Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

Exceptional Circumstances in Bayh-Dole, 2

Here’s the slide from Dr. Thomas that starts our descent into darkness. Part of the slide contents is accurate. Part is slipped. Let’s take up the slipped. First, Bayh-Dole does not say the federal government “retains patent rights” when the … Continue reading

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

Exceptional Circumstances in Bayh-Dole, 1

In 2008, Dr. Jeffrey W. Thomas, then a senior advisor to the Technology Transfer Center at the National Cancer Institute, gave a talk on Bayh-Dole’s exceptional circumstances. The slide deck is still up at a federal laboratory consortium web site. … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s preemption of public purposes to re-establish a patent monopoly pipeline

I wrote a Twitter thread in retweeting this observation. Erin (Eeks) Stair @DrErinkate Don’t forget about Bayh-Dole, passed in the 80s, which enabled the #NIH to use our tax dollars to fund drug research at institutions & businesses; allow them … Continue reading

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

AAU, APLU, and others aim to “bolster” federal technology transfer, 1

AAU has tweeted out its happiness with advice it and other “higher education associations” (APLU, AAMC, COGR, and ACE) have given in response to NIST’s call for public comment on ways to improve federal “technology transfer.” AAU tweets that “Bayh-Dole … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole Basics, 7: Disclosure comments, 4

Though it’s rather useless to do so, let’s consider then the steps required by a Bayh-Dole compliant disclosure. I say it’s useless because no one complies with Bayh-Dole and federal agencies don’t care. The law doesn’t operate but enables something … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole Basics, 7: Disclosure comments, 3

We are considering disclosure under Bayh-Dole. You may have thought that every invention made with anything like federal support must be disclosed. That you now know is not true. Under Bayh-Dole, inventors have no obligation to disclose anything, though they … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole Basics, 7: Disclosure comments, 2

We are working through the details of Bayh-Dole’s requirement that all subject inventions must be disclosed. What are subject inventions? What is the scope of a funding agreement? Who must disclose? What is the nature of the disclosure? Good questions, … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole Basics, 7: Disclosure comments, 1

This will be longish. For the brief of heart, here’s a synopsis. Invention disclosure is the heart of Bayh-Dole standard patent rights compliance. Disclosure is not reporting that an invention exists. Disclosure means providing, for an invention owned by a … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole Basics, 7: Disclosure

The Bayh-Dole Act requires contractors who acquire title to an invention made in the performance of work under a federal funding agreement to disclose that invention to the federal government. Here’s 35 USC 202(c)(1), specifying one condition among others that … Continue reading

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

Mapping Bayh-Dole Flow of Control

I have updated this article from June 24, 2011  in light of the Stanford v Roche decision. In its previous version, the article sets out the idea that a federal agency has a right to claim title to inventions made … Continue reading

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