Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

Are copyrights considered inventions under Bayh-Dole?

I saw a search show up here at Research Enterprise–“Are copyrights considered inventions under Bayh-Dole?” Simple answer. No. Brief answer. Copyright is a form of intellectual property. At one time, perhaps, the idea of copyright was itself a social invention. … Continue reading

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

Loma Linda University misrepresents Bayh-Dole

Here’s another misrepresentation of Bayh-Dole by a university technology transfer office: The Bayh-Dole Act (1980) requires universities to report all inventions arising from federally supported research, and to diligently pursue patent protection and commercialization for new technologies that are commercially … Continue reading

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

Unhelpful NIAID guidance on Bayh-Dole, 2

We are working through another unhelpful NIAID document on Bayh-Dole. With such ubiquitous misinformation put out as authoritative, it is no wonder that Bayh-Dole has become an excuse for what amounts to ad hoc law, created by wonderful agreement between … Continue reading

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

Unhelpful NIAID guidance on Bayh-Dole, 1

Previously, we have looked at a thoroughly misinformed NIAID document on Bayh-Dole. Let’s look at another document from NIAID, “Intellectual Property Considerations for Contracts,” published in Funding News, April 2, 2015. The document may come up “Access Denied” in a … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged | Leave a comment

Oh wow–short form

Bayh-Dole has to be broad Bayh-Dole’s scope has to be as broad as the broadest federal statute or regulation pertaining to federal rights to inventions. In Bayh-Dole, “subject invention” is defined broadly to include conception or first actual reduction to … Continue reading

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

Oh wow. Implications of Bayh-Dole’s broad scope

For Bayh-Dole’s preemption to operate “uniformly,” Bayh-Dole’s scope has to be as broad as any federal statutes and executive branch patent policy. Since those statutes and executive branch patent policy do not worry who has ownership of any invention “arising … Continue reading

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

Reagan’s Executive Order 12591-4

In the implementation of Bayh-Dole, then, employee-inventors own unless they assign rights to the Contractor. We can use “Contractor” with a capital “C” to follow the usage in the Federal Procurement Regulation’s patent rights clause that implements the Nixon patent … Continue reading

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

Reagan’s Executive Order 12591-3

President Reagan’s Executive Order 12591 does one more odd thing. It makes the contractor’s title to patents conditioned on a government license. But this government license is not the one required by Bayh-Dole. Here’s Bayh-Dole (35 USC 202(c)(4)): With respect … Continue reading

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

Reagan’s Executive Order 12591-2

So far we have discussed the Reagan executive order mandating the promotion of commercialization (something not in Bayh-Dole) by having federal agencies grant title to patents to all contractors–not just to large companies that otherwise operated still under the Nixon … Continue reading

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

Reagan’s Executive Order 12591-1

In 1987, President Reagan issued Executive Order 12591, which extended, sort of, the Bayh-Dole Act to “all contractors.” Let’s work through EO 12591 and try to sort out this “sort of.” It’s rather a mess. In doing so, we end … Continue reading

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