I know, most of you don’t have time to work through 50 pages of close reading of a university patent policy, with all its levels and inconsistencies and misrepresentations and foolishnesses. Here’s a summary:
FSU’s patent policy violates Florida state law
- expands grossly what it can claim beyond securing patents on work product
- ignores the requirement to review and agree before claiming ownership
- treats royalty sharing as a generous perk rather than consideration for assignment
- requires inventors to concur in the university’s non-compliance
- does not provide for reporting all assignments and agreements to the state
FSU’s patent policy guidance misrepresents and misapplies state and federal law
- Florida Statue 1004.23
- Bayh-Dole Act 35 USC 200-212
- Federal patent law and copyright law
FSU’s patent policy and guidance is ambiguous, inconsistent, overreaching, and deceptive
- ownership claims are overbroad and random
- guidance varies from policy
- policy is inconsistent internally and with other policies, such as academic freedom
FSU administrators seem to believe that
- administrative self-interest matters more than consideration of inventor contribution
- policy binds inventors, not administrators
- university legal counsel is reserved for administrative use against inventors
There you have it. In simple terms, a garbled mess. In slightly less simple terms, a nasty, clever, non-compliant policy that is both incompetent and deceptive, while appearing to be legal and proper. The tick of bureaucracy bites deeper into the neck of research enterprise.