Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

Bayh-Dole is thin soup when it comes to federal innovation policy

NIST wants march-in for Bayh-Dole’s section 203(a)(2) and (3) to be for “national emergencies” only. Section (a)(2) concerns health or safety needs that are not “reasonably satisfied.” Section (a)(3) concerns regulatory requirements that are not “reasonably satisfied.”  But the *price* … Continue reading

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

More bad Bayh-Dole advice in the wild

Here are “three important questions answered” by a company specializing in Bayh-Dole compliance. (I’m sorry, Nikki. Have your people up their game.) 1) If you report an invention after the 60-day deadline, can the Government take title? Yes, the Government … Continue reading

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

Typical Bayh-Dole wrongness in the wild

Here’s a 2017 article on Bayh-Dole, “Bullies and Beakers: How Large Universities are Squashing Research Competition and the Contractual Remedies to Solve It,” by Jonathan Fort, then a law student, published in the Washington University Journal of Law & Policy. … Continue reading

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

9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 3

We have worked through nine things Bayh-Dole does not require. Let’s come back around a work through the disclosure requirement that Bayh-Dole does not require in detail. Bayh-Dole has a disclosure requirement that is to be placed in the default … Continue reading

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

9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 2

We are working through a list of nine things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do. It’s worth the review because there are all sorts of claims out there–almost never contested–about what Bayh-Dole requires. Most of it is nonsense. And … Continue reading

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

9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 1

Let’s review some of the things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do. These, despite what you may have heard. First the list, then the discussion, then an extended technical note for the folks that want detail and think perhaps … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s patent law policy on patent property rights, 2

We are working through Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200 on the premise that this statement of policy, a part of patent law, has a material effect on the patent property rights of all inventions within the scope … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole’s patent law policy on patent property rights, 1

Bayh-Dole, part of federal patent law, starts with a statement of “Policy and Objective” at 35 USC 200. Usually, commentators treat this bit as “preamble” or “a restatement of legislative intent” or, bluntly, inoperative fluff. The commentators are wrong. 35 … Continue reading

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

How Bayh-Dole Is Intended to Work, circa 1992, Part 3

We are still working through a passage in a law article from 1992 that sets out how Bayh-Dole is intended to work and addresses questions of faculty ownership of inventions. The issue is not with the author of an article … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet | Tagged , | Comments Off on How Bayh-Dole Is Intended to Work, circa 1992, Part 3

Is this what Congress intended when it passed Bayh-Dole?

Would Congress have passed Bayh-Dole if things had been stated clearly? It is the policy and objective of Congress that nonprofit organizations should, for inventions arising in federally supported research or development: strip inventors of their common law rights in … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , | Comments Off on Is this what Congress intended when it passed Bayh-Dole?