Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

“Protection” of inventions in Bayh-Dole

Twitter thread: Federal patent law uses “protect” with respect to inventions only in Bayh-Dole’s strange definition of invention at 35 USC 201(d): “is or may be patentable or otherwise protectable under this title” What does it mean to “protect” an … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–6

To get at subject inventions, we will cover some of the same ground as that series of RE articles on subject inventions, but from a different angle. Bayh-Dole’s contracting provisions do not apply if an invention made under federal contract … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–5

We are working through when Bayh-Dole does not apply. Bayh-Dole doesn’t apply to works of authorship or copyright or data or data rights or know how or trade secrets (except to keep trade secrets secret even when the trade secret … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–4

Now that you have a better idea about Bayh-Dole and have done some thinking about why someone might want it Bayh-Dole to apply and others might not want it to apply, let’s work the definition of invention (at 35 USC … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–3

Back for more of when Bayh-Dole does not apply, I see. Well, let’s get serious about this. Let’s look at the Bayh-Dole definitional cascade for subject invention. We worked through “invention”–strange, broad, both patentable and not demonstrably not patentable, except … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–2

Let’s get into the details–dance with devils, reveal Bayh-Dole’s true character. Get some sympathy. Let’s consider again that heading of Title 35 USC, Chapter 18: “Patent Rights in Inventions Made with Federal Assistance.” In Bayh-Dole, “patent rights” are restricted, relative … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–1

When does Bayh-Dole not apply? Bayh-Dole is part of federal patent law, Title 35 USC, placed in Chapter 18 with heading “Patent Rights in Inventions Made with Federal Assistance.” Thus, broadly, we can expect that Bayh-Dole does not apply to … Continue reading

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

Another question on RE: Are data rights subject to Bayh-Dole?

Are data rights subject to Bayh-Dole? No. Sigh. Yes, in a way. Data rights generally involve the right to control disclosure and/or use of technical information generated within research, experimental, or development work. While some data may involve copyrights (as … Continue reading

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

The consequences of Bayh-Dole non-disclosure of inventions, 3

Finally, we reach a non-empty consequence of an invention becoming a subject invention, even if not disclosed to the federal agency. This consequence has to do specifically with subject inventions made under the nonprofit patent rights clause. Bayh-Dole stipulates that … Continue reading

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

The consequences of Bayh-Dole non-disclosure of inventions, 2

We are looking at the consequences of a contractor not disclosing a subject invention to the federal agency that funded work in which the invention was made. One consequence is that the federal agency “may receive title” to such an … Continue reading

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