Tag Archives: Bayh-Dole

Bayh-Dole government-wide licenses

In a Twitter thread in which Jennifer Gunter argues that “Americans should not be bankrolling the pharmaceutical industry,” Steven Martin tweets Let’s work this through. There is no need to revise Bayh-Dole for state and municipal governments to authorize the … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, high priced drugs | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Reagan’s Bayh-Dole cluster bungle

In 1987, President Reagan signed an executive order (12591) that aimed to legitimize his 1983 memorandum that instructed heads of executive branch departments and agencies to “promote the commercialization . . . of patentable results of federally funded research by … Continue reading

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

The inefficiencies of Bayh-Dole discussions-1

A common approach to discussions of Bayh-Dole is (1) accept that what is happening is just what people say is happening–the law is working (as people claim), based on a politicized spun history (as people claim), based on a metrics … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The inefficiencies of Bayh-Dole discussions-1

A sense of proportion–5

One can see, then, where Bayh-Dole comes into play in this meaningless mess. Bayh-Dole was drafted by the same folks who created the IPA system. The IPA system was shut down in 1978 as ineffective and contrary to public policy. … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Fun, History, Policy, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on A sense of proportion–5

The 100x Model–1 Protection

Bayh-Dole uses “protectable” with respect to inventions 35 USC 201(d). That’s strange. Nothing else in patent law has to do with protecting inventions. What could “protection” have to do with inventions, as a matter of law no less? To get … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The 100x Model–1 Protection

Univeristy and Exclusive Licensee Exposure to Bayh-Dole Non-Compliance

I’ll try to make this simple. When a university creates a written policy that commits it to attempting to commercialize inventions made with federal support, that policy alters the scope of any proposal the university submits for federal funding. Commercialization … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , | Comments Off on Univeristy and Exclusive Licensee Exposure to Bayh-Dole Non-Compliance

“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 , , , | Comments Off on “Protection” of inventions in Bayh-Dole

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 , | Comments Off on Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–6

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 , , | Comments Off on Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–5

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 , , , , , | Comments Off on Another question on RE: When does Bayh-Dole not apply?–4