Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Monthly Archives: June 2019
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-9
We can now–finally–oh gawd this is painful–turn to the place of “reasonable terms” in all of this mess of Bayh-Dole march-in. Simply, Bayh-Dole march in concerns itself with benefits of use available to the public on reasonable terms, not licenses … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, reasonable terms
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-9
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-8
In Bayh-Dole the march-in for health or safety needs is drafted to prevent the government from breaking up private patent monopolies on supported inventions merely because there are health or safety needs. The default public policy in Bayh-Dole is that … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, march-in, reasonable terms, reasonably satisfy
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-8
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-7
Now let’s look at Bayh-Dole’s treatment of march-in (35 USC 203(a)) and “reasonable terms”: . . . the Federal agency . . . shall have the right . . . to require the contractor . . . to grant a … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, march-in, public health, reasonably satisfied
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-7
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-6
Now let’s look at the transmogrification of the definition of practical application from Kennedy to Bayh-Dole. In doing so, we also will see how the usage of “reasonable terms” arises, along with Bayh-Dole’s introduction of “reasonably satisfies.” This gets detailed. … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History, Policy
Tagged Bayh-Dole, FRAND, Kennedy patent policy, reasonable
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-6
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-5
We are working through the prior federal regulations in an effort to understand the “reasonable terms” requirement in Bayh-Dole’s 35 USC 203(a)(1) march-in condition. In the Kennedy executive branch patent policy, contractors had two primary routes to retain ownership of … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-4
We are working through the details of prior treatments of what becomes “reasonable terms” in Bayh-Dole’s definition of “practical application.” This definition in turn becomes the threshold for federal agency march-in under 35 USC 203(a)(1)–the first of the four march-in … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-3
We are working through the NIH’s Institutional Patent Agreement master template to establish the context for Bayh-Dole’s use of “reasonable terms” in its definition of practical application, which in turn establishes the march-in threshold for 35 USC 203(a)(1), one of … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-2
Now we get to government rights under march in. Here we have complications. In 1968, Norman Latker, NIH’s patent counsel, revived the Institutional Patent Agreement program, under which the NIH (and later the NSF) contracted with nonprofits so that a … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged Bayh-Dole, development, exclusive license, IPA, Latker, march-in, master agreement
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-2
Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-1
This will be longish. It’s a document of the details. In a world where people spout TL;DR for most any issue of substance, and want a sound bite to gulp instead, this ain’t it. Perhaps we can get all brief … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History
Tagged Bayh-Dole, Kennedy patent policy, march-in
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole Basics, 8: Reasonable Terms Comments-1