Tag Archives: subject invention

AUTM’s invitation to delude yourself, 3

To show how clueless the universities have been about Bayh-Dole–look at this finding from the GAO’s 1998 report on university administration of Bayh-Dole inventions: The policies varied among the universities in connection with how they determined whether the invention was … Continue reading

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

When experts cheat at Bayh-Dole

In the classic guide to cheating at cards, The Expert at the Card Table, the point gets made that an expert cheater can cheat regardless of the watchfulness of anyone who expects him or her to cheat. An expert cheat … Continue reading

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

Bayh-Dole applies only to subject inventions

Bayh-Dole applies only to inventions owned by a contractor Bayh-Dole applies only to subject inventions. Supreme Court: the Bayh-Dole Act . . . applies only to “subject inventions”—“inventions of the contractor” Subject inventions are patentable inventions made in work under … Continue reading

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

The NIH’s View of Bayh-Dole Compliance, 7

We have come full circle through NIH’s garbled version of Bayh-Dole, having been referred by the NIH’s SBIR guidance back to the NIH’s policy manual regarblization of Bayh-Dole in section 8.2.4. Section 8.2 has a bunch of data and research … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The NIH’s View of Bayh-Dole Compliance, 7

The NIH’s View of Bayh-Dole Compliance, 6

Research Enterprise has been examining the NIH’s representation of Bayh-Dole. So far we have seen that the NIH persists in citing a 1995 document that gives “guidance” that the Supreme Court in Stanford v Roche (2011) rejected. But the NIH … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The NIH’s View of Bayh-Dole Compliance, 6

The NIH’s View of Bayh-Dole Compliance, 5

We are working NIH’s not so tasty guidance to participants in its SBIR and STTR programs directed at small businesses. We reach the NIH’s account of the “principal features” of Bayh-Dole, at least with regard to “intellectual property” requirements: Principal … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The NIH’s View of Bayh-Dole Compliance, 5

What has NIST done, actually?-1

NIST has made an attempt to turn Bayh-Dole into a vesting statute. From all appearances, that is what a casual reader would think has happened with NIST’s new subject invention assignment language. With help from inept (if not complicit) university … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on What has NIST done, actually?-1

NIST’s Chief Counsel on Bayh-Dole, 5

Unlike the other various fakographics and misguidances and misrepresentations of Bayh-Dole that we have reviewed, this slide deck by NIST’s chief counsel is distinctive, since NIST has primary responsibility for Bayh-Dole’s implementation and patent rights clauses. Thus, a failure to … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on NIST’s Chief Counsel on Bayh-Dole, 5

NIST’s Chief Counsel on Bayh-Dole, 4

One last slide from NIST’s chief counsel’s talk from 2013. Much to discuss. How to unwind this assertion? The Bayh-Dole Act requires federal agencies to use an arbitrary default patent rights clause. In the absence of Bayh-Dole, executive branch patent … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on NIST’s Chief Counsel on Bayh-Dole, 4

NIST’s Chief Counsel on Bayh-Dole, 3

NIST’s chief counsel gives, let us say, a unhelpful representation of the law. Let’s continue with his second slide titled “Bayh-Dole Highlights.” The government does not “retain” a license. The government is entitled to receive that license. The law uses … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on NIST’s Chief Counsel on Bayh-Dole, 3