Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

“Promote” in Bayh-Dole, 1

In 2002, a district court provided an implicit interpretation of a key word in the Bayh-Dole Act. No, not “of”–but rather “promote.” Let’s look at “promote” in Bayh-Dole, and then at the case. The first section of Bayh-Dole, 35 USC … Continue reading

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

NIST’s Explanation of the Addition of an Assignment Requirement

NIST added an assignment requirement to the standard patent rights clause authorized by Bayh-Dole. There’s no authority in Bayh-Dole, however, for an assignment requirement. The Supreme Court in Stanford v Roche made clear that Bayh-Dole does not vest ownership, does … Continue reading

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

NIST does not understand the government license in Bayh-Dole

NIST has issued a draft green paper that consolidates all the fake history, pseudo data as fact, misrepresentations of Bayh-Dole, and misconceived proposals all in one convenient place. I can’t hope to catch everything, but let’s take a look at … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, History, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on NIST does not understand the government license in Bayh-Dole

Nine Points to Consider (with regard to AUTM’s licensing survey), 8-9

We are considering nine points with regard to AUTM’s annual licensing survey. We have got through seven points–not validated and with estimates, duplicate reporting, conflating technology and invention, activity measures giving the illusion of a process at work, no reporting … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Metrics, Policy | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Nine Points to Consider (with regard to AUTM’s licensing survey), 8-9

Nine Points to Consider (with regard to Bayh-Dole)

No matter how one takes apart the assertions of the advocates for the Bayh-Dole Act, they just keep coming back, like some obsessive combatant out of Road Warrior. In the articles here at Research Enterprise, I have documented and reasoned … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Nine Points to Consider (with regard to Bayh-Dole)

On advocative fakery of Bayh-Dole

Advocates of Bayh-Dole tell a fake history. They say that before Bayh-Dole, the federal government owned all inventions made with federal support. They say that Bayh-Dole gave universities the right to take ownership of inventions made with federal support. They … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on On advocative fakery of Bayh-Dole

Nixon’s Need and Encouragement

In a series of articles we have dealt with the monopoly meme. The monopoly meme argues that the true purpose of patents is the corporate right to exclude all others from practicing an invention. Without this right of exclusion, so … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Nixon’s Need and Encouragement

15 USC 2218(d)

A federal statute passed in 1974 establishes a federal policy with regard to inventions made with federal support–15 USC 2218(d). Folks wrapped up with Bayh-Dole don’t often mention 15 USC  2218, which establishes the authority of the administrators of federal … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on 15 USC 2218(d)

“Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 2

We might ask, then, what happens if a contractor does not acquire ownership of an invention made in the performance of work under a federal funding agreement. The answer is that 15 USC 2218(d) remains in effect, and even though … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on “Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 2

“Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 1

Bayh-Dole requires federal agencies to use a patent rights clause that includes a provision under which contractors who obtain ownership of a patentable invention made in the performance of work under a federal funding agreement and elect to retain that … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on “Government” rights in federally supported inventions, 1