Monthly Archives: February 2018

Bayh-Dole Basics, 2: subject invention

Posted on February 28, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

For federal research and development contracts, Bayh-Dole defines a new category of invention in federal patent law, the “subject invention.” A subject invention is an invention that is or may be patentable is owned by a party to a funding … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 2: subject invention

Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole, 2

Posted on February 27, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Mississippi State provides us with this diagram of the “commercialization” process that ends up with a singular “license.” What goofiness–an assertion of order in an activity that is almost always disorderly. According to the diagram, “ideas” get “protected” and then “marketed” … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole, 2

“Only assholes get patents…”

Posted on February 26, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Slashdot points to a recent blog post by Marco Arment on dealing with feature copying and imitation in software apps. Arment summaries copyright and trademark angles, noting that neither provides much defense. He then moves on to patents: Only assholes … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on “Only assholes get patents…”

The booger way of innovation

Posted on February 24, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Consider these two pathways by which universities might acquire inventions under Bayh-Dole’s patent rights clause. 1. Non-compliant. University by policy asserts ownership of all inventions made by faculty. University refuses to comply with the (f)(2) written agreement requirement in Bayh-Dole’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The booger way of innovation

Bayh-Dole basics, 1: public covenant comments

Posted on February 23, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

University patent administrators ignore Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200. At best, they treat it as a statement of objectives, not policy, and that these objectives are a problem for Congress if no one bothers to accomplish them. … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole basics, 1: public covenant comments

Bayh-Dole Basics, 1: public covenant

Posted on February 22, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

The Bayh-Dole Act is part of federal patent law. Bayh-Dole establishes a policy (35 USC 200) regarding the use of the patent system for inventions arising in federally supported research or development. This policy establishes the property rights in patents … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 1: public covenant

Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole

Posted on February 20, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Here’s Mississippi State University’s Office Technology Management answering the question “Why does the University patent technology?” It is required under federal grants – The University is required to patent and commercialize the technology under terms of the Bayh-Dole Act. If the … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Mississippi State University misrepresents Bayh-Dole

The bozonet on mount stupid

Posted on February 19, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

I mentioned “mount stupid” last week in a three-part article on the University of Utah. Mount stupid is a bit of a meme derived from accounts of the Dunning-Kruger effect, which I have referred to in developing an account of … Continue reading →

Posted in Bozonet, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The bozonet on mount stupid

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

Posted on February 16, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

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 , , , , , , | Comments Off on You should want to see Bayh-Dole operate as written. Here’s why.

How Bayh-Dole complicates the definitions in Stevenson-Wydler

Posted on February 15, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

The only law that Bayh-Dole does not expressly supersede is the Stevenson-Wydler Act. It’s worth comparing language in the two laws, as Bayh-Dole draws from Stevenson-Wydler, but then works its own magic. Consider the definition cascade on inventions. Here’s Stevenson-Wydler: … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on How Bayh-Dole complicates the definitions in Stevenson-Wydler