Monthly Archives: November 2010

A Patent License in the DFARS

With all the talk about template patent licenses these days, I thought it might be worth pointing out that in the DFARS there is a template patent license that the Government expects when obtaining patent rights.  You can find it … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on A Patent License in the DFARS

Minimum Policy, Phase 2

[This is a pre-Stanford v Roche discussion. I have updated it for current CFR references. A contractor does not “elect title”–a contractor may “elect to retain title” that the contractor has obtained by conventional means. A contractor’s option under a … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Minimum Policy, Phase 2

Two paths you can go by

One can read Bayh-Dole to be a means of stripping university research personnel of their invention rights.  This is the tornado view of Bayh-Dole.  Wherever there is federal funding to universities, because Bayh-Dole says the university may elect to retain … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Two paths you can go by

Why Bayh-Dole is Inspired Legislation

Patentdocs has a useful discussion of Stanford v. Roche, covering the key elements of the case and the history of decisions up to November of last year.   At the end, Kevin Noonan makes an effort to get at why there … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Why Bayh-Dole is Inspired Legislation

Your transfer to the unknown has come through

You know, the money sweet spot for invention commercialization is to take acute conditions and make them chronic.   That’s like a drug to treat the pain rather than an intervention that cures the condition causing the pain, or providing protection … Continue reading

Posted in IP, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Your transfer to the unknown has come through

A New Kind of Innovation Practice

Sloppy practice leaves university technology transfer programs exposed to claims of failure of consideration and lack of just compensation. A better way is to return to voluntary practice. Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Sponsored Research | Comments Off on A New Kind of Innovation Practice

Opening up technology transfer

Open innovation presents challenges to conventional forms of university technology transfer, even as the conventional forms are a start at open innovation. Continue reading

Posted in Commons, IP, Social Science | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Opening up technology transfer

Under strictly controlled conditions…

Section (e) ensures that pre-existing commitments by a university are still valid even if the government takes title to subject inventions, and certainly so otherwise, so long as the university reports the invention and there is practical application with benefits to the public. Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | 1 Comment

We have questions

When we interpret Bayh-Dole as a social text, we get beyond the immediate claims and into a territory that tests our competence. Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Literature, Social Science, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on We have questions

Not all title are belong to us

It’s clear that the standard patent rights clause in 37 CFR 401.14(a) does not expect to get all rights to title in inventions made in the course of federally funded research.  The written agreement in (f)(2) concerns itself only with … Continue reading

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Not all title are belong to us