Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Author Archives: Gerald Barnett
Research Enterprise Policy Issues: fragmentation of noisy research
We have looked at noisy research and quiet research. Policy folks don’t much care, but it appears to make a difference whether research is conducted quietly or noisily. In quiet research, variations are explored, applications considered, data assembled, evidence checked … Continue reading
Posted in Commons, Innovation, Policy
Tagged commercialization, federal funding, fragmentation, noisy research
Comments Off on Research Enterprise Policy Issues: fragmentation of noisy research
Research Enterprise Policy Issues: noisy work, quiet work
Let’s discuss practice around research, invention, and enterprise. Let’s start distinguish quiet work and noisy work. When someone is doing unprovoked research on their own–in the proverbial laboratory (institutional) or garage (unaffiliated, gadgeteer, entrepreneur), their work tends to be quiet. … Continue reading
Posted in Innovation, Sponsored Research
Tagged noisy, quiet, SBIR
Comments Off on Research Enterprise Policy Issues: noisy work, quiet work
Typical Bayh-Dole wrongness in the wild
Here’s a 2017 article on Bayh-Dole, “Bullies and Beakers: How Large Universities are Squashing Research Competition and the Contractual Remedies to Solve It,” by Jonathan Fort, then a law student, published in the Washington University Journal of Law & Policy. … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, incentive, Yale v Fenn
Comments Off on Typical Bayh-Dole wrongness in the wild
9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 3
We have worked through nine things Bayh-Dole does not require. Let’s come back around and work through in detail the disclosure requirement that Bayh-Dole does not require. Bayh-Dole has a disclosure requirement that is to be placed in the default … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), Bayh-Dole, written agreement
Comments Off on 9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 3
9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 2
We are working through a list of nine things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do. It’s worth the review because there are all sorts of claims out there–almost never contested–about what Bayh-Dole requires. Most of it is nonsense. And … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, requirements, technology transfer
Comments Off on 9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 2
9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 1
Let’s review some of the things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do. These, despite what you may have heard. First the list, then the discussion, then an extended technical note for the folks that want detail and think perhaps … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, commercialization, disclosure, invention, ownership, subject invention
Comments Off on 9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 1
Bayh-Dole’s patent law policy on patent property rights, 2
We are working through Bayh-Dole’s statement of policy at 35 USC 200 on the premise that this statement of policy, a part of patent law, has a material effect on the patent property rights of all inventions within the scope … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole’s patent law policy on patent property rights, 1
Bayh-Dole, part of federal patent law, starts with a statement of “Policy and Objective” at 35 USC 200. Usually, commentators treat this bit as “preamble” or “a restatement of legislative intent” or, bluntly, inoperative fluff. The commentators are wrong. 35 … Continue reading
How Bayh-Dole Is Intended to Work, circa 1992, Part 3
We are still working through a passage in a law article from 1992 that sets out how Bayh-Dole is intended to work and addresses questions of faculty ownership of inventions. The issue is not with the author of an article … Continue reading
Is this what Congress intended when it passed Bayh-Dole?
Would Congress have passed Bayh-Dole if things had been stated clearly? It is the policy and objective of Congress that nonprofit organizations should, for inventions arising in federally supported research or development: strip inventors of their common law rights in … Continue reading