Tag Archives: Stanford v Roche

You should want to see Bayh-Dole operate as written. Here’s why.

Let’s start with some Bayh-Dole basics. Bayh-Dole preempts all other statutes but Stevenson-Wydler on matters of federal policy on inventions made in research contracts (35 USC 210). Bayh-Dole is the only authority on the matter. Bayh-Dole requires federal agencies to … Continue reading

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

Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 1

Back in 2010, I wrote an article titled “Whistling all the way to the bank.” The article explored the problem of compensation tied to the argument that the Bayh-Dole Act was a “vesting statute” that vested ownership of inventions made … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bayh-Dole the Monster

The Bayh-Dole Act makes a great deal about public interest. Throughout the law are gestures toward worthy objectives–use of inventions, manufacturing in the United States, government licenses, and the right of federal agencies to step if they need to. But … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The First Principle of Bayh-Dole

Here is the First Principle of Bayh-Dole: A federal agency may not require the assignment to the federal government of an invention made with federal support at a nonprofit or small business if the inventors assign their patent rights to … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The First Principle of Bayh-Dole