Author Archives: Gerald Barnett

University Patent Practice: Practice

Posted on July 15, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

Here are five ways to use a patent: Nonuse     Don’t practice the claimed invention and exclude all others Troll          Don’t practice, demand payment if others practice the claimed invention Flip           Don’t practice, and exclusively … Continue reading →

Posted in Agreements, IP, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on University Patent Practice: Practice

University Patent Practice: Flip

Posted on July 14, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

Here are five ways to use a patent: Nonuse     Don’t practice the claimed invention and exclude all others Troll          Don’t practice, demand payment if others practice the claimed invention Flip           Don’t practice, and exclusively … Continue reading →

Posted in IP, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on University Patent Practice: Flip

University Patent Practice: Troll

Posted on July 13, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

Here are five ways to use a patent: Nonuse     Don’t practice the claimed invention and exclude all others Troll          Don’t practice, demand payment if others practice the claimed invention Flip           Don’t practice, and exclusively … Continue reading →

Posted in Agreements, IP, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on University Patent Practice: Troll

University Patent Practice: Nonuse

Posted on July 12, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

Here are five ways to use a patent: Nonuse     Don’t practice the claimed invention and exclude all others Troll          Don’t practice, demand payment if others practice the claimed invention Flip           Don’t practice, and exclusively … Continue reading →

Posted in IP, Policy | 1 Comment

Three once-concerns regarding university patents

Posted on July 6, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

Historically, there have been three areas of concern for the limitation of university involvement in patenting: (1) the monopoly effect of IP, (2) worrisome commercial behaviors, and (3) the problem of money as an apparent motivation. In the past, when university inventors … Continue reading →

Posted in History, Policy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Three once-concerns regarding university patents

A patent policy’s stated objectives mean something

Posted on July 5, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

University patent administrators don’t see that the patents they own and manage are any different from any other patents–exclusion of use, licensing (especially exclusively, for the duration of the patent), litigation, and indifference (failing to license, but no matter) are … Continue reading →

Posted in Policy | Comments Off on A patent policy’s stated objectives mean something

Regulatory limitations on fun-lovin’ university patent administrators

Posted on July 2, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

My argument is that university patents aren’t like other patents–not like corporate patents, not like entrepreneur patents, not like speculator patents. My argument also is that universities are limited in how they manage patents, and therefore they are not in … Continue reading →

Posted in IP, Policy, Technology Transfer | Comments Off on Regulatory limitations on fun-lovin’ university patent administrators

Should universities manage patents like corporations do?

Posted on July 2, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

We have discussed how university-owned patents are not like other patents. A university owner of patents is not free to do just anything with a patent. A university-held patent is not simply a property right–there are limitations (though many university patent administrators are … Continue reading →

Posted in IP, Litigation, Metrics, Policy | Comments Off on Should universities manage patents like corporations do?

A Good Policy for a Patent-Trolling University

Posted on June 26, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

Let’s continue the discussion of how university-owned patents might differ from other patents. We have considered the idea of “first use exhaustion” under Bayh-Dole: if the express purpose of Bayh-Dole is to use the patent system to promote utilization of … Continue reading →

Posted in Litigation, Policy | Comments Off on A Good Policy for a Patent-Trolling University

Free Competition and Reasonable Pricing of Products Based on Subject Inventions

Posted on June 22, 2016 by Gerald Barnett

I have argued that the Bayh-Dole Act establishes, for inventions made with federal support at universities, a principle of patent exhaustion. We might call it a “first use” exhaustion of patent rights. Since the express, statutory purpose of the Act … Continue reading →

Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP | Comments Off on Free Competition and Reasonable Pricing of Products Based on Subject Inventions