report on federal patent policy, from the 1930s until the 1950s, the pharmaceutical industry was the primary source of funding for university investigators in the area of medicinal chemistry–looking for compounds that might become prescription … Continue reading

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