Monthly Archives: February 2018

Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 3

Posted on February 14, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Having established the contracting problem for government-sponsored “basic research,” let’s get into how the patent administration folks got into changing things around from government ownership (with its open access, often without conditions or formalities) to institutional ownership (or, more accurately, … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 3

Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 2

Posted on February 13, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

The “Whistling” article struggles with the problem of the standard patent rights clause language about “electing to retain title.” I’ve wondered over this wording for years. It appears to be at the heart of the “cleverly crafted scheme” to intercept … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy, Stanford v Roche | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 2

Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 1

Posted on February 12, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

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 , , , , , , | Comments Off on Whistling all the way to the bank, revisited 1

Bayh-Dole in another simple diagram

Posted on February 9, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Bayh-Dole conflates three distinct forms of federal contracting for research and then moves one form–university-hosted research–into the category of another, procurement from commercial firms. Here’s the diagram:   The effect of Bayh-Dole is depicted by the blue arrows. The box … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole in another simple diagram

University of Utah’s Mount Stupid Disclosure Claim, 3

Posted on February 8, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Now let’s look at what the University of Utah requires by way of assignment. My snark controls have apparently failed. I will try to line out at least some of the snark. Here is a link to the template Assignment … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Policy, Sponsored Research | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on University of Utah’s Mount Stupid Disclosure Claim, 3

University of Utah’s Mount Stupid Disclosure Claim, 2

Posted on February 7, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

We are working through a statement by the University of Utah regarding disclosure. We have got through one paragraph, and now are headed to the second. Unfortunately, the snark restrictor on my WordPress editor has failed and snark keeps popping … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Policy, Present Assignment, Sponsored Research | Comments Off on University of Utah’s Mount Stupid Disclosure Claim, 2

University of Utah’s Mount Stupid Disclosure Claim, 1

Posted on February 6, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Here is a bit from the University of Utah’s web site. The general topic is final invention reporting for grant close out. Here’s the statement of interest (bold in the original, links removed): All University employees are responsible to disclose all … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Policy, Present Assignment, Sponsored Research | Comments Off on University of Utah’s Mount Stupid Disclosure Claim, 1

Bayh-Dole–enforce or repeal the patent rights clause?

Posted on February 5, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

Bayh-Dole is such a strange law. Consider: After 35 years, there is no public data supporting the claim that the Bayh-Dole Act has been successful. Bayh-Dole makes that data a government secret. Universities don’t report it. AUTM licensing surveys do … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole | Comments Off on Bayh-Dole–enforce or repeal the patent rights clause?

Available to one, developed by none, 2

Posted on February 2, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

We are working through the political argument that without a patent monopoly, federally supported research will never get used or developed into commercial products or ever benefit the public. It’s flowery language meant to lead those who hear or read … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, IP, Policy, Projects | Comments Off on Available to one, developed by none, 2

Available to one, developed by none, 1

Posted on February 1, 2018 by Gerald Barnett

A repeated argument regarding inventions made with federal support was that the public would benefit from these inventions only if companies invested substantial amounts of private capital in developing the inventions as commercial products. Without commercial development at private expense, … Continue reading →

Posted in History, IP, Policy, Projects, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Available to one, developed by none, 1