Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Author Archives: Gerald Barnett
Patent rights follow-up: from the FPR to BD–1
Here’s some advice in the Federal Procurement Regulations (1975) with regard to the operation of the patent rights clause covering subject inventions. Bayh-Dole is built from the ruins of the IPA program and the FPR by the same folks who … Continue reading
A null hypothesis for the ITIF panel on Bayh-Dole
The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a self-described think tank based in Washington DC, will have a panel soon featuring Joe Allen and representatives from BIO and AUTM. Here’s the topic of the discussion: Join us on March 7 for … Continue reading
Research, Nonresearch, and CDC Policy 557
The Centers for Disease Control has a document–Policy 557–that lays out when Institutional Review Board involvement is necessary with regard to distinctions between patient care and the involvement of patients in research. Here’s the basic policy: CDC has an ethical … Continue reading
Posted in Policy, Sponsored Research
Tagged I and Thou, nonresearch, policy 557
Comments Off on Research, Nonresearch, and CDC Policy 557
Are copyrights considered inventions under Bayh-Dole?
I saw a search show up here at Research Enterprise–“Are copyrights considered inventions under Bayh-Dole?” Simple answer. No. Brief answer. Copyright is a form of intellectual property. At one time, perhaps, the idea of copyright was itself a social invention. … Continue reading
Another university misrepresents Bayh-Dole
Here’s another misrepresentation of Bayh-Dole by a university technology transfer office–at Loma Linda University. This statement is typical of what happens when someone relies on the information put out by organizations such as AUTM–information people ought to be able to … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, Loma Linda, misrepresentation, poison
Comments Off on Another university misrepresents Bayh-Dole
Unhelpful NIAID guidance on Bayh-Dole, 2
We are working through another unhelpful NIAID document on Bayh-Dole. With such ubiquitous misinformation put out as authoritative, it is no wonder that Bayh-Dole has become an excuse for what amounts to ad hoc law, created by wonderful agreement between … Continue reading
Unhelpful NIAID guidance on Bayh-Dole, 1
[NIAID had this document up for all of 2017, as far as I can tell. They have now removed it, and purged it from Google’s cache. But as far as I know, they have not corrected their misrepresentation nor broadcast … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged Bayh-Dole, compliance, NIAID
Comments Off on Unhelpful NIAID guidance on Bayh-Dole, 1
Oh wow–short form
Bayh-Dole has to be broad Bayh-Dole’s scope has to be as broad as the broadest federal statute or regulation pertaining to federal rights to inventions. In Bayh-Dole, “subject invention” is defined broadly to include conception or first actual reduction to … Continue reading
Oh wow. Implications of Bayh-Dole’s broad scope
For Bayh-Dole’s preemption to operate “uniformly,” Bayh-Dole’s scope has to be as broad as any federal statutes and executive branch patent policy that claim any federal interest in inventions arising from federally supported research or development. Since those statutes and … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged assignment, Bayh-Dole, nonprofit, oh wow, subject invention
Comments Off on Oh wow. Implications of Bayh-Dole’s broad scope
Reagan’s Executive Order 12591-4
In the implementation of Bayh-Dole, then, employee-inventors own unless they assign rights, such as to an institutional Contractor. We can use “Contractor” with a capital “C” to follow the usage in the Federal Procurement Regulation’s patent rights clause that implements … Continue reading