Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Author Archives: Gerald Barnett
It Just Doesn't Get Any Better Than This
[I’ve revised this a few times. I will leave it now. It’s intended to reflect passion and disbelief at the magnitude of this situation. It is not a mild difference of viewpoint couched in odd technicalities of a law most … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on It Just Doesn't Get Any Better Than This
Some More Roche Comments
Roche’s response to Stanford University’s petition for a writ of certiorari is posted here. My read of it is, they got the Bayh-Dole piece of it right. See Section I.A (Bayh-Dole was not intended to be a tool for universities … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, IP, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Some More Roche Comments
Who To Listen To?
I’m sort of fascinated by the academics doing surveys to ascertain technology transfer practice. They don’t actually sully themselves by observing practice–that would take too long, be expensive, and would compromise some degree of (what to call it?)–oh–innocence–perspective. Survey is … Continue reading
Posted in Social Science, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Who To Listen To?
Are you feeling all right?
Here are some implications of US university IP policies and technology transfer office practices: 1) the value of university research is referred at each point of invention to commercial markets; 2) university IP claims serve to create value for the … Continue reading
Posted in IP, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Are you feeling all right?
Fragmentation
When a bunch of universities file patents on bits and pieces of an area of research, such as has happened in nanotechnology, who are the big winners? That is, there is a commons made of patent claim thicket. No one … Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Fragmentation
Patent Fair Use, Commons, and Research Inventions
Madey v. Duke wasn’t a good thing for research. Essentially, it put an end to the idea of a research use exception to patent claims. Whatever the merits of the case, there is no question in my mind that it’s … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Commons, IP, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Patent Fair Use, Commons, and Research Inventions
Here’s what I mean
Nick White over at the LinkedIn SpinOut group points to a story put out by the University of Edinburgh. According to a summary by Richard Wachman in The Guardian, the University claims 40 start ups in a year, raising £3m in start … Continue reading
Posted in Metrics, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Here’s what I mean
Thinking about software
I’ve spent a large part of the past 20 years working on university-originated software IP–in research, instruction, and administrative services. We’ve done open source, source available, venture-backed start ups, technology access programs, commons, publication agreements, distribution agreements, site licenses, waived … Continue reading
Posted in IP, Projects, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on Thinking about software
If it weren't for bad luck
A bad IP policy is worse than nothing. The purpose of an IP policy is (1) to change in the defaults of law, (2) to provide clarity with regard to employment obligations, (3) to set out protocols to manage IP, … Continue reading
Posted in IP, Technology Transfer, Uncategorized
Comments Off on If it weren't for bad luck
…. And Zombies!
In perhaps the simplest form, one may ask what collateral damage university IP policies do to research, just as one might ask whether central plans for rebuilding a city have much to offer the areas to be rebuilt. In this, … Continue reading
Posted in IP, Sponsored Research, Technology Transfer
Comments Off on …. And Zombies!