Tag Archives: scope

An invention is not a thing, 2

We are working through the logic of Bayh-Dole’s requirements on ownership of inventions made in work receiving federal support. We have made the point that an invention is not a thing–it is a category, a set, a collection of ways … Continue reading

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

An invention is not a thing, 1

An invention is not a thing. An invention not a “cotton gin” or a “light bulb,” even though a cotton gin and a light bulb were once inventive. It doesn’t help to use things as proxies for inventions. An invention … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy | 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 , | Comments Off on Oh wow–short form

The IPA and Wisconsin’s 1969 Patent Policy, 5

Start here: The IPA and Wisconsin’s 1969 Patent Policy, 1 The new 1969 Wisconsin patent policy broadens the scope of the university’s interest in patents yet further: Here is the Wisconsin IPA definition of “subject invention”: Both elements are essential … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy, Sponsored Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The IPA and Wisconsin’s 1969 Patent Policy, 5